“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved, you and your household.” Yes, or No? Acts 16:31
In this article I will be exploring the idea of individual and collective salvation. I will be addressing the concept of salvation from a Christian perspective and will be answering this question: When one family member gets saved does the entire household also get saved? By saved, I mean an acceptance of Jesus Christ as Saviour and becoming a recipient of eternal life with Him. Opinion is divided in the Christian community about this belief with many Christians using Noah as a perfect example of an entire family being saved. Others see the concept of salvation as only for the individual and no one else.
Examples such as Noah, Abraham and to some extent Job indicate that there is hope for eternal life for extended family members in God’s overall plan. And Paul’s words to the prison keeper in Acts 16:31, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household” supports that argument. But so much of the Bible does not support Acts 16:31. And, since we are called to rightfully divide the Word of Truth, we need to look wider and deeper to see if this concept can be substantiated across the entire biblical text.
Most of our beliefs about the entire household being saved stems from examples in our Hebrew Scriptures (Christian Old Testament). Of which Noah and his family are the most prominent. We must keep in mind though Noah’s family’s salvation was physical and not spiritual and what Paul was referring to in Acts 16:31 was spiritual. Although I agree that as a metaphor Noah’s Ark can also have a spiritual significance, Noah’s family were saved only in a physical, earthly sense. It is the same scenario with Abraham and others in the Bible.
Abraham pleaded for his family and for Sodom. He kept bargaining with God for mercy for the righteous souls of Sodom, if there were any righteous souls that is (Genesis 18:20). In this instance also, God in His infinite mercy saved Lot and his family for Abraham’s sake. But it would be purely a physical salvation, because as we know from the story, Lot’s daughters left Sodom, but Sodom never left them. Even physical salvation has its limitations, as in the case of Noah’s son, Ham after being saved departed from the Lord and who can forget the treachery of Lot’s daughters. Another example is the tragedy experienced by Job’s family.
It is without doubt that we are all familiar with the most classical of all biblical stories, the story of Job. Job enjoyed many earthly blessings bestowed upon him by the Almighty. His ten children were amongst the most precious of those blessings. Job was aware his children chose a lifestyle of partying rather than worship, so he took it upon himself to offer sacrifices on their behalf (Job 1:4-5). Job’s intercession for his family, could not save them in this earthly realm forever and despite his efforts his children perished. Like Job ancient fathers viewed their families as one whole unit. And not just families but whole communities viewed themselves as collectivist societies. Entire tribes had only one identity and only one name. This is evident with the twelve tribes of Israel, each tribe took on the identity and the name of its tribal elder.
It is because of this belief the ancients stood so confidently in the gap for their family members. Abraham stood in the gap for his nephew Lot, and Job stood in the gap for his children. The High Priest stood in the gap for the children of Israel in the Tabernacle and the Temple. There is no better example of collective salvation than in the Passover story of Exodus. It was a Lamb for a Household (Exodus 12:3). But everyone of those examples only offered temporary salvation and every one of those examples did not guarantee eternal salvation, or did it? I am often reminded of what the Apostle Paul said, “All Israel shall be saved!”
People read Paul’s, “All Israel shall be saved,” (Romans 11:26) as a statement when it is a question. Paul was asking the question; Will all Israel be saved? Since I believe, he was clearly referring to a remnant, the answer is emphatically, “No.” There is nowhere in the Hebrew Scriptures that guarantees corporate or collective salvation for entire nations, tribes, groups or even families. Ezekiel said, “The soul that sins shall die.” Ezekiel Ch.18:20. That is the soul and not the body.
The body is a different issue as I pointed out, while family members remain on this earth, prayer, intercession can be offered up, and they can be saved in a physical sense. Once the soul has rejected God and has passed from this earth all bets are off. That soul has chosen separation from God and cannot be saved anymore. Which pretty much makes offering Masses and prayers for the dead an exercise in futility. It does nothing for the departed soul, it only benefits the churches financially and offers comfort for the ones left behind.
For those who are adamant that “All Israel shall be saved,” because Paul said so, have you checked the cross-reference to that passage in the Old Testament? The cross-reference is Isaiah Ch. 59: 20-21, which simply states, “A Redeemer shall come out of Zion, and to those who TURN from their transgression in Jacob. The operative words there, being ‘Redeemer’ and ‘Turn.’ If they do not accept the Redeemer or TURN (Repent) then they cannot be saved. That is why I can say an emphatic, “No” to “All Israel being saved.”
Turning as in repenting from one’s sins is one of the oldest concepts in Jewish literature. What most Christians do not realize is that when Jewish literature speaks of salvation, it is speaking predominantly about the Resurrection of the Dead. A theory made famous by the Maccabees and book of Daniel. In Jewish thought the idea of salvation is a return to Eden and the manifestation of heaven here on earth, rather than leaving this earth and going to heaven like Christians believe. The phase of death then is a long deep sleep used sixty-six times in seventeen books of the Bible. The individual sleeps in a state of rest until resurrection. It’s where we get RIP from. For a full explanation of what “All Israel shall be saved” means please check out my article in the link below.
I will return now to the original passage I quoted in Acts 16:31, where Paul offers the entire jailers family salvation. It is no doubt that Paul offered them eternal salvation and not just some physical deliverance. There is a couple of things to consider here, firstly, that the jailer would have been the head of the household. And it is understood if he decided to follow Christ his family would have also do so. And secondly, it was a miraculous event that preceded his conversion. In these types of circumstances, it is common to see even whole communities come to Christ. But everything hinged on the family believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, there were no exceptions.
Although Paul goes one step further in 1 Corinthians 7:14 by stating that an unbeliever is made ‘holy’ or ‘sanctified’ by their believing partner. For me, this passage does not line up with the rest of the Bible. No adult can be made ‘Holy’ by another adult under the New Covenant. Only The Holy Spirit can make someone, Holy. I would agree though, that children, perhaps up until the age of reason can be sanctified by a believing parent. The age varies, Jews like many other ancient cultures believe this age to be thirteen, while in others it is eighteen or even twenty-one. Personally, it is dangerous to give anyone the green light for eternal salvation and every soul no matter how young should receive Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour.
The Apostle Peter says in 1 Peter 4:18, “If the Righteous are barely saved…” my point exactly! Ezekiel also says, even if Noah, Daniel, or Job were present they could only save themselves and nobody else (Ezekiel 14:14). Which leaves us where exactly? The example that Christians use to justify salvation for whole families does not apply for spiritual salvation. Although, God in His mercy, hears and answers prayers to save and deliver loved ones here on earth. There is no mention of collective or corporate salvation anywhere in the Scriptures. Although, from texts such as Maccabees and Daniel a belief in collective salvation evolved in ancient Israel. But this was steeped in the doctrine of the Resurrection of the Dead.
Jews and Christians have vastly different theories of life after death and eternal life. One is here on earth and return to Eden and the other is in Glory land in the Heavens. By all accounts we can barely save ourselves let alone another person who is a sinner. Jesus often spoke of the difficulty in entering eternal life, for some, it is like passing through the eye of a needle. Albeit there is hope, plenty of hope for the believer. The believer, just like the jailer in Acts 16:31 opens the door for the whole family to receive salvation. Honestly, it is a privilege, and we need to start seeing it that way. Unfortunately, in many instances we as Christians cut ourselves off from family in a physical sense when we join a church. This should not be the case, stay close to your families, pray for them, and share the Gospel with them.
I was so blessed recently to have watched a video of a Pastor Thomas Niditauae from Vanuatu, in a Near Death Experience he believed the Lord gave him two warning. We should listen to this man. The second warning had four parts to it and consisted mainly of bringing loved ones into the family of God. The link is below, please watch it sometime. I will leave with the words of Jesus to Zacchaeus the Tax Collector (Luke 19:1-10), “Today salvation has come to this house.” The day you received Jesus Christ into your life and became a Christian, salvation entered your house, and you became the gateway by which the other members could also be saved. May God Bless you in your mission to save your family!
Cheryl Mason.
All Israel shall be saved? My article:
Pastor Thomas Niditauae video:
Scriptural References: n.d. The Holy Bible Authorized King James Version. Nashville: Collins World.
End Times Update – February 2022.
Please click on the link below:
Apostle Paul’s ‘Ethos’ for the First-Century Christian Woman: “As says the Law.” But which Law?
Scriptures: 1 Corinthians 14:34-37; 1 Timothy 2:11-15 & 1 Peter 3:1-6
It is evident that Paul’s letters to Corinth relate to specific problems within that Christian Community. We know for sure that he was answering questions (1 Corinthians 7:1). But without knowing the questions we are at a disadvantage to fully appreciate the answers. His letters to Timothy are different, as they are of a personal nature. As a father would admonish his son, Paul wrote to Timothy and perhaps the letters were never intended for public reading. Peter wrote to confirm Paul and emphasise the virtues of a Christian woman.
Whatever the reasons behind these letters to Corinth, Ephesus, Galatia, in them the Apostles made some serious assertions about women. Apostles or not, the ‘Ethos’ for the First-Century Christian woman must be addressed. And I pray that I do it respectfully and honestly.
In this article I will present my dilemma with trying to make sense of Paul’s comments on women. If you follow my blogs, you will know, I like studying various laws; ancient and religious. But to fully appreciate where Paul was going with his ‘Women must be silent, as states the Law,’ comment (1 Corinthians 14:34), I had to delve into new sets of Laws, Roman Law and Natural Law. These laws were new to me, and I had to do a lot of reading so that I did not arrive at any false conclusions.
Question:
When Paul mentioned, women should remain in silence according to ‘The Law,’ which Law was he referring to? Moses’s Law, Jewish Talmudic Law, Roman Law, Natural Law, which Law?
Scripture Reference: 1 Corinthians 14:34-37
In his letters to the Corinthians, Paul addresses the chaos that was occurring during their church meetings. It appears from his comments that some females were contributing much to this chaos. His solution to the problem was that all the women be silent and not speak, because that is what the Law says. Which left me wondering, which Law was he referring to? Because of the obscurity of this passage, I will begin with a process of elimination. The first Law I am going to eliminate is Talmudic Law. Even though Talmudic Law applies to Paul’s other comment about women ‘learning’ in silence. I covered that in my article on Timothy. Deuteronomy 4:10 says, “Gather the people (not gender specific) and let them hear my words, that they may ‘learn’ (instruction, if you received instruction, you could give instruction) from me.” That puts paid to the Talmud’s position on “Men come to learn, women come to hear.”
According to Deuteronomy everyone came to hear and to learn. Women were equals in hearing and learning (receiving instruction). If you are like me, you would have enjoyed watching the 1983 movie, Yentl. The movie was about a young woman’s desire to learn. In the movie, Barbara Streisand had to essentially pretend to be a boy to learn Talmud in Eastern Europe. Perhaps she should have just quoted Deuteronomy 4:10 to her teachers.
There is another reference in Talmud to the woman’s voice being too provocative which I will also eliminate in this instance, as I do not consider it relevant. I do not think Paul would have meant for women to be silent because of their enticing voices. Not all women have such voices. I know many a man who would prefer deafness rather than hear his wife’s nagging voice 😊 I am also going to rule out Moses’s Law because there is nothing said in there that forbids a woman to speak or to remain in silence. There are too many high-profile women in the Hebrew Scriptures to even contemplate such a thing. It is possible however, that it was implied in a cultural sense, but it was not written down.
With the Talmudic and Mosaic Law out of the way, I will now deal with Natural Law. I was surprised to find Natural Law written into Roman Law. And to be perfectly honest with you, I never took it seriously as a ‘thing’ but apparently it is. Wikipedia summarises ius naturale lex naturalis (Natural Law) as Laws relating to Nature and they also relate to religious morality. But here lies the problem, how humans perceive what is natural/nature is vastly different and, in many instances, it is a cultural phenomenon. Women in some cultures go topless, it is natural for them. In other cultures, being natural is for the woman to cover her breasts with more than one layer of clothing.
To understand Paul, we must understand him in a first-century Roman context. On more than one occasion he wrote about this Natural Law. And now that you are made aware of it, you will see it all over the place. He referred to Jews as being ‘Jews by nature,’ the natural olive tree and the wild grafted branches. In 1 Corinthians 11:14, he says, “Does not nature itself teach you?” To which I always replied, “What do you mean?” That was until now. Now I understand it as sets of laws that were established in ancient times, simply by observing nature. It is a difficult concept to grasp in modern times because as I mentioned earlier, cultures perceive what is and is not natural in diverse ways.
