Sh'eil'ot u'T'shuv'ot
"Questions and Answers"

Torah Teacher Ariel addresses your online Torah Questions

QUESTION 1:

I have a problem when at the messianic congregation they bring out the Torah and everyone kisses it as it passes by. I am very uncomfortable when this occurs and wonder if this borders on idolatry? I know it is tradition but I do not have peace about doing it myself. I am a gentile believer and support the idea of Jews retaining their culture but not if it is a wrongful practice. 

ANSWER:

The practice of kissing the Torah scrolls, whether it be a Messianic Jewish service, or a non-Messianic one, has meaning for some….but not all. Our individual traditions need not serve the Adversary, in the form of idolatry, or superstition. Sadly, some people are unaware that those are the actual reasons behind many of the things done in the name of God and His Torah. Carefully listen to your spiritual discernment on each issue. If you have serious questions about participating in something, ask the pastor, or rabbi, for spiritual guidance. Sha'ul taught the Congregation at Corinth that, ""Everything is permitted," you say? Maybe, but not everything is helpful. "Everything is permitted?" Maybe, but not everything is edifying. No one should be looking out for his own interests, but for those of his fellow."" Even though the immediate context of this passage has to do with food offered to idols, the application for today's Messianic Community is valid. In the present case, the leaders of the congregation or church should be "looking out" for the "interests of their fellow members". 

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 2:

Is there a "dual sanctification" theology underlying the Messianic Judaism movement today?

ANSWER:

If by the word ‘sanctification’ you mean ‘righteousness’, then I believe that the Torah speaks of two types of righteousness: ‘forensic righteousness’ and ‘behavioral righteousness’. By the former, I mean the righteousness that a believer inherits when he or she chooses to be identified, by faith, with the righteousness of Messiah Yeshua. The latter implies the lifestyle that the believer now leads, as he or she walks out the truth of the first type of righteousness. In other words, true faith produces true works (see Ephesians 2:8-10; James 2:14-26).

We are holy (sanctified) because Yeshua has made us holy!

Just as unrighteous Avraham became righteous when he placed is complete faith in HaShem, so we too inherit the righteousness and holiness of the Holy One when we place our unreserved trust in his Son. But holiness is also a duty. What do I mean?

Apart from being an attribute of God–one that we inherit intrinsically with our trusting faithfulness in the Messiah, holiness is also meant to be a lifestyle. This is why I keep using the phrase ‘trusting faithfulness’ rather than simple ‘faith’. The latter implies a one-time action on our part, which forever sets into motion a spiritual truth that will be fully actualized at the return of our LORD. Notice the candor of the phrase, "I place my trust in Yeshua". However, the former carries the aspect of a daily motion, which permeates every movement of our new-creation lives! "I place my trusting faithfulness in Yeshua". Do you notice the subtle difference? To live by ‘trusting faithfulness’ rather than just by ‘faith’ alone characterizes our moment-by-moment thought process as well as our actions. The former carries our faith into action! In other words, this new life in Messiah is an ever constant, ever-growing relationship with the Holy One of Isra’el; a demonstration of the miraculous on a level that can and should be measured in even the smallest areas of our lives. Trusting faithfulness is ongoing! It is not some unmoving, monumental event which took place sometime in our lives–it is the ongoing monumental process that overtakes our lives–for the rest of our lives–which was enacted when we first had a genuine encounter with the divine holiness!

Lets take a look at some crucial verses in Galatians. Chapter two, verses 15 and 16 are what has been recognized by Messianic Jewish scholars as the key to show how Sha'ul regarded the Law of Moshe; thus they are the key to the book of Galatians and the book of Romans. He who seizes their true meaning can help repair the grave damage done to the unity of Jews and Gentiles in the Body of Messiah by those who have misunderstood Sha'ul’s view of Torah. I want to launch from verse 15 to explain the crucial verse 16. Translator and author David H. Stern will help to explain this difficult passage:

"We, by nature Jews and not sinners from Gentiles," This is a literal rendering of verse 15 from the Greek. It is simply an identifying opening for what is to follow. Sha'ul is not degrading Gentiles in any way, he is simply using the same language and identifiers that the legalizers/Judaizers (the villains of the book) use in order to speak of them. Also the Torah itself recognized that before the giving of the Messiah and the revelation of the Torah, Gentiles were sinners (Gal. 2:11-12; compare Luke 18:31-33 with Luke 24:7). However, it should be noted that he also went out his way to emphasize the equality of Jews and Gentiles before HaShem.

"But knowing that a person is not justified from works of law, but through trust of Messiah Yeshua, even we unto Messiah Yeshua trusted, in order that we might be justified from trust of Messiah and not from works of law, because from works of law not will be justified all flesh." This is a literal rendering of verse 16 from the Greek. Being declared righteous by HaShem is the goal of all men who seek HaShem. Righteousness can be defined in two ways: "behavioral righteousness", actually doing what is right, and "forensic righteousness", being regarded as righteous in the sense (a) that HaShem has cleared him of guilt for past sins, and (b) that HaShem has given him a new human nature inclined to obey HaShem rather than rebel against him as before.

"Yeshua has made forensic righteousness available to everyone by paying on everyone’s behalf the penalty for sins which HaShem’s justice demands, death. Forensic righteousness is appropriated by an individual for himself the moment he unreservedly puts his trust in HaShem, which at this point in history, entails also trusting in Yeshua the Messiah upon learning of him and understanding what he has done. The task of becoming behaviorally righteous begins with appropriating forensic righteousness (through Yeshua); it occupies the rest of a believer’s life, being completed only at the moment of his own death, when he goes to be with Yeshua. What is important to keep in mind here is the difference between these two kinds of righteousness. Each time the Greek word "dikaioo" ("righteousness") or a cognate is encountered, it must be decided which of these two meanings of the word is meant. In the present verse and the next, all four instances of "dikaioo" refer to forensic righteousness. But in verse 21, the related word "dikaiosune" refers to behavioral righteousness."