Violating Natural Law also brought about shame. It was a shame for a man to have long hair, or a woman to go with her head uncovered. It was a shame for a man to cover his head. It was about what was normal and what was considered abnormal. Yet for Samson, his hair was his anointing, different time, distinct cultural expectation. And as we know from the Hebrew Scriptures, it was considered very sacred for everyone to cover their heads. And the High Priest was commanded by God to cover his head with a turban (Exodus 28:4).
But under Roman Law, if a woman was seen with her head uncovered, it meant she was caught in adultery and being publicly shamed. As we can see Paul used the Natural aspects of Roman Law to teach Christians how to function. And it did not always agree with the Hebrew text as in Samson and the High Priest. There is one other aspect of Roman Law I would like to mention and that is, that women were considered the weaker of the sexes, and Peter mentioned this in 1 Peter 3:7 which I will deal with a little later. Peter like Paul was very much about keeping the Church safe and not rocking the Roman boat.
A lot of what Paul and even Peter referred to in their comments was Roman Law with elements of Natural Law. I found the book, Roman Wives Roman Widows by Bruce W. Winter so beneficial. Please get yourself a copy, it will assist greatly in understanding what the first-century Christian woman experienced under Roman rule. The Romans were big on regulating female morality and conduct by legislating for them. And every one of the commands mentioned in Paul’s ethos for women can be attributed to Roman Law. From how a woman dressed, wore her hair, her submission to her husband, and her responsibility as a child bearer. It was all Roman Law.
I will quickly list the favourable and not so favourable attributes of a Roman woman. If she was a submissive wife, a child bearer, covered her head, wore modest apparel, and had a gentle, quiet spirit she was favourable. If she wore revealing and costly clothing, braided her hair, wore gold, pearls, purple and went unveiled she was considered not so favourable. Much of these outward appearances related to whether a woman was a virgin, a wife, or a prostitute. But not altogether, because as historians discovered, this period also gave rise to the ‘New Woman.’ The New Woman cared little about what people thought of her. She enjoyed many freedoms, and her sexuality was just one of them. She wore makeup, had high brows and rosy, red cheeks. She flaunted her beauty and her wealth everywhere she went.
We see a typical example of the New Woman in Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, where a young man was caught in adultery with his father’s wife (1 Corinthians 5:1-5). According to Roman Scholars this New Woman preferred younger men and younger men preferred her. Prompting the likes of Plutarch to warn men if they did not lift their game and be a bit more cheerful, that their wives would simply find pleasures elsewhere. Bang smack in the middle of this feminine revolution was Corinth, the la-de-da city of affluence and influence. It is no wonder that it was there that Paul experienced the full extent of the ‘New Woman’ revolution.
There is so much more in Roman Law that relates to what the Apostles wrote. Many laws were passed to ensure women got married and had children. There were incentives for families who did the right thing by the authorities and penalties for those who did not. If a woman did not conduct herself well in public, her male (head or handler) could be fined, as he was responsible for her. We might cringe at the fact that every Roman woman had to have a male head who was answerable for her. But consider a twenty-first century wedding, where the celebrant asks, “Who gives this woman to this man?” And with that just like a chattel, she is transferred from one man to another.
Lastly, I want to deal with Peter’s comment, which really threw a spanner in the works for me. I hold Peter in extremely high esteem, higher than Paul. So, what did Peter say that threw me? He essentially quoted Roman Law but reverted it back to Old Testament Scriptures by referring to Sarah, Abraham’s wife. In 1 Peter 3:1-6, Peter essentially confirmed Paul’s ethos of a first-century Christian woman by saying, “Hey, yeah sure, Paul is quoting Roman Law, which we all have to abide by, but we have examples of the likes of Sarah and other Holy woman in the Scriptures, Holy women’s examples that we should follow.”
Peter called for the conduct of a Christian woman in such a way that by her behaviour she would draw others to God. He also mentioned the hair arranging, jewellery and fancy clothes. We could be fooled for thinking he is reading from a Roman script, but he mentioned Holy woman of old, such as Sarah. I personally would not go as far as calling any man, Lord. And it was only that one time that Sarah did this (Genesis 18:12), and in all honesty we know little else about Sarah. Perhaps, Peter knew more from folklore and tradition. However, it is clear to me that the Apostles likened Roman Law to aspects of God’s Law as set out in the Hebrew Scriptures.
In concluding, based on the studies I conducted to find out which Law Paul was referring to, when he stated, ‘Women should be silent according to the Law,’ he was predominantly referring to Roman Law. I discovered that the Roman’s were prolific legislators especially when it came to the behaviour of their women. The Empire had reached a crisis with crippling birth rates and the rise of the New Woman who decided she could stand alone and needed no man. Introduced Roman Laws were meant to keep society decent, marriages intact and a steady birth rate. There were incentives for those who complied and fines for those who did not. The Apostles, Paul and Peter used Roman Law to keep the churches safe, and the Christians from drawing unnecessary attention to themselves, especially the women. It was Peter in the end that made the connection that this was not just Roman Law, but it was compatible with Hebrew women of old. Peter used Sarah as an example.
The word ‘silent’ is really an unfortunate one and contradicts Paul’s other writings where women were free to pray, sing and prophesy. Peter used the word, quietness instead, and this is more suited to the situation in Corinth. Romans preferred the women to ask their male heads at home if they needed clarification on something and not cause a ruckus in a public place. Quietness does not mean silence. In Roman terms quietness was understood as not being loud, disruptive, and boisterous. Quietness together with gentleness were seen as good virtues for a every woman to possess. I will leave you with a quote from Roman Wives Roman Widows (p.86), “Most of these practices (known from ancient times) are also forbidden by our laws. But ours contain an additional proviso that such offenders shall be punished by the supervisors of the woman.” Plutarch. In light of the punishment imposed by Roman authorities, we can better appreciate Paul and Peter’s ethos for the first-century Christian woman.
Author
Cheryl Mason.
Bibliography:
En.wikipedia.org. n.d. Natural law – Wikipedia. [online] Available at: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law> [Accessed 15 February 2022].
Grubbs, J., 2005. Women and the law in the Roman Empire. London: Routledge.
Neusner, J., 2005. The Babylonian Talmud. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson Publishers.
n.d. The Holy Bible Authorized King James Version. Nashville: Collins World.
Shelton, J., 1998. As the Romans did. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
Winter, B., 2003. Roman wives, Roman widows. Grand Rapids, Mich. [u.a.]: Eerdmans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yentl_(film)
Click to hear the message on YouTube, thanks 🙏🏽
The Pastoral Epistle to Timothy and Paul’s ‘Silence’ of Women.
1 Timothy 2:11-15 KJV
“Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”
The Apostle Paul wrote his Epistles to Timothy during the last phase of his life. At that time, he was imprisoned in Rome and facing execution. It appears all but a few had abandoned him, which left Paul clinging to the hope that the young Timothy would carry out his vision for the fledgling Christian Church. I spent a lot of time reading and re-reading Paul’s Epistles to Timothy, and I got a sense of the deep anguish he was experiencing at that time.
Paul had run the race and finished the course, he was satisfied to have completed his mission; and while he looked forward to his rewards, his words were sorrowful. Paul knew he was leaving behind a Church in the grips of Gnosticism. Although the real second-century Gnosticism did not eventuate until after Paul’s Epistles to Timothy, Paul seemed aware of its potential dangers. The Gnosticism Paul was referring to was home grown and mystic. I intend to write more about the types of Gnosticism that confronted the early church at another time.
Paul lacked an heir, which made it more important that his prodigy Timothy, knew how to manage this imminent threat of Gnosticism. Reading from his other comments, this new form of ‘knowledge’ may have become rooted in church members with too much time on their hands. I was left with no doubt that Paul believed women were more open to these deceptions than men were. Besides Paul’s tattling, prattling, busy-bodying and women being gullible comments he also provided Timothy with some solid guidelines to manage the unruly and troublesome members of his congregation.
The ‘I’ should be emphasized in Paul’s admonition to Timothy. ‘I,’ “do not permit a woman to teach,” We could assume then, it was his preference or the way he did things. Also, it would be okay to assume that others did not share his views. And certainly, today, unless you belong to a Baptist Church, or similar, most Christian Churches do not follow Paul’s instruction. Yet very few openly express their disagreement with Paul’s views.
Paul stands alone in his views on women in the New Testament, and yet he stated, let everything be established in the mouth of two or three witnesses. Something that was very much part of his Hebrew tradition. Speaking of his Hebrew Tradition, his instruction for Timothy’s “Apt to teach” comment is directly from the Traditions (Pirke Avot). In Talmudic Tradition also, “The men came to learn, the women came to hear.” Something that is still practiced today in most Synagogues, women are mere spectators, and the men are the participators. The word ‘learn’ is loaded in this instance, inferring that women are incapable of receiving instruction. Therefore, it is more appropriate for them to ‘hear.’
Despite, the Christian Church today practicing an openness for all members to participate, some diehards still adhere to what Paul said in a literal sense. I respect these are personal convictions and should an individual wish to follow Paul’s instructions word for word, it should be their prerogative. And I will not try to convince them otherwise. Nevertheless, I will state my views on why this passage is vague and disjointed. And for me, it lacks logic and coherency. The reasons Paul gives for his beliefs, just do not make sense to me, and that is why I have a problem with 1 Timothy 2:11-15.
Paul refers to Genesis Ch. 2 which states that the male was created first, and since he (Adam) could not find companionship amongst the animals, God made the female. But we are to assume, that male and female already existed in the animal kingdom. My preference is to believe it was always God’s intention to make male and female (Human, as in Genesis Ch. 1) and that the woman was never some afterthought, like Genesis Ch.2 suggests. My preference is also to believe that the ‘Yahwist’s’ took licence in Genesis Ch. 2, to offer some exegesis which emphasised the Jewishness of Adam, the dominance of the male, the significance of Sabbath and the Tree of Life.
Paul’s second reason for silencing women, also stems from the Garden of Eden. As if being a second creation is not enough to bear, he places the woes of the world squarely on Eve’s shoulders. If I am to interpret his comments correctly, Paul is implying that, because Eve was deceived first, the ability to be easily deceived is inherent in the character of all women. As punishment for the original deception, all women everywhere, for all time should learn in silence. This type of attitude does not acknowledge Adam’s role in the deception and that both parties repented and together produced Seth, the righteous seed. I accept there can be no remission of sin for repeat offenders, but in this case, it was Eve’s first violation of God’s command, therefore I do not accept that the stigma of the sin is permanent or that all women should be judged accordingly. I do accept there were consequences for the original sin, but I cannot see how not being allowed to speak has anything to do with that. The Genesis text does not suggest that a consequence was silence.
There appears to be some consolation from Paul’s perspective; and that is that women will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, charity, holiness, and sobriety. No mention of ‘silence,’ because of the two reasons for ‘learning in silence’ he gave earlier. The reasons Paul gave were that women were created after Adam as in Genesis Ch.2 and that they tended to be easily deceived. Both reasons lack logic and do not provide any conclusive evidence as to why women should learn in silence.
My testimony of when I was told to be silent:
As someone who came to Christ in a Baptist Church I was taught from my earliest days about my low status as a woman in the Church. However, God had other plans for me.
God supernaturally opened the heavens and poured out His Holy Spirit on me, and from then on, I was filled with boldness and no Baptist Pastor was ever going to shut me up!
Certain men made it their business to educate me in Paul’s teaching in 1 Timothy 2:11-15. I decided for the sake of my youth and keeping the peace, I would be obedient to their wishes.
But God disapproved of my silence, he gave me a dream, and someone had placed a huge black toilet plunger over my mouth. The suction had sealed my mouth completely and, in the dream, it felt the same as me restricting God’s Holy Spirit from speaking through me. I knew I had to remove this dreadful object. So, I stuck my finger in-between the plunger and my skin and released it. And I was free again.
Although that was not enough for me, I needed more confirmation that I was not in violation of God’s commands. I heard there was a Prophet holding a meeting a couple of hours away. I prayed and told God, I will go before him and tell him my problem and whatever he tells me to do I will do. When I arrived at the meeting and saw the Prophet up close and personal, I got cold feet. I could not bring myself to tell him anything. I just stood there quietly in the congregation.
Then the man of God called me up to the front and prophesied everything that I came to see him about. I had never seen that man or anyone in that meeting before. And I never told anyone about my inward struggles or why I was there. I still have that prophesy and listen to it from time to time. Concisely, God’s message to me that night was noticeably clear, “Whatever I command you to say, you must say it.” There was much more, which I keep to myself. The fire of God touched my mouth, like the hot coals from the very throne of God that night and I never questioned my calling again.
Ironically, I still get challenged about writing, speaking, and teaching as a Christian woman. And my answer to my critics is this … “I would rather be judged as a woman that does too much than a man who does too little.” Thank God for the witness of the Christian women who reach millions with the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Cheryl Mason.
Announcement
First, I would like to wish you all A Very Blessed Reformation Day!
I am also excited to inform you that this Blog has performed extremely well in 2021. Apart from the Amazon, Greenland, and a couple of very remote places in Africa, I have had readers from every country on the planet.
Why stop there? I have decided to also resurrect my old Domain www.cherylmason.com and use it to post micro-articles. Short snippets as the Lord leads; insights from my daily readings, devotions, and prayers. Because I want to keep articles short on the new Blog, I can post more frequently.
The Blog you are on now will continue to exist and I will continue to post and link to it.
www.cherylmason.com is now up and running.
God Bless and Be Safe.
Cheryl Mason.
The Book of Jasher – Part Two: The Life & Times of Abraham the Star! Chs. 8-26
Please read Part One for my Introduction to this series on The Book of Jasher.
Abraham’s Star:
In Part Two of this series, I will be discussing the life and times of Abraham according to Jasher. We already know quite a lot about Abraham’s life from the Bible. But I promise you lots of new information and many surprises along the way. Curious? Then read on …
Jasher makes it quite clear that the birth of Abram/Abraham was a significant event in the history of the world. “And they saw and behold one very large star came from the east and ran in the heavens and swallowed up the four stars from the four sides of heaven.” Then they prophesied over the child. “And, they said to each other, this only betokens to the child that has been born to Terah this night. Who will grow up and be fruitful and multiply and possess all the earth, he, and his children, forever. And he and his seed will slay great kings and inherit their lands.” (Charles, 1887)
The men observing the stars on the night Abraham was born, knew instinctively the future promises to him. The Promises being: he would be ‘fruitful and multiply’, ‘possess all the earth’, ‘forever’ and that ‘his seed will inherit the land of great kings’. In Jasher, the same words are repeated several times over as an indication of God’s Covenant ─ like any good Suzerain Vassal Treaty. The prophesy to Abraham in Genesis Chapter 12 is identical, except that in Genesis it originated from God and not from those present at his birth. The blessing in Genesis also consisted of seed, land (all the earth in Jasher and river to river in Genesis) forever.
The significance of being born under A Star:
I have studied the importance of being born under a Star for some time. What I discovered was, it was not just superstition in Abraham’s day. The relevance of being born under a star is emphasized in Matthew’s Gospel even in the Christian era. The story of the Three Wise Men who followed the star 2000 years ago is no doubt a Christmas favourite. Throughout the Ancient Near East, ‘Watchers’, watched the night sky for signs, one such sign was a bright Star. Any child born during the phenomenon of the bright Star was destined to change the world in an extraordinary way. Matthew alluded to it in his Gospel. He stated the Three Wise Men (Jewish sages) sought out the baby Jesus, when they saw the Star in the East (Matthew 2:9-10).
There is a good reason to accept that Matthew’s celestial event happened. Astronomers believe Jupiter stood still in the night sky on December 25, 2 BC. Quoting from Pursiful’s Bible & Faith Blog, “Amazingly, one possible answer is that the visit of the Magi took place on December 25, 2 BC. On that date, Jupiter stopped in its path and began its yearly retrogression through the heavens. Remember: It was Jupiter that, in the previous year, highlighted the star Regulus by in effect tracing a crown above it, likely alerting the Magi to the birth of the King. According to Matthew 2, when the Magi left Herod, the star they were following “stood still” over the place where Jesus was to be found (Mt 2:9)”.
“Astronomical calculations reveal that in the predawn hours of December 25, 2 BC, Jupiter indeed stood still in the sky. Observed from Jerusalem, it did this at 68 degrees above the southern horizon, directly over the city of Bethlehem. This date may have been memorable even to those unfamiliar with the astronomical observations because, by Roman reckoning, it fell on the exact date of the winter solstice. (When Julius Caesar instituted the new Julian calendar in the first century BC, the winter solstice festival was celebrated on December 25. This date continued to be observed for many years.)” (Pursiful, 2021). The reason Matthew mentioned the Star in the East was because of a long-expected belief in Messiah’s Star.
Messiah’s Star:
The basis for the belief in Messiah’s Star in Judaism and Christianity stems from the passage in Numbers. “A Star will shoot forth from Jacob” (Numbers 24:17). The same scripture was applied to the leadership of Shimon bar Kochba by Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva believed Kochba was the promised messiah. In the end Kochba’s star faded and he was referred to as Bar Koziba, the son of a lie. His ‘messiahship’ ended abruptly with the death of hundreds of thousands of Jews. It was an incredibly sad time in the history of the Jewish people (Bar Kochba, 2021). Throughout the whole episode of Kochba, we got a glimpse of the early Christian understanding of being born under a star.
Justin Martyr (Apol.i.31) mentioned that early Christians were severely punished for not accepting Bar Koshba’s Star. When Rabbi Akiba referred to the prophesy in Numbers as being fulfilled in Bar Kochba (Taanith IV.8, p.68d) the Christians simply replied… “Thou art in error, Jesus of Nazareth and no other is the true Son of a Star.” Although Christians accepted the Star had manifested in Jesus Christ, most Jewish people did not. Hence, the quest for Messiah’s Star continued in some sects of Judaism. The Messianic idea is different in Judaism than it is in Christianity. Abraham, Joseph, Moses, they were all messianic, because they led their people in victories over their enemies. There is still one more Messiah to come according to Judaism. My reason for writing more on Abraham’s Star was to show that Jasher had a very clear plan when he mentioned the importance of Abraham’s Star. And, that the early Christians still believed humans could be guided by the stars.
When was Abraham born?
Abraham’s life is very well documented in many religious texts. Texts that are fundamental to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Jasher being one such text. And despite Jasher providing intimate details of Abraham’s life, loves and wars he leaves us clueless about when Abraham was born. Because there is no actual dating for Abraham, we must use specific biblical passages as a guide to gauge when he was born. Extra-biblical sources such as the Amarna Letters, Mari and Nuzi documents also assist by comparing events in Abraham’s life with external cultural contexts. But as I discovered, this was no easy task and all we can do is get a rough estimate at best.
From the Hebrew Scriptures Abraham is dated as follows:
1 Kings Ch.6:1 says the ancient Israelites were 480 years in the land before Solomon’s Temple.
Exodus Ch.12 says the ancient Israelites spent 430 years in Egypt.
Solomon’s temple was built in approximately, 960 BC.
By adding the dates 960+480+430, scholars conclude that Abraham was on the move in approximately 1870 BC. However, because some scholars support an early Exodus and others a late Exodus (1450 BC/1250 BC), Abraham’s timeline changes accordingly. When dating Abraham using extra-biblical sources there is evidence of considerable movement of people in the region during his lifetime. Scholars refer to the period Abraham was on the move in Canaan as the Amorite Hypothesis.
The Amorite Hypothesis:
The Amorite Hypothesis is a hypothesis that originated in the 1930’s by William Albright, archaeologist, and historian. According to Albright’s theory, it is conceivable that Abraham left Ur of the Chaldees and travelled to the land Canaan, on a popular trade route. Although most modern-day scholars reject Albright’s Hypothesis. Professor Cline, states that scholars who do not accept Albright’s Amorite Hypothesis, do so based on the genealogy and the chronology not adding up and because the average life span was around 40 years. It appears the Hebrews lived two, three or four times longer than the average person. Some lived hundreds of years more than the average person. Therefore, according to Cline, an accurate date for Abraham is not possible (Cline, 2006).
Despite varying views on Abraham, Jews, Christians, and Muslims tend to agree by faith, that Abraham was a real person. And that in obedience to God, he made the journey from Ur of the Chaldees to the land of Canaan. Apart from God telling Abraham to go to Canaan, Jasher alludes to some trouble that made Abraham make the journey. Jasher states that, Anuki (Nimrod’s servant) insighted Nimrod to kill Abraham. So, Abraham left Ur of the Chaldees and went to Canaan. Jasher also states that Abraham was in the land of Canaan three years when God Cut the Covenant with him (Charles, 1887). Whereas the Bible says, God Cut the Covenant with him while calling him out of Ur of the Chaldees (Genesis Ch.12).
From other ancient sources we also learn that the Elamites, the Nanna Moon Cult, could possibly be another reason for Abraham leaving Ur of the Chaldees. “Those who believe in the Hebrew Bible as history have long sought the background to the tale of Abraham and his family, their trek around the arc of the Fertile Crescent, from Ur of the Chaldees in Sumer to Haran in the north, and from there westward to the land of Cana’an, in the years following the collapse of Ur’s empire. Perhaps, they suggest, Terah took his family from Ur because of the Elamite onslaught and the consequent move of the moon cult from the conquered southern city to safer Haran in the north.” (Kriwaczek, 2010).
If Abraham was on the move in 1870 BC, then it is conceivable he visited Salem (Jerusalem) around 2000 BC where he had his encounter with Melchizedek. I will deal with the mystery man, Melchizedek later. I will attempt to answer whether Melchizedek was Jesus Christ or if he was Shem as Jewish literature concedes. After all the Bible does say that Shem lived a long time, to 600 years of age (Genesis 11:10). Even though Shem (the Name) is a bit of a riddle in Jewish literature, he is still fundamental to Judaism. Jasher states that Adoni Zedek (Melchizedek) was Shem. In Jasher, Shem is a guiding force in the life of Abraham. On more than one occasion Abraham lived with Shem. In fact, Jasher states that Abraham learned The Law from Noah and Shem. Which Law they are referring to remains uncertain, since according to the Hebrew Scriptures the ‘Law’ originated with Moses, some 500 years after Abraham.
Abraham’s Life Events:
I found the Book of Jasher to be far more detailed than the Biblical text. Especially, with the life of Abraham. As most of my readers are already familiar with the scriptural version of Abraham’s life, I will not bore you with the same stories again. Instead, I will do a dot-point summary of details found in Jasher that have been left out of the Biblical text.
1. As mentioned earlier Abraham was born under a Star which meant he had enemies and his life was always in danger. Which fits nicely into the Talmudic belief that Abraham was so blessed because he was alone and needed extra protection. From the get-go, Nimrod tried to kill him. He took refuge with Noah and Shem for thirty-nine years and it was there that he studied The Law. Which Law, we do not know. He also hid in Caves and was ministered to by the Angel Gabriel. The whole episode of the cave experience was reminiscent of the Islamic story of Mohammed.
2. Despite Abraham’s schooling with Noah and Shem, he is shown as being a polytheistic worshiper of the Sun, Moon and Stars. At the same time Jasher says, Abraham followed the Lord since he was three years of age. Later, Abraham did become monotheistic and followed the One True God. Evidence of this is when he smashed all his father’s (Terah’s) idols. Terah tried to kill his son but again Abraham escaped. Reading between the lines, I glean that this revelation of Abraham’s relates more to The Unity of God, which is the same in Judaism and Islam. Christians have a different understanding of The Unity of God.
3. In another instance Abraham finds himself facing the Fiery Furnace with words that are like the book of Daniel. Abraham also walked about in the furnace, while those that came near died. “And Abram said to the king, The God of heaven and earth in whom I trust and who has all in his power, he delivered me from the fire into which thou didst cast me.” (Charles, 1887).
4. Another interesting aspect to Jasher is the story of Ishmael. First, I must mention that Hagar, together with Eliezer were gifts to Abraham from Pharoah. Hagar was the daughter of Pharoah, by a concubine. In the Hebrew Scriptures, Hagar and Ishmael were cast out, and we heard very little about them. Except that Ishmael made a brief appearance at the funeral of Abraham. Jasher on the other hand, portrays a very different story. Ishmael, threatened Sarah’s life, so had to leave the family home. But Abraham never lost touch with Ishmael, he visited him on a regular basis and instructed him in the Ways of the Lord. “And Ishmael and his children dwelt with Abraham many days in the land, and Abraham dwelt in the land of the Philistines a long time.” (Charles, 1887). Jasher also states that Ishmael was very much present at the Binding of Isaac. Which is explained in the text as a human sacrifice, a Burnt Offering.
5. Sarah the mother of Isaac was both Abraham’s half-sister and his niece. Niece was a preferred choice, because of Leviticus laws concerning incest. Sarah had trouble conceiving, hence the intrusion of Hagar and Ishmael into Abraham’s life. Abraham and Sarah eventually had Isaac, when Isaac was forty years old, he married Rebecca who was ten years old (ouch). Isaac was sixty when Rebecca gave birth to Jacob and Esau. Isaac the child of Promise was the biggest blessing and the biggest test for Abraham and Sarah. Abraham was tempted to offer up Isaac as a human sacrifice. What we do not read in the Genesis version is that Satan enticed God to test Abraham. The similarities to Satan enticing God to test Job for me were undeniable. As with Job, Satan wanders to and fro on the earth and spots Abraham and decided he needed some testing (See Job Ch.1 & Jasher Ch.22).