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 3:

In the O.T. there are many references to [LORD]. How can I know which ones are in reference to the father, and which ones are in reference to the son?

ANSWER:

By the way, this is an entirely Christian dilemma. Traditional Judaism doesn't consider the term LORD to apply to the Messiah the way Christians use this term. But as a Messianic Jew who believs in the equality of the Father and the Son, I see nothing wrong with the Christian understanding of this term.

Besides having a working knowledge of the Hebrew text of the TaNaKH (O.T.), the context of the verse in question usually leads the reader into the understanding of to whom it is referring. For instance, take the passage in Tehillim (Psalms) chapter 2. Verse 2 reads, "Yit-yazvu malkhay-eretz v’rotznim nosdu-yachad al-Y-H-V-H v’al-m’shichoh." Understanding that "Y-H-V-H " unmistakably refers to God the Father, we can infer, from the context, that "m’shichoh", a derivative of "mashiach", refers to the Son. "Mashiach" means "one who is anointed". We get the English word "messiah" from this Hebrew word. This interpretation is strengthened by the fact that the same Psalm goes on to make an explicit reference to the "Son" in verse 7, a verse we know to be referring to Yeshua according to the Book of Hebrews.

Study the passages in question carefully. Learn how to use Biblical hermeneutics (rules of interpretation), pray for the Ruach HaKodesh to grant to you the understanding, and you will be doing fine. And don’t forget to share your findings with other believers of like-mind. HaShem usually provides confirmation of interpretation through other resources, in addition to your own.

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy

QUESTION 4:

In Revelation 13:7 it was given to make war with the saints and to overcome them. Who are these saints? Is it Israel or is it the Christian in the tribulation period?

ANSWER:

Your question is a good one. Admittedly, it is somewhat of a difficult one. To be sure, the Book of Revelation has long since been one of the most difficult books the Bible to interpret. Yet, I am sure we can shed some light on the issue, with a little help from the TaNaKH book of Daniel. In chapter 7 of his book, Daniel is given a glimpse into the future. A future, in which HaShem’s "saints" would suffer at the hands of a "fourth beast" and a "little horn". These saints are described in verse 18 as "possess[ing] the kingdom for ever…." (KJV) Yochanan (John), the author of Revelation, quotes from Daniel in the verse in question, Revelation 13:7. If the context of Daniel defines the "saints" as "those who possess the kingdom", it seems to me to indicate that this includes both Jewish and non-Jewish believers who follow after HaShem and His Messiah (see Matt. 5:10). Of course by implication, this would place the Christians in the "tribulation period". But the details of what the "tribulation period" is, as well as who will be in it, remains a hot topic of debate, among scholars today. I must refer you to other resources for a complete discussion of that topic. Suffice to say, however, whether it is the Christians or the Jews who endure the "tribulation", we both must rely on the strength of our Messiah, Yeshua, to see us through! Are you prepared just in case?

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 5:

I am wondering about Zechariah's comment about Israel, Chapters 12-14. Do these chapters show Israel just prior to the Messiah's return? It does not appear to fit any historical siege of Jerusalem in light of the fulfillment described in ch. 14? Am I watching this development take place now even though they are seeking peace?

ANSWER:

Bible prophecy can be a very tricky subject. Learning how to recognize present events fulfilled, in light of their past predictions is a blessing from above. And yet some passages seem to remain so obscure, despite our best efforts to understand them. In the TaNaKH, truth often was hidden from the learned to accomplish the purposes of HaShem. Our assurance is that He would reveal them to His Body in His own time and according to His good pleasure (see Ephesians chapter 2, and Hebrews 1:1-3). Zechariah’s prophecy in chapter 12 is a good example of what is known in prophecy circles as "near/far" applications. This means that the event foretold about may have more than one historical application. Careful examination of the text reveals repeated use of the phrases, "in that day", "at that day", and/or "behold, the day cometh" (KJV). These phrases most often refer to the time period known as the "Great Tribulation". Often the Bible calls this time period the "Day of the LORD". At other times, they seem to indicate the Millennium, depending on the context. In Hebrew thought, we refer to this time period as the olam haba. Actually, the rabbis taught that the "tribulation" would usher in the olam haba. So the phrases actually encompassed both events. But the prophets of old recorded exactly what HaShem told them to; sometimes possibly unaware that the events applied to two time periods that sort of "mirrored" each other. The exact details of each event did not necessarily have to mimic each other in every detail. Yet, the single prophecy could apply to both. Zechariah’s prophecy most likely involves Yisra’el just prior to the Day of the LORD, where Yeshua rescues them from the hands of "certain destruction". It also may have applied to an earlier campaign which is now ancient history. The most exciting detail of the prophecy of chapters 12-14, in my opinion, is the promise from HaShem in 12:10. Surely this involves the corporate salvation of the Jewish nation once and for all!

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 6:

What is your position on animal sacrifice? Do you think that when the temple is rebuilt it will be right for the Messianic Jews to do sacrifice at the temple? Also, during the millennium will there be sacrifice or is it sweet smelling offering? I have always been taught that the animal sacrifice stopped for believers at the cross with the blood of Christ.

ANSWER:

My thoughts on the matter:

First off to recap what my Yom Kippur commentary stated:  "[HaShem] has lovingly provided a means by which mankind can redeem himself.  In the period of the TaNaKH, the sacrificial system was given as the object of the faith of an individual.  Surely the animals themselves did not bring about atonement (a permanent forgiving of sin), yet God saw fit to allow his perfect plan of Salvation, tied into the eventual coming of his Son Yeshua, to be "acted out" as it were through the Temple ritual.  The historical sacrificial system was effective in covering sin but ultimately it proved to be a mere "shadow" pointing to the True Body of Sacrifice found only in the Perfect Lamb of Sacrifice!  Even though it was a temporary solution, it was authentically God’s solution.  No Jew living in that time period was able to circumvent this system, and remain officially within the community.  To answer the question posed above, If we take HaShem seriously, them we will accept his provision—no matter what means, or how temporal that provision is!  This is our first lesson in "Torah logic"."