6. The Binding of Isaac in Jasher, leaves no doubt that it was “A Burnt Offering to the Lord as he commanded.” Sarah was devastated as she said her goodbyes to Isaac. Ishmael was also present. Like the perfect son, in total obedience to his parents, Isaac said to his father … “Bind me securely and place me upon the alter lest I should turn and move and break loose from the force of the knife upon my flesh, and therefore prepare the burnt offering, and Abraham did so.”. In the end, Isaac lived, much to the disappointment of Satan. If Satan solicited the temptation of Abraham just like he did with Job, then that would add another dimension to his existence in the Scriptures. Often his existence is denied in the Abrahamic faiths.
7. I left Melchizedek until last because I have a few things to say about him. The encounter between Abraham and Melchizedek in Genesis Ch.14 is shrouded in mystery. And as always Jews and Christians have very different viewpoints of what occurred. It is my job to tell you what those viewpoints are. Both are rather complicated, and both require a great deal of faith to believe. Josephus had the simplest understanding of Melchizedek in Antiquities of The Jews, he believed Melchizedek was a peaceful king, a real person who ruled in Salem before it was called Jerusalem. If only we could all believe that, but we do not! For the simple reason there are too many loose ends, and since speculation surrounds Melchizedek we must explore all the options. So, here we go …
First, I need to stipulate that Salem is Jerusalem (Jerushlaim). Salem means peace, therefore any king of Salem would automatically be associated with peace. Later either Jerush (possession) or Jarah (foundation) were added to create the word, Jerusalem. But originally it was called Salem and it was called that before King David. Genesis Ch.12 is not the only reference to Melchizedek in Jerusalem in the Hebrew Scriptures. There is also a mention of him in Joshua Ch.10:1-4 and it is a very similar battle. In Joshua Melchizedek keeps his Hebrew name, Adoni Zedek rather than being changed to Melchizedek. Both titles are similar, although Adoni Zedek is Lordship whereas Melchizedek is more about Kingship. I will explain further.
Adoni Zedek means Lord (Adoni) Righteous (Zedek), or my Lord is Righteous. In past times Zedek has meant Jupiter, but the meaning has changed over time. Adoni Zedek has been left as Adoni Zedek in Joshua in his battle, but in Genesis 14, Psalm 110 and in Hebrew Chs. 3;15-17 the title is written as Melchizedek. It appears from both Jewish and English understanding of this name that Melchizedek was not just some ordinary person. The mention of a Adoni Zedek in Joshua is somehow overlooked, and all the focus is placed on Genesis 14, where Adoni Zedek (Melchizedek) met with Abraham and shared a sacrament of peace. Unlike Josephus’s simple understanding of who Melchizedek was, Christians have interpreted him as none other than Jesus Christ.
There is no doubt this is due to the writer of the Book of Hebrews in the New Testament. The author of Hebrews (presumably Paul) uses various Psalms to establish the Kingship and Priesthood of Jesus Christ. Paul uses Psalm 110 as a prophecy about Jesus Christ. “The Lord said to my Lord.” There is mention of Zion, which is Jerusalem (Psalm 76:2) and finally, “You are a priest forever after the Order of Melchizedek.” (Psalm 110). From a Christian perspective of the Lordship, Rule (Kingship) and Priesthood of Jesus, Genesis Ch.14 ticks all the boxes. Yet as I discovered the idea of a coming King/Priest was not original to the writer of Hebrews. He expounded on it, but it was not his. The sect of Qumran lived in expectation of two Messiah’s, a Priest like Aaron, and a Royal like David (Merrill, 1996). Since Christians also believe the Hebrew Scriptures are Types and Shadows of the New Testament, some Christians hold the view that Melchizedek was not Christ himself but a type of Christ.
As I mentioned earlier you will need faith to believe both the Christian and Jewish versions of who Melchizedek was/is. Because they are both steeped in spiritual symbolism. If you thought the Christian version was complicated, then stay tuned for the Jewish one. The Book of Jasher states, Melchizedek was Shem. As far as I understand in Talmudic literature, R. Zacharia said on R. Ishmael’s authority that Adoni Zedek in Genesis was Shem (Dennis, n.d.). Also, from my understanding, Shem is the father of Israel. His name Shem (Name) is like Ha Shem (The Name of God). Since it is considered disrespectful to mention God’s name, Jewish people use Ha Shem (the Name) or Adoni (Lord) instead. The exchange between Adoni Zedek and Abraham was perceived in some Jewish circles as a transference of power or an ordination into the Priesthood (Graves and Patai, 2014). Adoni Zedek anointed Abraham and made him a Priest after the Order of Melchizedek, and they broke bread and drank wine.
Shem has a lot of significance in Judaism, more in some sects than others. He lived a long time, 600 years. The 600 then is symbolic, 6 being the number of man and the zeros divine (hidden). Numbers are coded in the Bible. I appreciate Christians having trouble accepting this but trust me they are. Jasher is full of 600’s, and the Bible has that number as well. For example, Noah entered the Ark at 600 years of age, another divine (hidden) number. Then there is the prophesy of Shem, about Japheth dwelling in the tents of Shem (Genesis (:27). From that we can gather that Shem carried messianic expectations, based on his prophesy. If that prophesy is yet to be fulfilled, then Shem is till here in spirit at least. In yet other sects of Judaism Shem is the divine presence, the Shekinah, and the all-encompassing name of God. Shem Hamphorash (YHVH) is 42 letters of the name of God in Kabbalah. It encapsulates the entirety of God’s name in the four-letter tetragrammaton.
Most Christians nowadays also use YHVH to address the God of the Israelites. Yet the inclusion of YHVH in the English Bibles is a recent addition. That appears a little strange to me, since in the Jewish texts, it was being removed and replaced with Adoni. YHVH (Yahweh) existed some 6828 times in the Hebrew Scriptures, it was removed because the scribes could not determine its correct pronunciation. But why take my word for it? Maimonides, the great Hebrew scholar, stated in Guide for the Perplexed, “The letters yod, he, vau, he, is applied exclusively to God, and is on that account called Shem ha-Meforash, the nomen propium.” Maimonides, explained why, when, and how YHVH was removed from circulation, but insisted it was still the 42 letters of God’s name (Moses Maimonides A Guide for the Perplexed, 2013).
Since I am mentioning numbers and their significance in the Hebrew Scriptures. I discovered that the authors of the JPS Torah, discovered some unusual aspects of Genesis Ch.14. For instance, they noted, “Uncommon divine titles, such as God Most High” and “Creator of Heaven and Earth”. Phrases that were not common in other books of the Hebrew Scriptures. Numbers were also repeated, Adam was mentioned 7 times and Melchizedek’s two blessing each contained seven words. In total according to the authors, 11% of the text occupies unique words and phrases (Sarna and Potok, 1989). By all accounts, whether from Jasher, the Hebrew Scriptures, the Book of Hebrews, from a Jewish perspective or a Christian perspective, Abraham’s encounter with Adoni Zedek (Melchizedek) will always be mysterious.
Conclusion:
In Part Two of my series on The Book of Jasher, I emphasized that according to the text, Abraham was born under a Star. And at his birth he received blessings which were again pronounced on him by God in Genesis Ch.12. Being born under a Star also meant Abraham was a threat to kings and rulers, hence his life was in danger. Jasher states that Abraham was schooled by Noah and Shem in the Law. Most aspects of Abraham’s life from the Jasher text aligned with the biblical version. I mentioned a few aspects that were different. Such as his relationship with Ishmael, his walking in the midst of the fire, and Satan enticing God to test him, were new to me. I delved a bit deeper into Abraham’s encounter with Melchizedek than perhaps I needed to. But my view always has been that the meeting in Jerusalem between Abraham and Melchizedek had layers of meanings. And for me in that instance, Abraham had arrived, he went from being a scared man hiding in caves to a warrior in the company of Canaanite Kings.
To be continued …
Author: Cheryl Mason.
References:
2020. Midrash Sefer Ha Yasher the Book of The Correct Record. 1st ed. YBS, p.30.
Charles, R., 1887. The Book of Jasher. Salt Lake City: J.H. Parry & Company, pp.10,26,32,35,36,58,59,64,67,72, 78.
Cline, P., 2006. The History of Ancient Israel and The Patriarchs.
Daodu, F., n.d. God’s Name is Not Yahweh or Jehovah? The Gentile Church Dilemma.
Dennis, G., n.d. The Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic & Mysticism. 2nd ed. Woodbury, Minnesota: Llewellyn Publications. Cited on locations, 13639, 12570,18977 on e-book
Farbridge, M., 1923. Studies in Biblical and Semitic Symbolism. New York: Kegan Paul, Trench, Turner & Co Ltd.
Graves, R. and Patai, R., 2014. Hebrew Myths the Book of Genesis. Rosetta Books LLC, p.147.
Hogarth, D., 1915. The Ancient East. 1st ed. New York: H. Holt.
Kitto, J., n.d. The History of Ancient and Modern Jerusalem. Kessinger Publishing LLC, p.21.Jewish History | We Bring Jewish History to Life. 2021. Bar Kochba. [online] Available at: <https://www.jewishhistory.org/bar-kochba/> [Accessed 20 July 2021].
Kriwaczek, P., 2010. Babylon: Mesopotamia and the Birth of Civilization. London WC1N312: Atlantic Books, p.163.
Merrill, E., 1996. Kingdom of Priests A History of Old Testament Israel. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academics, pp.263-265.
Moses Maimonides A Guide for the Perplexed, 2013. New York: Veritatis Splendor Publications, pp.169-200.
n.d. The Holy Bible Authorized King James Version. Nashville: Collins World.
n.d. Ur: The History and Legacy of the Ancient Sumerian Capital. Charles River Editors, n.d.
Pursiful, D., 2021. When Was Jesus Born? Clement of Alexandria. [online] Dr. Platypus. Available at: <https://pursiful.com/2006/12/19/when-was-jesus-born-clement-of-alexandria/> [Accessed 21 July 2021].
Sacred Texts. 2021. The Book of Jubilees. [online] Available at: <https://www.sacred-texts.com/index.htm> [Accessed 16 July 2021].
Sarna, N. and Potok, C., 1989. The JPS Torah Commentary Genesis. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, p.102.
Sayce, R., n.d. Patriarchal Palestine. New York: The Tract Committee, p.8.
Schwartz, H., 2004. Tree of Souls the Mythology of Judaism. New York, New York: Oxford University Press, p.437.
The End:
The Book of Jasher ─ Part One: Adam to Nimrod the Mighty Hunter.
There are several references in the Bible to other texts that were not included in the Canon of Scripture. These texts are often referred to as the Non-Canonical Books or the Lost Books of the Bible. Whatever we choose to call them, we cannot deny that they continue to be of great interest to the curious bible scholar. One such text is the Book of Jasher. In the Bible, the Book of Jasher is cited in Joshua 10:12-13; 2 Samuel 1:18-27 and 2 Timothy 3:8 (as in Jannes and Jambres). In Hebrew, Jasher is referred to as the Sefer ha Yashar (Book of the Correct Record). In the LXX, Jasher is called the “Book of the Upright One.” And, in The Latin Vulgate, Jasher is called the “Book of the Just Ones.”
Anyone seeking information on Jasher will soon discover there are many opinions about the text. The consensus is that there is a genuine copy out there, but the forgeries are more prevalent. Others believe that the original copy of Jasher did exist at some point in time, but it was destroyed and whatever information was contained in it has been lost forever. Despite our fascination with the non-canonical books, we continue to harbour niggling doubts about their authenticity. We are acutely aware they have a flare for exaggeration, mysticism, and drama which most of us find difficult to understand. Perhaps, that is why they were excluded from the Holy Bible.
After much searching and reading reviews and the like about Jasher, I settled on a copy by R.H Charles from a reputable publisher and the Midrash Sefer ha Yashar or the ‘Book of the Correct Record.” I mean seriously, how could I click past such a claim? Besides that, it was accompanied with a nice story of how the text was supernaturally preserved. Call me gullible but I am a sucker when it comes to a good story. I would have liked to have also read a Kabbalistic interpretation for this study but reading two Jasher’s was all the violence I could handle. If I can spare someone else the goriness of Jasher, then I will. Winners are grinners and the Hebrews of Jasher’s world plundered their way through some of the most significant people groups in the Ancient Near East one scalp at a time.
To make this article a little easier to read I will summarize chapters and individuals under the various headings. And where necessary I will compare the R.H. Charles version with “The Correct Record” and The Bible.