The corporate animal sacrifices officially came to a halt when the Temple was destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D., as there were no more priests to officiate and of course there was no facility.  They have not officially resumed since then.

Now we are talking corporate sacrifices here.  In some Orthodox circles live fowl and such are still used in expatiation type ceremonies.  The book of Hebrews possibly allows for the fact that even Messianic Jews were still offering sacrifices before the Temple was destroyed, being that the book was most likely written just before the destruction.

Yeshua's public ministry continued until his death sometime around the early 30's A.D.  That the Temple remained standing until Titus oversaw its destruction in 70 A.D. is a well-known historical fact.  That the Temple was used to facilitate the sacrificial system, even after the death of Yeshua can be deduced by the very necessity to write the entire book of Hebrews.  But historic documents can also be found.

Josephus, one of the first century's respected and well-noted journalists recounts that the sacrifices ended sometime around 66 A.D., in this excerpt from The War of the Jews:

'And now Titus gave orders to his soldiers that were with him to dig up the foundations for the tower of Antonia, and to make him a ready passage for his army to come up; while he himself had Josephus brought to him (for he had been informed that on that very day, which was the seventeenth day* of Panemus [Tamuz], the sacrifice called "the Daily Sacrifice" had failed, and had not been offered to God for want of men to offer it, and that the people were grievously troubled at it) and commanded him to say the same things to John that he had said before, that if he had any malicious inclination for fighting, he might come out with as many of his men as he pleased, in order to fight, without the danger of destroying either his city of temple; but that he desired he would not defile the temple, nor thereby offend against God." (Book 6, Chapter 2.1.)  Concerning the 17th day, it was footnoted: This was a very remarkable day indeed, the seventeenth of Panemus [Tamuz], A.D. 70, when, according to Daniel's prediction, 606 years before, the Romans "in half a week caused the sacrifice and oblation to cease," Dan. 9:27, for from the month of February, A.D. 66, about which time Vespasian entered on this war, to this very time, was just three years and a half.  See Bishop Lloyd's Tables of Chronology, published by Mr. Marshall, on this year.  Nor is it to be omitted, what very nearly confirms this duration of the war, that four years before the war began, was somewhat above seven years five months before the destruction of Jerusalem, 5.3.'

So much for history.  Did the Messianic Community participate in these sacrifices even after Yeshua died?  Consider this commentary to Hebrews 10:8-10, and again at 15-18:

'Notice that God does not take away the Torah; rather he takes away the first system of sacrifices and priesthood in order to set up the second within the framework of the one eternal Torah.  Moreover, it is not necessary to suppose that this "taking away" prohibits all animal sacrifices by the Levitical priesthood.  The author's point relates to only the sin offering: "an offering for sins is no longer needed" (Heb. 10:15-18) because the second sin offering system is effectual in a way that the first never was (Heb. 10:10, 9:11-15).  The other animal sacrifices and the Levitical priesthood could be continued without eclipsing the preeminent role of Yeshua's once-and-for-all sacrifice and eternal high-priesthood.  Even the sin-offering ritual could theoretically be continued, but only if it were regarded as a memorial and not as effective in itself.  Just as it was never more than "a shadow" (Heb. 10:1), so now, if it should be resumed (which would presuppose the rebuilding of the Temple at some future time; see 2 Thess. 2:4), it could not be more than a reminder of the great deliverance provided in Yeshua's death as our final and permanently effective sin offering and his resurrection as our cohen gadol.

'Having God's Torah written in one's heart and mind necessarily implies that God has forgiven one's sins, so that an offering for sins is no longer needed.  Therefore the readers of this sermon should free themselves from their compulsion to offer animal sacrifices as sin offerings and instead be fully assured of the sufficiency of Yeshua's sacrifice of himself on their behalf.  We moderns have no such compulsion, but we too should be convinced of the necessity of blood sacrifice for sin while having assurance that Yeshua's blood sacrifice fulfills that requirement.  With this, the author's major argument is completed.  But the author is very specific in limiting what he says.  An offering for sins is no longer needed and is ruled out.  But the other sacrificial offerings remain part of God's order even after Yeshua's death, as provided by Sha'ul's activity in the Temple at Acts 21:26 and his own offering of sacrifices which he himself speaks of at Acts 24:17.  With the destruction of the Temple, sacrificial offerings became impossible; but if the Temple is rebuilt, thank offerings, meal offerings, and praise offerings may be offered once again.  The author of this letter does not proclaim the end of the sacrificial system in its entirety, only the end of animal sacrifices for sins.' (David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary, pp. 704-705, JNTC Publications 1996)

Question:  Will the sacrifices ever return?

Answer:  According to an understanding of the last dozen or so chapters in Ezekiel, yes.  When?  According to these passages sacrifices will be enforced during the Millennial reign of Messiah.  How does that work?

When a Jewish person comes to believe in HaShem through His Messiah, Yeshua, he no longer interprets Judaism the way he used to.  His new way of thinking is permeated by what was accomplished on the execution stake.  To be sure, the Ruach HaKodesh makes this a reality in his mind.  Consequently, all sin offerings, whether while the Temple was still standing, or when it will be rebuilt, find their meaning in the "once and for all" sacrifice of Yeshua. 

Conclusion:  Messiah accomplished the atonement for sin, and we should not confuse the issue with regards to additional sacrifices.  Commandments, whether performed out of obedience, or remembrance, are still valid commandments.  We understand that the Torah of HaShem is eternal.  Additionally, the latter part of the book of Ezekiel discusses some of the sacrificial activities of the Millennium period; offerings for sin are addressed.  Once again, if we settle the issue within ourselves as believers, once and for all, that the participation in such an offering can be applied as a memorial, then I don't see a problem with the sacrifices in the Millennium.
 

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 7:

Considering the controversial doctrine of the Trinity, and taking into account Rev. 21:22 and 22:1,3, where is the Holy Spirit in the New Jerusalem? 

ANSWER:

I believe that the answer to this question can be found within the very chapters that you’ve provided. Look at Revelation 21:3: HaShem’s Sh’khinah is mentioned as being "with mankind". In Hebrew terminology, this is another name for the manifested presence of HaShem, i.e., the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit). Logically, if we believers are living in the New Yerushalayim, then the Ruach will be as well. But where is he? Look at Chapter 22:4, "…and his name will be on their foreheads." This type of "head" identification mark is reminiscent of the Shema, with the Torah being at the head (and hand). But it also resembles the identifying mark of all true children of HaShem. Allow me to make a drash (allegorical application of Scripture). Remember Ezekiel Chapter nine? Go back and read it. Specifically notice where the mark is being placed (in verse four). Now use your B’rit Chadashah (New Covenant) knowledge of 1 Corinthians 12:3. Is this not an identifying mark of salvation? Where does this knowledge of Yeshua’s Lordship take place? "On our foreheads", spiritually, when the Ruach HaKodesh renews our mind (Romans 12:1,2). Yeshua’s name means salvation. His name is on us! Salvation is not possible without the power of the Ruach HaKodesh. Review 1 Corinthians 6:19,20 also.

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 8:

When reading Eph. 2:14,15 these verses seem to suggest that the Law of commandments contained in ordinances is the source of enmity between the Jew and Gentile. Could you please comment on this.

ANSWER:

The Torah is holy, and the commandment holy, just and good according to Rabbi Sha’ul (Romans 7:12, KJV). So why did he supposedly say that it the source of enmity in his letter to Ephesus? In and of itself, it doesn’t cause the enmity spoken about in the verse in question. However, Torah, by its nature to reveal and condemn sin, ‘occasions’ sin, by stimulating Jewish and Gentile sinful propensities. In at least four ways is does this:

The enmity is destroyed when we as believers, both Jew and non-Jew, realize that "the ground is level, that is, equal at the foot of the cross". In other words, both are equal when it comes to the need for HaShem’s loving grace! This type of loving grace, provided in full measure through Messiah Yeshua, melts away the envy, pride, resentment, and cultural differences that all of HaShem’s children have for each other. To be sure, the verse in John 13:34,35 is fulfilled when we (Jew and non-Jew) have true LOVE for one another!

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 9:

Please can you list the Jewish names of the 12 disciples. Some of them, eg. Andrew do not seem to have Jewish roots at all.

ANSWER:

To the best of my knowledge at this time, some of the talmidim didn’t have Hebrew names or Jewish roots. First names, surnames and even renames were common in that part of the East and at that time. These are the names of the twelve talmidim as given in Hebrew: 

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy

QUESTION 10:

What does it mean to be in the Bride of Christ?

ANSWER:

The body of all believers throughout history is sometimes referred to as "The Bride of Messiah (Christ)". This imagery using wedding themes, with the Messiah as the "bridegroom" can be found in numerous passages in the B’rit Chadashah, that is the New Covenant (Matt. 22:1-14, 25:1-13; Mark 2:18-20; John 3:28-30; 1 Cor. 6:13-20; 2 Cor. 11:2 and Eph. 5:25-33). Similar language can be found throughout the TaNaKH as well, with Isra’el as the bride of HaShem (see Isaiah 54:1-8, 62:4-5; Jer. 31:32; Ezek. 16 and the whole book of Hosea, especially chapters 1-3). The terms and images used are employed to intimately identify HaShem and his Son, with those who are part of the community of true believers, made up of Jews and non-Jews. To be "in" means to have intimate fellowship, by means of trusting faithfulness, to HaShem through Yeshua, i.e. to be "married" to Yeshua. Historically before the Messiah, this was also true, as the followers of HaShem demonstrated their faithfulness by trusting in HaShem while awaiting the coming Messiah and remaining obedient to His Covenants. As a side note, the Midrash Rabbah to the Song of Songs 4:10 names ten places in the TaNaKH which speak of Isra’el directly or allegorically as a bride.

The Scriptural fact that the Father (HaShem) is the husband of Isra'el and that the Son (Yeshua) is the bridegroom of the Bride of the New Testament speaks of the mysterious metaphor that has been given to us by God as a way of teaching the unique one-ness of the Eyn-Sof. That the Bible uses such teaching tools is indirectly evident in the following passages:

HaShem as husband of Isra'el:

Isaiah 49:18
Isaiah 62:5
Jeremiah 3:20

Now, some might ask, "Where does the Bible plainly call God the husband?" At the following verses there is no mistake as to the identity of the Bride and the Groom:

Isaiah 54:5
Jeremiah 31:31, 32
Hosea 2:2
Hosea 2:7

In the Renewed Covenant Yeshua, who is in fact YHVH veiled in flesh, takes on the role of the Bridegroom in these parabolic verses:

Mark 2:18-20
Luke 5:33-35
John 3:28-29
Ephesians 5:32 (this verse even refers to the "mystery" of the Body of Messiah)
Revelation 21:2, 9, 10, 24

But some might ask, "Where does the Bible plainly call Yeshua the Bridegroom with the Church as his Bride?" At the following verses there is no mistake as to the identity of the Bride and the Groom:

Romans 7:1-4
2 Corinthians 11:1-2

Well known author and commentator David H. Stern, has written concerning the Bride of Messiah in his commentary to the passage at Revelation 19:7, found in his Jewish New Testament Commentary, JNTC Publications:

"Arnold Fruchtenbaum, a Jewish believing scholar whose theology might be categorized as a modified Dispensationalism, distinguishes radically between the "wife of Jehovah," Isra'el, and the "bride of the Messiah," the Messianic Community; see his commentary on Revelation called The Footsteps of the Messiah, Appendix III ("The Wife of Jehovah and the Bride of Christ").

"My view is that the distinction between the Church and the Jewish people is less sharp and more subtle than Dispensationalism has generally depicted it (see Romans 11:23-24), and that Yeshua the Messiah sometimes represents and sometimes is intimately identified with the Jewish people (see Matt. 2:15).

"For these reasons I see no significant substantive distinction to be made between the bride of the Messiah and the wife of YHVH. Rather, the Bible employs a variety of metaphors to express the future intimacy of God with his people; different ones are used at [Rev.] 21:2-3, 22:3-5."