Adam and The Creation Story: Chs. 1-5.
The creation story in Jasher is the same as Genesis Ch. 2. Immediately, for me that meant the text was written by a Yahwist. Confused? Then check out my Exegesis on Genesis Chs. 1-2, I explain it all in there.
In Jasher Adam and Eve have two sons and three daughters; daughters that are not mentioned in the biblical text. The daughters of Adam and Eve are further mentioned in other texts, such as Jubilees. And according to the other texts Adam’s sons’ wives were their sisters. Cain married Awan his sister and Seth married Azura. Christians are often challenged with this question: “Where did Cain get his wife from?” Equally, where did Seth get his wife from?
If we go down the path of accepting what Jasher and Jubilees says, then Christians must admit that the first family were incestuous. Something God considers wrong in other parts of the Bible (Leviticus 18:8-10). But was incest wrong for our benefit or for God’s benefit? In my opinion every Commandment of God for humans is for our benefit and incest is just one of them. Theoretically, the first family had to reproduce somehow and until God revealed his precise plan for humans, they were not in any violation of His Laws. God was right, and most cultures now avoid incest because the offspring can be susceptible to genetic disorders. I am by no means qualified to comment on the genetic makeup of Adam and Eve, but according to Genesis Ch.2 they were two separate creations.
Moving on from the first family. Jasher quite early on used two names we are all familiar with, Enoch and Enosh. Enoch, it says was a descendant of Cain and Enosh was the son of Seth. As we know Seth was a replacement child for Abel the first Shepherd who was slain by his brother, Cain. As with the biblical version, sin consumed humans and they were full of debauchery, like avoiding having children. As always when humans reached that point, it was time for a righteous person to appear on the scene and turn things around.
Another Enoch makes an appearance in the line of Cainan and Jared. And, according to Jasher, he was the Enoch that walked with God! He was a pious, holy man who shunned human company in favour of God’s presence. He was full of wisdom and lived to 366 years of age before God took him up in horses, a whirlwind, and chariots of fire. Just like Elijah the Prophet. Ironically, the “The Correct Record” states that Enoch had a son called Elisha. Both men did not experience physical death, one had a son called Elisha and the other passed his mantle to Elisha (2 Kings 2:2,4,6). It is clear in Jasher that as God prepared for Judgement, the righteous were removed (they all died). In the end only righteous Noah and his family were left, their preservation reliant on Noah’s obedience to build an Ark. If that is a pattern, then God will do the same again. If Judgment is upon us, the righteous will be removed first and still others will ride the storm in the Ark of God’s divine protection.
Noah to Nimrod: Chs.5-7.
Noah the righteous man deliberately did not marry or have any children because he was aware that the world as he knew it was about to end. Despite his hesitation, God told him he must marry and have children. Bear in mind we already have a date for Noah entering the Ark and it is recorded in the biblical text as being in the six-hundredth year of his life (Genesis 7:6). According to Jasher, Noah married Namaah the daughter of Enoch when he was 498 years old, and she was 580 years old. She bore him three sons, Ham, Shem, and Japheth. The rest of the Noah story pretty much aligns with the biblical text. Except for Ham’s sin against his father, Noah.
Namaah was the daughter of Enoch, she was eighty-two years older than Noah at the time of their marriage. She shared the same name as another interesting character in Jewish folklore. Namaah means pleasant and lovely, but she is also the fourth sea-demon who has a ravenous sexual appetite. She is blamed for men remaining unsatisfied even after sex and for teaming up with Lilith and seducing Adam to breed demon spawn. Okay, enough of that…Hopefully Noah’s Namaah was Namaah in name only and nothing like the folklore demon.
However, Namaah did give birth to Ham, and it appears he was no good. Gossip abounds as to the reasons why Noah cursed Ham’s offspring. I have heard that Ham violated his father sexually and that is what is meant by, “Uncovering Noah’s nakedness.” (Genesis Ch.9). Others are shocked that something as innocent as seeing your father naked would warrant such a harsh curse upon Ham. But I think, the story goes a lot deeper when we read from the non-canonical books. According to Jasher, a family heirloom of Adam and Eve’s which held supernatural powers was in Noah’s possession and Ham unlawfully stole it and passed it to Nimrod his descendant.
The stolen ‘garments’ of Adam and Eve is throughout Jewish literature. And so is Nimrod who benefited greatly from the stolen garment. Jasher states that Nimrod was even at the birth of Abram celebrating with Terah. There was also concern about Nimrod being a threat to Abram’s life, simply because Abram was born under a Star. I will cover that in the next section. Jasher states that Nimrod lived in Babel, and people called him, Amraphel. However, most scholars now agree that Amraphel was in fact, the Hammurabi and not Nimrod. Also, since Jasher states that Nimrod died prematurely at 215 years of age because Esau chopped off his head. And why did Esau set his mind on chopping off Nimrod’s head? To take possession of the garments. I used a text called Tree of Souls to find out what these garments were. It did not suffice to just call them ‘garments’, and I could not determine what their significance was in the first reading.
Tree of Souls states that Adam and Eve were originally clothed in garments of light. Like Clouds of Glory and that makes perfect sense to me. Rather than being naked, they must have looked magnificent in their spiritual covering. When they sinned, the Lord had to substitute the covering with covering of skin (Genesis 3:21). The Lord made these garments, hence the supernatural relevance ascribed to them. I discovered in Tree of Souls that even the second earthly garments had a description. It states, they were made of a “Hornlike substance, smooth as a fingernail and beautiful as a jewel.” (Tree of Souls, p.437). Since Jasher states that Esau eventually cut off Nimrod’s head, it was Esau who inherited the garments. On the day Isaac granted Jacob the Blessing, Esau left his garment at home. Rebecca stole it and placed it on Jacob and Jacob became the recipient of the garment’s supernatural powers (Genesis 27:15).
As we have seen in Jasher there is a transition of power passed down through the Righteous Ones from Adam and Eve. An outward expression of this power consisted of a mantle (garment of animal skin) worn by Adam and Eve. I believe in Jasher, Noah still got drunk and while he was in that state Ham stole his mantle (his covering). This in fact is what made Noah so angry, and it all makes perfect sense to me now. Ham was the father of Cush and as we see later Cush and Moses contended for power. But the real benefactor of the stolen mantle of power was Nimrod. The power behind Nimrod, the first settler of Shinar (Babylon) was never intended for him and because of that Babylon will always remain an enigma for God’s Chosen People. As night follows day in the annuals of the Abrahamic religions, it was time for the Almighty to raise up another righteous soul to combat the evil brought about by Nimrod.
To be continued…
Author: Cheryl Mason
Image © Getty Images
Bibliography
2020. Midrash Sefer Ha Yasher the Book of The Correct Record. 1st ed. YBS, p.30.
Charles, R.H., 1887. The Book of Jasher. Salt Lake City: J.H. Parry & Company, pp.10, 26, 78,
Dennis, G., n.d. The Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic & Mysticism. 2nd ed. Woodbury, Minnesota: Llewellyn Publications.
n.d. The Holy Bible Authorized King James Version. Nashville: Collins World.
Sacred Texts. 2021. The Book of Jubilees. [online] Available at: <https://www.sacred-texts.com/index.htm> [Accessed 16 July 2021].
Schwartz, H., 2004. Tree of Souls the Mythology of Judaism. New York, New York: Oxford University Press, p.437.
The Gospel of John: What did Jesus and others declare about his Messiahship & Is the Gospel of John anti-Semitic?
According to John’s Gospel, Jesus Christ openly professed his Messiahship and Sonship. His self-declarations were boldly made in the face of serious charges of blasphemy and threats of imminent death. Declaring oneself to be the prophesied Messiah, the Son of God or the I AM aroused great suspicion, concern, and hostility from the religious authorities.
Although his profound statements were accompanied by miracles, the demands of, “Show us the Signs?”, never diminished. That is, the Signs of Messiah, the Signs of a Prophet, which are so important in Judaism. Although there was no shortage of followers who acknowledged the ‘Signs’ and spoke of them openly. John’s Gospel is full of such affirmations by normal, everyday people of ancient Judea. People like John the Baptist, who proclaimed, “Behold, The Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world” (John 1:29).
In this article I will list others like John the Baptist, who bore ‘Witness’ to who Jesus Christ of Nazareth was. I will include the ‘Witness’ of Jesus himself and the Father. I will answer questions that have plagued John’s Gospel, questions such as who really wrote the text? I will also discuss the perceived anti-Semitic undertones of John’s Gospel. And why I believe the author chose to use the term ‘The Jews’. I will also include the opinion of Geza Vermes a foremost Jewish Scholar and his take on the New Testament being anti-Semitic.
Hopefully, by the end of this article we can all gain a better understanding of this extraordinarily rich text; full of detail and from a time when the world was changed forever.
What did Jesus and others say about who He was?
Bear in mind these were all Jewish witnesses, except for the woman of Samaria.
Chapter 1:29 — John the Baptist said, “Behold! The Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world!”
Chapter 1:41 — Andrew the brother of Simon Peter said, “We have found the Messiah.”
Chapter 1:45 — Philip found Nathanael and said to him, “We have found Him of whom Moses and the Law wrote about.”
Chapter 1:49 — Nathanael said, “You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!”
Chapter 3:2 — Nicodemus said, “You are a teacher come down from God, no one can do these signs except God is with him.”
Chapter 3:35 — John the Baptist said, “The Father loves the Son and has given all things into His hand.”
Chapter 4: 25 — The woman of Samaria said to Jesus, “I know the Messiah is coming.”, Jesus said to her, “I am He who is speaking with you.” Many of the Samaritans believed because of her testimony (verse 39).
Chapter 4:42 — The Samaritans who believed said, “They believed, not only because of her but because of the teachings of Jesus.”, “Indeed, He is the Messiah, the saviour of the world.”
Chapter 5:20 — Father/Son witness, “The Father loves the Son.”
Chapter 5:23 — Father/Son witness, “He who does not honour the Son, does not honour the Father who sent him.”
Chapter 5:36 — Father/Son witness, “The works that I do, bear witness of me that the Father has sent me.”
Chapter 10:25 — Father/Son witness, Jesus said, “The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness of me.”
Chapter 12:28 — Father/Son witness, the voice from Heaven said, “I have glorified your name and will glorify it again.”
Chapter 14:10 — Father/Son witness, Philip asked Jesus, “Show us the Father?” Jesus replied, He who has seen the Father has seen me (verse 9) and “I am in the Father and the Father in me.”
Chapter 14:23 — Father/Son witness, only those who love Jesus and keep His word is loved by the Father.
Chapter 15:23 — Father/Son witness, Jesus said, “He who hates me hates the Father.” And that, “He was hated without a cause.” (Verse 25).
Chapter 5: 39 — The Scriptures as witness, “You search the Scriptures, because you think in them you have life ─ The Scriptures testify of me.”
Chapter 5:46 — Moses as Witness, “If you believe Moses, then you would believe me, because Moses wrote about me.”
Chapter 6:69 — Simon Peter’s witness, “We have come to believe that you are the Messiah, the Son of the Living God.”
Chapter 7:41 — The Crowds as witness, “This is the Messiah, will the Messiah come out of Galilee?”
Chapter 8: 11 — Woman caught in adultery witness, she said, “No one, Lord.” Acknowledging Jesus as Lord!
Chapter 8: 58 — Jesus as witness, Jesus was in a discussion with authorities and said, “Before Abraham was, I AM.”
Chapter 6:35 ─ Jesus said, “I AM the Bread of Life, which came down from Heaven.”
Chapter 9:5 Jesus said, “I AM the Light of the World.”
Chapter 10:7 Jesus said, “I AM the Door of the Sheepfold.”
Chapter 10:11 Jesus said, “I AM the Good Shepherd.”
Chapter 11:25 Jesus said, “I AM the Resurrection and the Life, no man comes to the Father but by me.
Chapter 14:6 Jesus said, “I AM the Way, the Truth and The Life.”
Chapter 18:37 Jesus said, “I AM a King.”
Chapter 9:38 — Blind man as witness, the blind man who was healed at the pool of Siloam (Sent) confessed that Jesus was the Messiah, “Lord, I believe, and he worshipped Him.”
Chapter 10:25 — The authorities surrounded Jesus and asked Him, “Tell us if you are the Messiah?”
Jesus replied, “I told you and you do not believe me.”
Chapter 10:36 — Jesus chastised the religious leaders for calling someone whom the Father sanctified and ‘Sent’ a blasphemer. He said, “You call me this because I said, I am, the Son of God?”
Chapter 11:27 — Martha as witness, “Yes, Lord, I believe you are the Messiah, the Son of God.”