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 11:

Can you explain the 'sign of Jonah' in the gospels? Surely Jesus wasn't buried for 3 days AND nights.

ANSWER:

First of all, take a look at this updated link on my Pesach commentary site of GraftedIn.com:

http://www.graftedin.com/WeeklyTorah/QuestionsAnswers/pesachchron.html

I believe that the sign of the prophet Jonah, given by Yeshua was referring to literal 24-hour periods of time. Why should we seek another interpretation when the plain sense makes good sense? The following is a time table that I have created, suggesting that Yeshua was killed on Wednesday, Nisan 14 and resurrected on Shabbat, Nisan 17, fulfilling three literal days (see sections with *** below). The time table starts at the beginning of "crucifiction week" and ends with his resurrection:

Jn. 12:1 —Friday, Nisan 9. This trip from Ephraim [ch.11:54], to Bethany [present verse], was more than a "Sabbath's day" journey [Acts.1:12], thus rabbinically forbidden by law; hence, Fridays speculation. Mk. 11:1-11 —Saturday, Nisan 10 (traditionally recognized as "Palm Sunday") 

Jn. 12:12 —Saturday, Nisan 10 

Mk. 11:12 —Sunday, Nisan 11 

Mk. 11:20 —Monday, Nisan 12 

Mk. 14:17 —Tuesday, Nisan 13 

Mk. 15:1 —Wednesday, Nisan 14 

-(Mk. 15:25 -9:00 a.m. —Wednesday, Nisan 14) 

-(Mk. 15:33 -12:00 p.m. Dies at 3:00 p.m., still on cross —Wednesday, Nisan 14) 

-(Mk. 15:42 -Preparation for a High Holy Day not weekly Sabbath) 

***In the grave 6:00 p.m. —Wednesday, Nisan 14 (Deut. 21:22,23)***

***In the grave (Matt. 27:62) —Thursday, Nisan 1***

***In the grave —Friday, Nisan 16....until 5:59.59 p.m.*** 

***Out of the grave —Saturday, Nisan 17....6:00.00 p.m.*** 

Matt. 28:1 -Saturday/Sunday (See comments below) 

Jn. 20:1 -Saturday/Sunday: Dark part of Saturday evening, also known in Judaism as the "going out of the Sabbath". 

Mk. 16:9 —Sunday. *note: vv. 9-20 are not found in the two oldest manuscripts.

Was Yeshua Resurrected On Sunday Morning?
(With acknowledged assistance from TNN)

If we were to examine a surface reading of this text in English, it would appear as if Messiah Yeshua really had been resurrected on Sunday morning, and perhaps Christians have a legitimate case to not honor Shabbat and replace it with Sunday. However, one meaning of the Greek verb epiphosko, translated as “dawn toward,” is “to draw near, as the…Sabbath which began in the evening.” It can be legitimately understood that the Marys left to go to the tomb of Yeshua late on the Sabbath, as the first day began to draw near. This is understood by the 1901 American Standard Version translation of Matthew 28:1:

The Messianic Renewed Covenant properly renders Matthew 28:1 with the consideration that the Marys left for the tomb of Yeshua after the Sabbath as the first of the week began to come upon them:

It is important to understand that Biblically the first day of the week does not begin at midnight on Sunday, but on Saturday evening. The precedent for a new day beginning in the evening and then ending in the evening is established in Genesis chapter 1. We are told, “God called the light: ‘Day,’ and to the darkness He called: ‘Night.’ And there was evening and there was morning, one day” (vs. 5). J.H. Hertz comments, “The day, according the Scriptural reckoning of time, begins with the preceding evening.” When Mary and Mary Magdalene embarked toward the tomb of Yeshua, as the “first day” began to draw near, it was on what we would consider Saturday evening (we also readily point out that the Ancient Greeks followed the Biblical reckoning of time from sundown to sundown. To them like the Israelites, the new day began in the evening. It is the Romans that brought us the concept of the new day beginning at 12:00 AM in the middle of the night).

What is more likely than a Friday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection, which would not constitute three days and three nights, is that Yeshua was crucified on a Wednesday afternoon and then resurrected on Saturday in the late afternoon or evening.

We are told that Messiah died in the afternoon in Luke 23:44: “And it was now about the sixth hour, and darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour.” The ninth hour in the Greek time reckoning here is about 3:00 P.M. But what day was this on?

Consider that Wednesday afternoon to Thursday afternoon is one day and one night. Thursday afternoon to Friday afternoon is another day and another night. Friday afternoon to Saturday afternoon is the third day and third night. Consistent with how Yeshua said He would be in the grave for three days and three nights, and if a Wednesday to Saturday period of His being in the grave is accurate, He was probably resurrected sometime as the Sabbath began to close during twilight.

Some disagree with this assessment because Mark 16:1-2 says “And when the Shabbat had elapsed, Miriam of Magdala and Miriam the mother of Ya'akov, and Shlomit, brought spices so they might come and anoint Him. And very early on the first of the week, they came to the tomb, when the sun had risen”

It attested here from the text that the empty tomb of Yeshua was discovered on Sunday morning. The Greek verb “had arisen,” anatello, means to “spring up as the sun.” However, it is also clear that the Mary’s left to go to the sepulcher as the first day began to epiphosko or draw near, sometime near the end of Shabbat on late Saturday afternoon or early evening, as the day Biblically begins in the evening. But this does not necessarily prove a “Sunday morning resurrection.” Zodhiates states,

The Scripture text is clear that it was the intent of the Marys to leave at the departure of the Sabbath on Saturday evening to the tomb of Yeshua and anoint His body with spices per the stench of decay. However, Matthew 28:2 says “And behold, a great earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the Lord came down from Heaven and approached and rolled away the stone and sat upon it.” This occurred “late on the sabbath day” (Matthew 28:1, American Standard Version), just as the Marys intended to set out toward the tomb. As Zodhiates suggests, perhaps after the earthquake occurred, they decided to wait to go to the tomb at sunrise.