Chapter 12:13 — The witness of the Passover crowd, “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord, Hosanna! The King of Israel.”
Chapter 13:13 — Jesus confirms He is Teacher and Lord, “You call me Teacher and Lord. for so I am.”
Chapter 18:37 — Jesus confesses to Pilate He is a King (but only after telling Pilate His Kingdom is not of this world, but another world).
Chapter 19:19 ─ The Romans confession above the Cross, “Jesus of Nazareth, The King of the Jews.”
So, there you have it. Jesus confessed he was The Messiah, The Son of God, The I AM, several times over. That he was ONE with God and he confessed he was a King. Although, that his Kingdom was not of this world.
Is the Gospel of John anti-Semitic?
To answer this question, we must first establish if John’s Gospel was written by a Jewish author and if it was acknowledged by other Jews as being truthful.
Is the Gospel of John, written by a Jewish author? And when was it written?
Most of the books of the Bible have experienced challenges relating to their dates and authorship. And the Gospel of John is no different. With John’s Gospel, because it was the last Gospel written, John’s age comes into question. How old was he when he wrote it? A reasonable question, I think. The other significant issue raised by Minimalists is the verse in John 21:24, “This is the disciple who testifies of these things and we know his testimony is true.” Who are the ‘we’, referred to in the passage? The ‘we’ in John 21:24 has led many to believe, that the Gospel of John is a collective work. But as I will show you, there is an exceptionally good explanation for this comment from another ancient source.
In this article, I will be quoting from The New Testament Documents by F.F. Bruce (1910-1990) for the most part. Bruce was Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis at the University of Manchester, England, and author of over forty immensely popular books. Bruce references several authors who clearly identify the Jewishness of John’s Gospel and that its author had to be a Jew. They remain convinced the author was familiar with the Palestinian landscape, Jewish purification rites for death and burial (John Chs. 2:6; 19:40). That he was familiar with The Feasts and Old Testament Law (John Ch. 8:17). It was John’s depth of knowledge that led prominent Jewish Scholar, Israel Abrahams to note: “My own general impression, without asserting an early date for the Fourth Gospel is that the Gospel enshrines a genuine aspect of Jesus’s teaching which has not found a place in the Synoptics.”
Dates of New Testament writings according to Professor Bruce:
The New Testament was completed AD100.
Matthew AD 85-90
Mark AD 65
Luke AD 80-85
John AD 90-100
Acts AD 60 approx.
Paul’s Writings AD 48-60 (Letters) and AD 63-65 (Pastoral Epistles)
Revelation AD 90
Mark and Luke wrote before the event of the destruction of the Temple in AD 70.”
It is quite conceivable for me to believe John wrote the Fourth Gospel and Revelation around the same time despite his advancing years. In both instances the much-loved disciple of our Saviour had the last word and concluded our New Testament with his Memoirs. According to Irenaeus, the Apostle John returned to Ephesus after his exile to Patmos. This was during the reign of Emperor Trajan (AD 98-117). Therefore, we know from this source that John lived to an incredibly old age.
What we refer to as Gospels were originally referred to as Memoirs of The Apostles. It was only in the second century that their Memoirs became Gospel.
The early mention of the Memoirs/Gospels being read in Christian gatherings are numerous. The most significant of these would be The Didache. I am also including references to other works of the New Testament by Papias, to acknowledge that the Early Church Fathers, left us a lot of information as to who wrote what.
Professor Bruce also mentions the following:
“Ignatius mentions the Gospels in AD 115
Maricon mentions the Gospels and Paul’s writings in AD 140 (Favouring the NT over the OT)
Papias wrote in AD 130-140 about living and abiding in the Word.
Justin Martyr mentions the Memoirs of the Apostles in AD 150 (read alongside the writings of the Prophets in the OT in Christian gatherings) Apol.i.67.
Bruce states, it was about this time that the Jews left the Septuagint to the Christians because of various divisions between them and made themselves a fresh Greek version of the Old Testament especially for Greek speaking Jews.
Irenaeus mentions the Gospels in AD 180
Origen mentions the Gospels in AD 185-254
Athanasius established the New Testament Canon in AD 367 in the East, followed by Jerome and Augustine in the West. As late as AD 508 there were disputes over 2 Peter, 2&3 John, and Revelation.
But officially the Canonisation of the New Testament happened in Hippo Regius in AD 393 and Carthage in AD 397 (both in North Africa).
Eusebius (Ecclesiastical story (iii.39) gives us an account of the Gospel of Mark by Papias. Papias calls Peter the Elder and says that Mark wrote Peter’s Gospel. And, says that Mark made no mistake, and Mark paid attention not to omit anything or make any false claims.
It is quite possible that Mark like Matthew were first written in Aramaic and then translated in koine Greek. “Aramaic was the common language of Jesus’s day, especially in Galilee and Jesus and His disciples would have spoken this dialect. Even though it is referred to Hebrew in the New Testament it was not! When Papias writes “Matthew compiled the Logia in the ‘Hebrew’ speech [it was Aramaic]. And he went on to say everyone translated them as best he could.”.
Now that we know that The Memoirs/Gospels were in circulation from an incredibly early date, we can appreciate Papias when he tells us who wrote the Fourth Gospel. Papias says The Apostle John wrote the Gospel of John. As far as the ‘we’ mentioned in John 21:24 is concerned, Polycarp, tells us that the disciples prayed and fasted for three days and it was revealed to Andrew that the Apostle John should write down everything in his own name and the others should revise it. Polycarp was a disciple of Apostle John and inherited his mantle when he died. In other words, Polycarp was a second-generation Apostle of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
Is the Gospel of John anti-Semitic?
a) Origins of the word Jew:
The word Jews appears seventy-one times in John’s Gospel. The Greek (laudais) and Latin (Iudaeus) were translated into English first as (Iewes) in the 1611 Authorized King James Bible. There is a free translation of the 1611 AKJ online, read it sometime. According to the Greek-English concordance the Greek word (laudais) is translated as Jews, Jew, Jewish, Jewess, Jewish community, and Jews. Greek (loudas) is translated as Judas, Judah, Jude, and Judea. In subsequent Revised King James Versions (1881-1885 and beyond) Iewes is translated as Jews, as in Second Kings 16:6 and Second Chronicles 32:18. This is the first time the word Jew appears in the English language.
God often changed people’s names in the Bible, Abram to Abraham (Genesis 17:5), Sarai to Sarah (Genesis 17:15), Jacob to Israel (Genesis 32:28). But He never changed Israel’s name to Jews! Israel should always remain Israel, the Twelve Tribes (Sons) of Jacob (Israel). Flavius Josephus says collectively the Hebrews (Israelites) called themselves Judeans (Judah) the day that they returned from Babylon, Judah were the first ones to arrive back from exile, “And thence both they and their country gained that appellation.” (Antiquities Book 11:5:7 (173). Only the Tribes of Judah, Benjamin and some of the Levites returned at first, which might indicate why they did not call themselves, Israel.
b) Jews were the inhabitants of Judah:
In the Gospel of John, I believe ‘Jews’ is used as an identifier and no malice is intended. The term differentiated one community from another, like Jewish people do today ─ Jews and Gentiles (Jews and non-Jews) or like Muslims do (Believers and Infidels/unbelievers). This same method is used in John’s Gospel, because John’s Gospel was the last Gospel written, therefore a clear distinction had arisen between the followers of Jesus, who were Jew and Gentile converts and the others who were not. Like the non-converts, who followed Judaism and lived in the Province of Judea. I like the term, “Speech Situation”, used in the book Anti-Judaism and the Fourth Gospel, it was just how things were labelled back then. You might find this strange, but The Talmud (English translation) also uses the term, “The Jews.”
Since Apostle John lived to a ripe old age as testified by Irenaeus, he would have seen the Temple fully demolished by Titus and both Jews and Christians scattered. And since John wrote Revelation, he would have also been familiar with the persecution taking place in the Churches. John Ch.16:2 comes to mind, “They will put you out of their Synagogues.” Despite many lies being peddled that Gentile Christians caused a rift between Jews and Converts, it was in fact Jewry that decided on a clean break. But that article is for another time. If nothing else, the close of the first century drew a line in the sand between the two religious’ groups.
When we look closely, John’s Gospel itself identifies who these ‘Jews’ are, they are the inhabitants of Judea. Therefore, Jesus left the Jews (the Judeans) where he felt persecuted and went to Galilee (He was a Galilean) where He was not persecuted. How is that anti-Semitic? Jews (Judeans) derived their name from Judea, (Yehud ─ a Roman Province), a place, a tribe, not a race or a religion. As a people, a community they would always be Israel. So, to apply anti-Semitic undertones to a Gospel written by a Jew and approved by other Jews is wrong.
c) What does Eusebius tell us about who was a Jew?
Eusebius (AD 260-340) wrote classical Christian Chronicles recording the first three centuries of Christian history. He was an eyewitness of the destruction of Christian literature by the Romans and decided to record events and hide them for future generations.
Eusebius carefully documented the most important Christian documents. When I read what he achieved, I sat quietly and cried. How insightful of him to have considered us, risking his own life to preserve a historical testament that has lasted 2000 years. God Bless you Eusebius!
In his writings Eusebius makes a distinction between Hebrews (converts to Christianity) and Jews. For example, he lists all the Bishops of Jerusalem as being Hebrews and differentiated them from The Jews living in Jerusalem who were not part of the Christian Church. Which I thought was interesting, I must dig a little deeper to unravel the mind of this Early Church Saint.
d) The meaning of the word Jew has changed over time:
In the passing of time the meaning of the word “Jew’ has changed. This is a quote from the MFA about their understanding of who is Israel and who is a Jew. “So, if modern day so-called Jews are not the Jews of the Bible, who are they? When asked, “Who is Israel? – Who is a Jew?” the Israeli Government’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) unhesitatingly answered:
“The term Israelite is purely Biblical. An Israeli is a citizen of Israel, regardless of religion. A Jew is a person anywhere in the world born to a Jewish mother, or converted to Judaism, who is thus identified as a member of the Jewish people and religion” (Information Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Jerusalem; February 1998)”.
Funk and Wagnall’s New Encyclopaedia (1970) says the same thing: “In 1970 the Israeli Knesset adopted legislation defining a Jew as one born of a Jewish mother or a convert” (vol. 14, p. 214). Despite these more recent definitions about Jews, we must remind ourselves that John’s understanding of the term was a lot different.
I was pleasantly surprised to find support for my concept of John’s Gospel not being anti-Semitic from one of my favourite Jewish Scholars, Geza Vermes. Vermes always provides interesting elements to Jewish/ Christian relations. That is because before reverting to his Jewish roots he was a Catholic Priest, fascinating stuff! In the words of Vermes, the New Testament contains squabbles between various Jewish groups. And there you have it in the words of this great scholar, they were just squabbling and not anti-Semitic.
Since John was a Jew, his writings cannot be deemed anti-Semitic. Vermes, does however see potential for anti-Semitic attitudes from the minds of some readers of the New Testament, but in general, he says, “Anti-Semitism is not in the New Testament text.” In my opinion this is only because the definition of the term ‘Jew’ has changed over time.
Conclusion:
In concluding I have shown that the use of the word ‘Jew’ in John’s Gospel cannot be considered anti-Semitic. John’s Gospel was written over 2000 years ago and the meaning of the word has changed over time. There is evidence from Eusebius that Christian converts in John’s day referred to themselves as Hebrews rather than Jews (adherents of Judaism). Much like today non-religious Jews refer to themselves as Israelites. The inhabitants of Judea (Yehud – Roman Province) who also referred to themselves as Judeans, later became translated into English as Jews. In ancient Jewish literature such as The Talmud, Jews also refer to themselves as ‘The Jews’.
I provided extra-biblical support from ancient sources who confirmed that the Apostle John wrote the Gospel of John. And the ‘we’ referred to in John 21:24 refers to those who verified that his testimony was true. It is estimated that John’s Gospel was completed in AD 90-100. Originally, John’s Gospel like the Synoptics were called Memoirs of The Apostles. In the second century, they were referred to as Gospels. Professor Bruce referenced the Jewishness of John’s Gospel. And that many scholars believe it was written by a bona fide authority on Jewish practices and processes. Lastly, I listed the Jewish sources (that is the people of Jewish descent) who testified that the person we know as Jesus Christ of Nazareth was non other than the Promised Jewish Messiah.
I will leave you with John Calvin’s take on John’s Gospel. “I am in the habit of saying that this Gospel is the key which opens the door to the understanding of the others.” Amen and Amen to that!
Cheryl Mason.
References:
Bieringer, R., Pollefeyt, D. and Vandecasteele-Vanneuville, F., 2001. Anti-Judaism and the Fourth Gospel. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, p.181-184.