However, simply because the Marys found the empty tomb at sunrise on Sunday, this does not give us a legitimate reason to abrogate the commands of Shabbat, which Messiah honored.

We believe that the Scriptural evidence is in favor of a late Saturday afternoon or early evening resurrection of Yeshua and that according to Matthew 28:1 the Marys intended to go to His tomb and anoint His body with the spices and perfume at the end of Shabbat on Saturday. But, because of the power of His resurrection and the earthquake that occurred, they must have thought it better and safer to go when there was daylight.


Did the Early Believers Meet On Sunday?

Although we believe that Scripture is clear that Messiah upheld the Sabbath and was not resurrected on “Sunday morning,” there are those who tell us that His early followers did not honor the Shabbat and instead replaced it by assembling on the first day.

This is usually based on verses such as Acts 20:7a which says “And on the first of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread.” In 1 Corinthians 16:2 Paul writes “On the first of the week, let each one of you put beside something and store it up, as he may prosper, so that no collections be made when I come.”

When examining these two verses, it may seem to some that the early Believers did gather on the first day of the week or Sunday. But even if they did assemble on Sunday, there is no indication that they did not likewise observe Shabbat. However, we believe that when placed in its correct historical and cultural context, the idea that the Believers assembling on “the first of the week” here being what would later become the Christian Sunday is misguided.

Acts 20:7 is translated in the Jewish New Testament as “On Motza’ei Shabbat, when we were gathered to break bread, Sha’ul addressed them. Since he was going to leave the next day, he kept talking until midnight.”

Stern comments that “Motza’ei Shabbat in Hebrew means ‘departure of the Sabbath’ and refers to Saturday night….It would be natural for Jewish believers who had rested on Shabbat with the rest of the Jewish community to assemble afterwards to celebrate their common faith in Yeshua the Messiah….A Saturday night meeting would continue the God-oriented spirit of Shabbat, rather than require the believers to shift their concern from workaday matters, as would be the case [if this were] Sunday night.”

As established earlier, the new day Biblically begins in the evening, so the first day of the week actually begins on Saturday night. If this were speaking of Sunday night, as many believe, then technically Acts 20:7 should have read that they were meeting “on the second day of the week” as Paul, who was “intending to depart the next day…extended his word until midnight.”

But what about 1 Corinthians 16:2? “On the first of the week, let each one of you put beside something and store it up, as he may prosper, so that no collections be made when I come.” The JNT translates this with Motza’ei Shabbat as well:

1 Corinthians 16:2 has absolutely nothing to do with “Sunday church” as commonly believed. At the very least, what it speaks of is people tithing their financial resources to the local assembly. Because engaging in commerce is prohibited on Shabbat, doing this when the Sabbath was over was appropriate.

We do concede that if this is speaking of collection for the local assembly, some of it may have occurred on Sunday. But, this does not negate the importance of Shabbat nor does it annul it as some believe. For Acts 2:46 tells us that the early Believers were meeting together “Every day” (NIV).

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 12:

What are the "high places" and the groves?

ANSWER:

First, unless you are already familiar with the passage, read Isaiah 57:3-13. Without needing to go into a lot of detail, the "high places", alluded to in verse seven and "groves", alluded to in verse 5, were idolatrous locations for the pagans to worship their false gods. Often this worship took on the form of lewd sexual practices involving temple prostitutes and high priests; it also involved infants and children sometimes ("Oy-vey!"). The Torah explicitly forbade the Children of Isra’el to imitate or join in on these practices. Sometimes the worshippers’ object of attention was to the heavenly luminaries. Other time it was to gods said to personify the luminaries (i.e. sun-god worship as opposed to worship of the sun itself). Going to a high place brought the worshipper closer to his object of worship, or to heaven itself. Sacrifice to the sun was common in that time. Burning the "sacrifice" alive was also common. Meeting under the leafy branches of trees hid the sometimes-gross immoral acts of the sexual worshippers. So one can easily see why HaShem hated these pagan practices. In fact, in my opinion, the tower mentioned in Genesis 11:4 is the first recorded "high place" built by men with wrong intentions.

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 13:

How do Jewish people explain Isaiah 53? Why would it not be blatantly obvious that the Messiah prophesied here is Yeshua?

ANSWER:

According to my modest study on the book of Isaiah, the prophetic servant theme, as I call it, is introduced in Chapter 41 verse 8 (the other prior four uses of the word servant are to: Isaiah, Eliakim, a common person, and David). Here in 41:8 it is clearly understood that the reference is to physical Israel. The theme (specifically the Hebrew word ahvdi translated as my servant) continues through chapters 41:9; 42:1,19; 43:10; 44:1,2,21,26; 48:20; 49:5,6,7; 50:10; 52:13 and finally culminating in the famous Chapter 53 and verse 11. I want you, the reader, to go back and read the entire section beginning in Chapter 41:8 and dont stop til you get through Chapter 53. I can assure you that most Christians dont read this far. To be sure, most just start with Chapter 53! No wonder my people interpret the servant as Israel and the Church as Yeshua. My suggestion is that both are right to a degree. The pshat (plain or literal) meaning of most of these instances is to Israel, the servant of HaShem. But in a remez (hint) and even a drash (searching) the prophet Isaiah, under the inspiration on the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit) meant the coming servant Messiah! That the Jewish nation as a whole cannot see in these verses the remez or the drash, but only the pshat, is proof of their spiritual blindness through their ever increasing defensive theology. That the Christians as a whole cannot see in the same verses the pshat, but only the remez and drash, is proof of their stubborn pride through their ever increasing replacement theology. Heres the key: Yeshua personifies the Jewish people! He is the prophetic servant, chosen by HaShem to suffer on account of all the peoples of the world. He is the model servant of the Jewish people, chosen to represent the perfect picture of what a servant of servants should look like. He is the quintessential Jew! And as the one chosen to atone for the sins of the world, by the Holy One himself, he alone is worthy to be worshipped as Mashiach!

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 14:

What is the Messianic Jewish position about remaining single. I've always heard that the rabbinical teaching is that a person is not truly a man until he has procreated. I am single and it looks like I may be remaining so. Does this mean that I'm less a man? Does God want everyone to marry? What about a homosexual person who foregoes all sexual activity in order to be faithful to the Lord? I'd be interested in your thoughts on these issues.

ANSWER:

I want you to read 1 Corinthians Chapter 7. In it youll find some very good instructions given to the married and unmarried alike. It is true that the rabbis had, and still have, a high view of marriage. The Talmud stresses this view. The unmarried person lives without joy, without blessing, and without good’ (Jeb. 62b); An unmarried man is not a man in the full sense; as it is said, Male and female created He them, and blessed them and called their name man (Gen. 5:2) (Ibid. 63a). A wife meant a home; hence the saying, A mans home is his wife (Joma I.I), and R. Jose said, Never have I called my wife by that word, but always my home (Shab. 118b). But dont let all this scare you. Remember this is commentary on the Torah, not the authoritative Torah itself! These are men’s opinions. High remarks are made in the Torah, to the single individual who fully devotes himself to HaShem in his singleness! Pray about your potential mating. It is a very important decision to make! To be sure, the Torah designed it to be a lasting one. Now as far as the issue concerning homosexuality goes, the Torah is explicitly clear: this lifestyle is not pleasing to HaShem, and is thereby forbidden. In the TaNaKH, the instances are told of pagan temple prostitution, by those women (and sometimes men) who had separated themselves unto the temple cult. This sanctification is where we get the Hebrew word kadosh from, meaning, set apart for a specific work. This separation was certainly not prescribed by the Torah of Moshe, and was not condoned by the Holy One! If you mean a homosexual turning from that lifestyle, and forgoing all further sexual activity in order to pursue faithfulness to HaShem, then let his tshuvah (repentance) be true renounce his sin of homosexuality and turn to HaShem with a renewed heart! True biblical separation always agrees with the Will of HaShem, and accomplishes the purposes of HaShem. Because homosexuality is outside the pale of a biblically correct lifestyle, it is not sanctified or blessed, but rather condemned by the Torah. This rabbi does not recommend such a lifestyle for anyone, but forgiveness through the shed blood of Messiah Yeshua has been made abundant for all, regardless of your past sins!

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 15:

I was reading Genesis 17:1.2. and was surprised to find the G-d who spoke to Abraham was "G-d Almighty'. I thought this only referred to the Father, not the Son. However, in Isaiah, 51:2, the Son states that He spoke to Abraham. What are your thoughts on this?

ANSWER:

I’m not sure how you ascertain that the reference in Yeshayahu (Isaiah) is the spoken word of Yeshua. The text makes perfect sense by placing those words in the mouth of HaShem. In fact, in keeping with the context of Chapter 51, allow me to make a midrash (search) and remez (hint) of verse five. The text reads,

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy

QUESTION 16:

I am confused about Ezekiel 10. What is the meaning or purpose of the four wheels?

ANSWER:

I’d like to take this time to mention that the talmid (student) who submitted this sh’eilah (question about Torah) is a close personal friend of mine, and a very fine believer. I am consistently blessed by him, as we are able to fellowship every Shabbat together. I am also grateful that he has not just settled for my answer alone, but has gone ahead and sought the opinions of other Torah teachers as well. In my opinion this is one of the marks of a great student of the Torah…. A student, in this case, destined to become a rabbi. Once again, here (this time for those other than Bob) is my answer:

I believe the vision of the four wheels, as recorded by Ezekiel, is similar to the vision seen by the Prophet Isaiah, particularly in Isaiah chapter two. Rabbi Menachem Leibtag also saw a similar connection to these two visions. Commenting on Isaiah chapter two he writes, "From a cursory reading of the first ten psukim [words], it seems as though Yeshayahu first sees the SHCHINA [Divine Presence] surrounded by angels in the "heichal" [the inner Temple chamber], after which God appoints him to be his messenger to Bnei Yisrael. But what is the meaning of this vision? Why must this enigmatic vision precede God's charge to Yeshayahu of his mission? In several ways, this prophecy is similar to God's OPENING prophecy to Yechezkel [see Yechezkel 1:1 -2:5], where Yechezkel receives his prophetic mission after seeing a very complex vision of the SHCHINA. It is also a bit similar to God's OPENING prophecy to Yirmiyahu, where he receives his mission as well (see Yirmiyahu 1:1-2:3). [These are better known as "nevuot hakdasha" (holy prophecies or visions). Compare also to God's OPENING "hitgalut" [revelation] to Moshe at the burning bush, where a vision precedes his mission (Shmot 3:1-10).]." It appears that the four wheels are part of the opening "display" of HaShem’s revelation of himself to the prophet. In visions such as these, we find that the k’vod or glory of HaShem preceded his actual "person". Perhaps this was to prepare the recipient for what was to follow; a message from none other than the Holy One of Yisra’el! In the case of Isaiah (Ch.2:5), his reaction to the Glory of HaShem was, "Woe to me! I [too] am doomed! ? because I, a man with unclean lips, living among a people with unclean lips have seen with my own eyes the King, ADONAI-Tzva’ot!" Of course my interpretation of Ezekiel’s wheels contains speculation. We may just have to wait until Yeshua returns, to put forth this sh’eilah to him.

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy

QUESTION 17:

A young Jewish friend told me that Jews (not messianic believers) do not believe in a being called Satan or The Devil. Can anyone tell me more please?