Bruce, F., 2003. The New Testament documents. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, pp.21,32,35,44-50.
Comfort, P., 2005. Encountering the Manuscripts. Nashville: B & H Pub. Group.
Eusebius and Crusé, C. (2009). Eusebius’ ecclesiastical history. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, p.93.
Greenlee, J., 2008. The text of the New Testament. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson.
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/jew.htm
Lancelot, S. and Brenton, C., 1851. The Septuagint with Apocrypha Greek and English. 12th ed. London: Samuel Bagster & Sons, Ltd.
Lincoln,
The Holy Bible, King James version.
Patzia, A., 2011. The making of the New Testament. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic.
Tomson, P., 2005. Presumed guilty. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.
Vermes, G. and Vermes, G., 2010. The Real Jesus. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, p.90.
Youngblood, R., Bruce, F. and Harrison, R., 1995. Nelson’s new illustrated Bible dictionary. Nashville: T. Nelson, p.897.
The End:
The Good Shepherd – Part Three
In this study I have been examining the meaning of the word, Shepherd, and its Function from a Hebraic perspective.
I have been looking at what does a Shepherd do as opposed to what a Shepherd is.
We looked at the meaning of the Hebrew word Ro’eh (Shepherd) and discovered that there were both male and female Ro’eh in the Hebrew Scriptures. Rachel was indeed a Shepherd and carried out the Function of a Shepherd by watering and feeding her father’s sheep. It was while she was tending her father’s sheep that Jacob found her. Jacob was already a shepherd and together these two shepherds produced the most beautiful Shepherd, Joseph.
Joseph held a special title, Ro’eh et, The Shepherd. I also mentioned Jesus’s own classification of Himself as The Good Shepherd. There is one other title given to Jesus Christ in Hebrews 13:20, The Great Shepherd. So, we have varying degrees of Shepherds in the Scriptures.
I would like to point out here that Shepherding is a calling and is not related to salvation. Salvation is a gift from God and Shepherding is what we do with that gift. There is no doubt that watering and feeding God’s sheep is our highest calling. The Apostle Peter denied Jesus three times and three times Jesus called him to “Feed His Sheep.” “If you love me, FEED my Sheep.” The act of loving God is FEEDING His Sheep. Love for God is not verbal, it is a demonstration and an act of self-sacrifice for the good of others (John 10:11; John 21:15-17).
The Hebrew word Ro’eh is what we refer to as Pastor in English. I was ordained as a Pastor when I was in my early twenties by the late Pastor Les Garrett. And I remember having a conversation with a guy I was witnessing to and I told him I was a Pastor. He looked puzzled and then asked me what type of spaghetti I was making. He thought I was making pasta for a living 😊.
The word Pastor has nothing to do with making spaghetti, it stems directly from the Hebrew word Ro’eh (Shepherd). In the Christian New Testament, Ro’eh is translated as the Greek word, Poimen. Poimen is translated seventeen times as Shepherd and one time as Pastor in Ephesians 4:11. And, the word Pastor has stuck, like pasta sticks! And I am sorry to say in the process the Function of the Ancient Shepherd has been lost in translation. I believe that is in part due to the way our religious texts have been translated and transliterated.
It is my opinion that some attempts have been made to downplay the role of woman as Shepherds both in the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian New Testament. However, I do believe we can see the significance of female shepherds in the early churches in Paul’s salutations. Just one example would be Phobe. Phobe (female) is a servant according to Romans 16:1. Yet, Tychicus (male) is a faithful minister (Colossians 4:7) as is Paul and other males. But it is the same Greek word, Diakonos that is used in all these instances. It means to minister as a Shepherd, Teacher or Deacon.
I remain baffled as to why the translators decided to downplay some ministries or interpret Poimen seventeen times as Shepherd and once as Pastor. Whatever the reasons, the word is here to stay, and it is used extensively to describe the workings of a Shepherd, although as I have mentioned it has lost some of its meaning.
If we use people as a metaphor for sheep or vice versa as the Bible does. Then many churches today are in grave danger when they have an open-door policy, “That’s the door if you don’t like it you can leave, if you want to come back, the door is open”. My friend be careful of this open-door policy, if a sheep goes out and gets taken by a wolf, the sheep’s life will be required at your hand.
In the beginning of this series I used Jacob and Rachel as an examples of Shepherds. Jacob knew what was at stake ─ Jacob knew his wife had to love sheep, so when he saw Rachel looking after sheep, he must have thought, wow! She will do simply fine. The fact that she was beautiful as the scripture’s states, was just a bonus.
Eventually Jacob and Rachel came together and produced a wonderful Shepherd by the name of Joseph, and what a shepherd, he was! Joseph not only watered and fed his father’s sheep, but he also watered and fed (human) sheep. He fed a whole nation! Joseph was the quintessential Shepherd. He was a type of The Messiah, Joseph, was the turning point for the Israelites, without him they would have perished. Both Jews and Christians appreciate the Messianic qualities of Joseph but differ in their Messianic expectations.
The next Shepherd after Joseph was Moses, God called Moses while he was watching his fathers-in-law’s sheep. He was hired in a sense, they were not his sheep. Although the real sheep that Moses would lead (also as a hired shepherd) was the sheep of Israel, human sheep.
Here is a question for you:
Did God visit every one of these shepherds while they were sleeping?
The answer is emphatically “No”. It was while they were working, busy, looking after sheep, that is when they had an encounter with God. They were the most lowly, humble people imaginable when God visited them. He knew if they could take care of real sheep then they could take care of people.
Remember those Egyptians (those proud Egyptians, they thought they were gods) they were producers of wheat, they were not shepherds. They would not even eat with shepherds. Like the Egyptians we also have a distorted idea of Shepherding. I hope that by the time I am finished this series you will see Shepherding (what we now know as Pastoring) in a hugely different light.
There are a lot of misconceptions out there about Pastors, and in the past I had some strange ideas about the whole concept of Pastoring. When I was ordained as a Pastor this is what I believed about being a Pastor.
Firstly: Pastors got to speak, if you were not a Pastor, the likelihood of speaking in Church was extremely limited. So, Prophets had to become Pastors, Evangelists had to become Pastors, even Apostles had to become Pastors! You may note that I never mentioned Teachers, that is because when you study The Shepherd you will find that Teaching is very much part of Shepherding. They are the one and the same thing.
A Shepherd holds in his hand a powerful tool by which he leads, that tool is The Staff. The Staff speaks of authority, guidance for the sheep, but it also means to Teach. In Hebrew, the word teach means to point, those who teach point the way. The Shepherd also points the way, always leading the sheep to greener pastures and away from danger. The Shepherd and the staff go hand in hand. You cannot separate the shepherd from the staff. He is not a Shepherd if he does not have his Staff.
In the Biblical Hebrew to Shepherd (Pastor) and to Teach is the same thing:
Look at these pictograph symbols below. Pictograph symbols preceded the Hebrew script. You will discover that God is also a Shepherd! The pictograph symbol (Lamed) has the Shepherds Staff. Together with the Ox Head which speaks of Chief, Leader, Strength and makes up God’s name. This is Psalm 23 in pictograph. Elohim also has the (Lamed) which was later written differently.
If you take Shepherding out of the Hebrew context then they mean two different things Shepherding meaning like being a Pastor and teaching means like being a Teacher. Now I know every scripture you are going to throw at me, the fivefold ministry and did not Paul say Pastors and Teachers? I am not going to argue with you, you can believe that they are two different ministries, but I believe they are one and the same. That is based on a comprehensive study of both the Hebrew and the Greek.
In 1 Corinthians 12:28-30, Paul neglects to mention Pastors, only Teachers as Church Ministries. The Didache, which is an ancient document, the closest document we have other than the New Testament, fails to mention Shepherds (Pastors) only Teachers. I remain convinced they are one and the same thing, because of my understanding of The Staff.
If we accept that they are two different ministries, then please explain to me what a Pastor does? And please do not tell me that Pastors are administrators and run churches.
Pastors are Shepherding-Teachers who lead the sheep by teaching and by example. If Jesus said to Peter “Feed my sheep” did He not intend that Peter teach them, when he said that? Jesus’s sheep were His followers, He wanted Peter to feed them by teaching them (giving them spiritual food). There are only two kinds of food, two kinds of shepherds and two kinds of staff’s, physical and spiritual, there are no others.
Secondly: Pastors got a wage, while you are going off doing whatever you felt God has called you to do, the church payed your wages. Nothing wrong with receiving wages, a labourer is worthy of his hire (hired people get a wage) but it is wrong to have a church and get a wage while the pastor is off doing other things, other ministries. You will understand exactly what I mean by this, if you have ever had a Pastor who is never there, because he/she is an Evangelist.
Thirdly: I believed that if you were a Pastor you were in opposition to the people, the people were rebellious, they were your enemies in a sense, it was an “Us against them mentality”. That is what I had seen, that is what I had learnt and that is what I believed. Warped? YES! I was warped in my thinking when I was ordained as a Pastor.
In reality, it is the complete opposite, the Shepherd is the only real friend the Sheep has. It is one of the closest bonds in the Scriptures. The staff of the shepherd not only means to teach, but it also yokes and binds (creates bonds) between the Shepherd and the Sheep. When the shepherd wraps his big hook around the sheep and draws it close to him, he is bonding with it. He is yoking himself to it.
A good shepherd will lay down his life for his sheep. A good shepherd will place himself/herself between the sheep and the predator. This is not people, people are not your enemy, although the enemy can use people, the real enemies of the sheep are the wolves, lions, bears, the Goliath’s, who have the potential to consume the sheep. The enemy is a whole distinct species. Dealing with people is a whole other issue and does not fit into this teaching that I am doing right now.
Based on what I believed about Pastoring it is not surprising then, that I found Pasturing difficult and could not continue in that role. I believe I was a good Pastor, despite my early age but found the entire process a bit daunting, because I did not understand what exactly it was, I was supposed to be doing. Nobody bothered to explain it to me.
Unlike the simplicity of ancient concepts, we have become preoccupied with titles. the Hebrew language is not concerned with titles, hierarchy, roles, positions, these are all Greek and Roman concepts. Ancient Hebrew does not care if you are an Executive Pastor, a Senior Pastor, a Junior Pastor, a Part-time Pastor, whatever that is. How about, a New Peoples Pastor, a Life Group Pastor, an Entertainment Pastor, or a Pastor in charge of Ablutions and Kitchens. You may very well laugh, but they exist!
If you ever get to do a course in Human Resources Management. You will discover some really weird job titles, and yet, they sound so impressive! Giving people fancy job titles, often means they have to work harder, longer hours, for the same or less money 😊. It is a con.
Once you receive your new title, you will work sixty hours a week instead of forty for little gain and you will be on call 24/7. And you will not be able to turn your phone off. The Christian Church has fallen into the similar patterns.
The Lord says, “I change not”! The job description for God’s people is still the same, as they were at the beginning. The job description for a Shepherd has not changed since Abel. We do not change with the world, we do not conform to the world. We are different! Jeremiah 10:2 Do not learn to go the WAY of the Nations.
God is up-front, He is not some HR Manager trying to give you an inflated title. He is not going to make up some ridiculous position to impress you, a Shepherd is a Shepherd, an Executive Shepherd is I do not know what? Is it a Shepherd in charge of other Shepherds who are Shepherding sheep? Are we talking about a hierarchy of Sheep, or a hierarchy of Shepherds? It is a contradictory term.
The Hebrew language is only concerned with FUNCTION: What is the FUNCTION of the Shepherd? That is explained in the meaning of the Hebrew word, Ro’eh.
I want to finish off this series with two images I created to describe how I see God’s concept of Shepherding and our concept of Shepherding. As they say a picture speaks a thousand words. The Church has become hierarchical, instead of a functioning body, one member has risen to the top of the pile.
In today’s churches the sheep are in their thousands, thousands of churches with thousands of people. The Staff is no longer an appropriate tool, not for thousands of sheep. For that you must go to the sheep farmers and see what they do. They let the dogs out. Sometimes when you are in church you feel like the dogs are after you. You are not being watched you are being herded. The Staff had been replaced with the cattle prod!
At the start of this series, I mentioned the enemy hates Shepherds and has a habit of killing them. That is exactly what happened to the first Shepherd, Abel. Cain slew Abel, and the first Shepherd was dead. God said to Cain, “Where is Abel?”. Cain replied, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Well, Cain you were your brother’s keeper. What in fact Cain was saying to God? I do not keep sheep (watching) I am busy, working tilling the ground.
Are we also our brother’s keeper and does that make us all Shepherds?
I do not care if you have the title of Pastor, or you have a Church, being a Shepherd is so much more than that. Being a Shepherd is watching out for God’s Sheep. Remember God has the Shepherd’s Staff in His name. And, Jesus said, “If you love me, feed my sheep.” Nourish the flock, do not consume the best sheep like Joseph’s brothers did. Be like the good shepherds, Abel, Jacob, Rachel, Joseph, Moses, Jesus Christ and the ultimate Shepherd, Father God. Remember it is not archaic or condescending to consider yourself a Shepherd according to its Function from an Ancient Near East perspective, because God still does.
God Bless You!
Cheryl Mason.
The Good Shepherd – Part Two
In Part Two of this series on The Good Shepherd, I discuss more about Joseph and the term given to him in the Hebrew Scriptures as the Ro’eh et (The Shepherd). This is because Joseph inherently had the heart of a Shepherd, something that set him apart from his brothers. For that, his brothers threw him in the Pit and tried to kill him. Genesis Rabba expounds on Joseph’s ordeal a bit more than the Hebrew Scriptures does.
To better understand the ancient concept of Shepherding, I also make references to ancient shepherding contracts. Such as ones discovered in The Mari Documents, unearthed in the Tel Hariri desert. I also divided Shepherds into categories such as Owner/Operator, Family Business and Hired-Shepherd to better appreciate responsibility and accountability at every level.
Jesus referred to himself as The Good Shepherd, and stated he did not lose any sheep, except one, so the scripture could be fulfilled. Jesus in turn left the responsibility for caring for his followers to his disciples and those that came after them. I likened those that labour in the Kingdom, God’s business as being like Hired-Shepherds. Which should conclude in Part Three with a better understanding of the function of Shepherds (Pastors) in the New Testament.
Please see The Good Shepherd Part One for the first part of this series.
I taught this series on The Good Shepherd in a Church in 2014. I decided to re-visit the series because I think the message is still a good one and still relevant to us today. I hope you enjoy and learn something new from these notes on The Good Shepherd.
For this study, I have divided Shepherds into three categories:
I apologise beforehand for using business terminology. My experience lies in business, so it is only natural that I resort to understanding the function of a Shepherd from a business perspective.
I have called these categories:
The Owner Operator (Shepherd)
The Family Business (Shepherd)
The Owner/Operator Shepherd:
The Owner-Operator Shepherd looks after their own sheep. This type of Shepherd is accountable for the sheep. Every sheep is an asset to the Shepherd. The Shepherd sells the dairy, the wool, the meat. If the Shepherd losers one sheep, he loses money. It is no different to being an owner operator in any other business. No business owner wants to lose money!
Father God falls into this category. He owns all things, and He can do whatever He pleases with everything that He owns. He is The Chief Shepherd.
The Family Business:
Sounds a bit like the Mafia, I know. But there is no Cousin Vinnie, in this business. The son (scripturally speaking, usually the youngest) like David, I also mentioned Rachel in Part One, is left to manage the father’s assets. I will include Joseph in this, and you say … “Ahh, but Joseph was not the youngest, Benjamin was”. The Jewish people consider Joseph to be the youngest son of Jacob and not Benjamin. There was a lot of problems with the Tribe of Benjamin. His mother called him Ben-Oni (son of my pain). His father changed it and called him (son of my strength). If your name is your identity, then Benjamin had a bit of an identity crises. What is Benjamin, pain, or strength? Benjamin was also one of the smaller, more mixed-up tribes, in the history of Israel.
The JPS Torah Series is the most highly acclaimed Jewish commentary since the turn of the century. Eighty- and ninety-year-old Jewish Scholars will be using the JPS in their studies. In JPS, Joseph is the youngest because he was the last one born in Paddam-aram. Paddam-aram was like Jacob’s Egypt, it was where he completed his time of servitude to Laban. He finally got his promotion and received his wages. It is where he became a man in his own right and got to step out of everybody else’s shadow. Benjamin was born whilst journeying, hence Benjamin’s story is a little different.
In the family business, the son is shepherding for his father, the son is now accountable. Remember Jesus said, “He will leave the ninety-nine sheep and go find the one that is missing” (Luke 15:4). Jesus knew the rules! He said in John 17:12 (This was His prayer) While I was with them in the world; I kept them in your NAME; those that YOU gave me I kept; none of them is lost, except the son of perdition; that the Scripture might be fulfilled. Jesus took His role of Shepherding very seriously. Unlike Jesus, I will have to stand before God one day and confess that I have lost a lot of God’s Sheep over the years.
Now that we understand the role the youngest son plays in the family business, let us look at Joseph again. All the sons of Jacob were Shepherds, they were all working together, Joseph was hanging out with Dan and Naphtali, who were the sons of Bilhah (Rachel’s maid). Something went wrong and Joseph brought his father a bad report. Could it be that his brothers were mistreating the sheep? Could it be that they were not being particularly good shepherds?
Christians and Jews differ in their understanding of the book of Genesis. Christians believe every word is written as God gave it. Jews on the other hand are fully aware that Genesis is a compilation of many other texts, such as Genesis Rabba, Jubilees (Little Genesis), Talmud, Enoch, and others. To glean a bit more about Joseph, I was curious to find out what Genesis Rabba had to say about him. It says that Joseph became proud and haughty, and confirming my suspicion it mentioned that Joseph had caught his brothers slaughtering and eating some of the best sheep. This in fact was the accusation (bad report) Joseph brought to his father.
The Hebrew word for Shepherd is Ro’eh but when it refers to Joseph in this Genesis story it uses the word Ro’eh ET. A Variation of Ro’eh. It is more like in this instance, Joseph was lording it over (JPS Torah Series) his brothers, telling them how to do their job. Acting a bit like ‘The Shepherd’. This made his brothers angry and they arose and conspired to kill him. The word (ET) in this instance means The Shepherd. By referring to Joseph as The Shepherd, he is differentiated from being just another Ro’eh.
Was the drama that was unfolding because Joseph had inherent qualities of a Shepherd or was, he just being a bit of a pain? I do not think that Joseph was a pain, he just understood his purpose at an early age. Let us take a quick look at Joseph.
- In Jewish literature Joseph is the youngest son of Jacob and Rachel.
- He was born to older parents, (Jacob was about ninety years old, when Joseph was born).
- His mother died when he was a teenager.
- He was taken into slavery when he was seventeen and he became separated from his family.
- Joseph was a Dreamer in the sense that God was communicating to him in dreams.
- Joseph had to grow up fast. Remember when the brothers were sitting around, during the famine, they did not know what to do. By then, Joseph was running a country. Joseph’s brothers were terribly cruel to him, and they made him suffer. For what? For being a better shepherd than they were? For having dreams, for predicting the future.
I have been told by an Orthodox Jew who visited a pit like the one Joseph was put into. He said there is an enormously powerful echo in the area and that noise carried through in waves and you could hear it miles away. Joseph’s screams would have been terrible to hear. He would have cried out to his brothers to save him from the pit and they did not. They showed no mercy! Again, Genesis Rabba states that the pit was infested with snakes and scorpions. That Joseph was stripped of his garments and left in the pit for three days before he was sold to the Ishmaelites.
In the end Joseph was grateful for his ordeal because he was able to save many people through the things he suffered.
For me, this recalls the suffering of Jesus. Because of the things He suffered, He also was able to save many people.
Many things impress me about the life of Joseph. None more so than Joseph’s ability to make decisions. He made decisions about Potiphar’s wife, he decided to interpret dreams, and he made decisions as to how to get himself out of prison. Then he made decisions as to how to manage the worst famine the land had ever seen. We learn to make decisions by making decisions. We learn to make good decisions, by making lots and lots of decisions. Decision making is not a ‘stab in the dark’, it is a calculated process.
In the end, I believe Joseph, was Ro’eh ET because he inherently had the heart of a Shepherd and he was trying to impress upon his brothers to be better Shepherds. For that he paid the ultimate price.
The Hired-Servant (Shepherd):
The third category I have put shepherds into concerns us more than the other two. The last category is called the Hired Shepherd (the employee).
If the Owner/Operator cannot operate his business for any reason, and he has no son, or his Rachel has left, then he needs to hire someone.
That person is called a “Hired-Shepherd”. A Hired-Shepherd is on a wage (that is us, we are hired). The Hired-Shepherd must answer to his Lord and Master and explain to Him why a sheep has gone missing. He will have to pay compensation to his Lord and Master. (“You broke it you bought it”).
In ancient documents called the Mari documents (found in Tel Hariri, on the banks of the Euphrates), we get a particularly good understanding of the sorts of expectations that existed between owner and hired shepherd.
The Mari documents were excavated in 1933 -1938. Over twenty-thousand cuneiform documents were found. Most of them are from about 1800 BC. About 3800 years ago, that is close to the time of The Patriarchs. The Mari documents also contain names like, Sarah, Terah, Abram, Laban. They worshiped a moon-god (nanna). The symbol for this god was the crescent moon. In ancient times the sun was (male) moon (female) stars (children). The Mari documents speak of male and female prophets who prophesied and there is evidence that the Kings sought out these prophets to receive guidance.
I am not suggesting they were a group of Hebrews. But a lot of what they lived out in their daily lives correspond to the lives of the Hebrews and is confirmed in the Bible.
Please see an example of a contract that was discovered amongst these Mari documents. It was translated by Israel Finkelstein and published in the Journal of the American Oriental Society 88(1968):30-36.
If you are thinking that Workplace Agreements are a modern-day concept then, think again.
The hired shepherd received a portion of the newborn animals. 92 ewes, 20 rams, 22 breeding lambs, 24 spring lambs, 33 she goats, 4 male goats, 27 kids, total 158 sheep, 64 goats, which Sinshamuh entrusted to Dada the Shepherd. Dada assumes liability therefore and will replace any lost animals. Should Nidnatum Dada’s Shepherd-boy absent himself, he will bear responsibility for any subsequent losses. Dada will also have to pay five kor of barley. It was signed by three witnesses in Samuiluna year one, fourth month, sixteenth day.
If there was a breach of contract compensation had to be paid, by Dada (hired shepherd) and by Nidnatum Dada’s shepherd boy.
In the book of Job 7:1-3. It says “Is there not a time of hard service for man on the earth? Are not his days like the days of a hired man? Like a servant who earnestly desires the shade, and like a hired servant who eagerly looks for his wages. So, I have allotted months of futility and wearisome nights have been appointed to me.”
Hired-Shepherds, they are not our sheep! Watch how you treat God’s sheep – it is not our business, but we must treat it like it is. We are responsible and accountable. If something goes wrong, we will be asked to “Please explain?”.
There is a saying: ” If it happened on your watch, you fix it”. You broke it you brought it!
This brings me to the close of Part Two of my teaching on The Good Shepherd.
We need to take shepherding very seriously. By the time I am finished this teaching you will be left with no doubt as to what shepherding is.
Refresher:
- The number one occupation of God’s people was that of a Shepherd.
- There were both male and female shepherds.
- Joseph was more than a shepherd, he was The Shepherd (Ro’eh ET)!
- I divided shepherds into three categories (Owner/Operator), Family Business and Hired-Shepherd.
- Jesus, fell into the category of Family Business (The Son) and he was careful not to lose any sheep. He knew the rules. He has the title as The Good Shepherd (special title for the Son).
- We fall into the category of Hired-Shepherd, the penalties for losing sheep are severe for us.
Hands up all those who want to be Shepherds.
In Hebrews 13:17 the Apostle Paul says, obey those that watch over you; the Greek means, obey those that are sleepless over you. Shepherding means being sleepless. Jacob said to Laban, Gen 31:40 the drought consumed me by day and the frost by night. My sleep departed from my eyes. Jacob was sleepless over Laban’s sheep, that is why he was so successful. Good shepherds watch the sheep, care for the sheep, and protect the sheep. The word watch also means to give account, not just an account about yourself (yes, that too), but also an account for others.
I want to finish off now with a bit more about Joseph. Joseph had a dream, in the dream he was binding sheaves. A shepherd binding sheaves! You cannot understand this until you read some more from the Mari documents.
One of the Mari tablets says: that Shepherds were also required to bring in the harvest. Most of the time they were watching sheep, while watching sheep they also had to bring in the harvest. The best shepherds got to do this. When Joseph said to his brothers, “I will bind sheaves”, he became a problem for them. Because what he was saying is “I’m going to rise to fame”. Harvesters were greater than Shepherds.
Rather than encourage and allow him to rise to the top, instead they conspired to kill him.
In the next session I will speak more about the function of a Shepherd and how it relates to the Christian New Testament.
Thank you for reading and God Bless You.
Cheryl Mason
The YouTube video for …
The Good Shepherd — Part Two
Recent Comments