ANSWER:

To a certain extent, this is true; Jews dont espouse to the idea of a person called Satan". Rather, they hold to the concept of personification of evil which many refer to as Satan". Perhaps it would help to clarify the issue if you knew that the word Satan is from the Hebrew word sah-tan (say saw-tawn). This word is easily translated into adversary, that is, one who opposes. But the opposition is always of that which is for the good. Likewise Satan is portrayed as opposing all that which is good, hence, Judaisms concept of the word. This created angelic being figures much in the Talmud, the great rabbinical commentary to the Torah. Satan the Yetzer HaRa (evil inclination) and the Angel of Death are all one (B.B. 16a). It indicates that the prompting to evil is rather a force within the individual than an influence from without. It also explains why HaShem permits Satan to be active and does not destroy him. Judaism explains that he is only able to be in one place at a time, so that he must have emissaries (other fallen angels) do his bidding. The Talmud goes on to suggest that Satan performs three functions: he seduces men, he accuses them before HaShem, and he inflicts the punishment of death (Ibid.). Apart from the Talmud, the TaNaKH and the New Covenant Scriptures take for granted the existence of a supernatural realm of good, obedient angels who serve HaShem and evil, rebellious ones (demons) who serve the Adversary. A few references for your further study: Genesis 3 (serpent as adversary to tempt Adam and Eve); Isaiah 14:11-15 (King of Babylon as a fallen creature of power and beauty, who lets pride and rebellion overtake him); Ezekiel 28:11-19 (similar example); Job 1-2 (explicit in showing Satan as opponent of both HaShem and man); Matthew 4:1-11 (personal opponent and tempter of Yeshua prior to his public ministry); Revelation 12:9 (the ancient serpent, also known as the Devil and Satan [Heb: Adversary]).

***BONUS COMMENTS***

In Genesis the Torah explicitly states that HaShem created the Light and the Darkness.  The Hebrew word for Light is "ohr", while the Hebrew word for Darkness is "choshekh".  In Isaiah 45:5-7 we learn that there is no other Creator besides HaShem.  He forms Light and Darkness, peace and evil.  Does this mean HaShem is responsible for the bad in the universe?  Absolutely not.  This verse is teaching us the difficult concept that sin is "waiting" for mankind to discover it.  And discover it we surely do!  God does not tempt man to sin, nor does he cause man to sin.  Man freely chooses sin!

The adversary is the Father of all lies, the Torah says.  This means, he is the author of evil, in the sense that he is the original fallen created being.  He is the first sinner.  Man simply followed in his footsteps.  The Torah makes an explicit statement in 1 John 3:4 that sin is defined as the transgression of the Law (Torah).  Is God the author and creator of the Torah?  Surely!  Yet, Rabbi Sha'ul (Paul) teaches that without the Torah, there is no knowledge of sin (read al of Romans chapter 7).

So Darkness is the absence of (or direct violation) Light--which God created.  Therefore, both Light and Darkness originate with the Creation.  Sin (darkness) is a propensity, an evil inclination that sprang to life with the first sin.  This inclination, to be sure, started with haSatan, yet because of man's decision in the Garden, it has infected every single human as well.  God did not cause man to sin.  God simply established set rules.  Man's transgression of those rules is sin.  Darkness set in motion.

The absence of light is darkness.  God is Light and in him dwells no Darkness.  Yet, because of the freedom that we inherited from God, we, including haSatan, have chosen to embrace the absence of God's Light--which is the Darkness.  God created the Light.  God created the Darkness.  But we freely and disobediently embraced the darkness.  Therefore, it is not God's fault that we sin, anymore than it was Eve's fault that Adam sinned.  He tried to pass the guilt off on God, by saying "the woman that you gave me caused me to sin...", but let's get real!  Adam freely, willingly, and knowingly chose to eat the forbidden fruit.

So sin is man's choice.  Salvation is God's remedy!  Thanks be unto God that he has freely provided that remedy!  Do we deserve it?  Of course not.  But the wonderful thing is that the same freedom that we possess to choose sin gives us the freedom to choose life!

So Moshe give us the choice, in Deuteronomy 30:10-20 (please go back and read this wonderful passage).

Light and Darkness are both free choices.  Our duty is to make the right choice.....
 

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 18:

Hebrews tells us that Yeshua suffered outside the gate. My question is, which gate? Was it the Damascus gate and would this be the same gate Rabbi Sha'ul went through on his way to Damascus when persecuting the believers there?

ANSWER:

I believe the particular verse in Hebrews refers not to an actual gate but rather to an illusionary gate. Let me explain. In Chapter 13 of Hebrews, the author uses at least five images to portray the work of the Messiah to his readers: 

1. as the sin offering;
2. as impure [i.e. as a leper];
3. as one who must be separated [i.e. remain outside of the camp in disgrace as a leper];
4. as the Red Heifer [i.e. making the people holy through his own blood as recalled in Chapter 9:11-14, which mentions the Red Heifer as being burned outside of the camp];
5. as the permanent city [by mentioning the gate, the author brings to our remembrance the language used in 11:9,10,13-16; 12:22 where Heavenly Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) is the focus of the temporary residents]. 

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 19:

Who was Melchizedek?

ANSWER:

The name Mel-chiz-ed-ek (KJV) or Malki-Tzedek as it is written in the Hebrew, means, my king is righteousness, or king of righteousness. He is first mentioned in the Torah in the book of Genesis, in a meeting with the patriarch Avram. Chapter 14 verses 18-20 reads, Malki-Tzedek king of Shalem brought out bread and wine. He was cohen [priest] of El Elyon [God Most High], so he blessed him with these words: Blessed be Avram by El Elyon, maker of heaven of earth; and blessed be El Elyon, who handed your enemies over to you. He is again mentioned in the highly messianic Psalm 110 at verse 4. Finally he figures in the New Covenant book of Hebrews at Chapter 5:6,10,20; and is the subject of Chapter 7. Although the Torah mentions him receiving the tithe from Our Father Avraham, no record of his official lineage (i.e. to king and to priest) is given in the immediate text. This absence has caused no small speculation on the part of the rabbis of antiquity. Especially since in Judaism the roles of king and priest are separate roles! Normally (excluding the first king, Saul of Kish), the kingly line runs through David. Accordingly, the priestly lineage is traced through Aharon the brother of Moshe. But Malki-Tzedek was both king (of Shalem) and priest (of HaShem the Most High). How is this possible? I believe, initially HaShem alluded to the answer in the prophecy stated about the Messiah in Psalm 110. This should have tipped the rabbis off about HaShems provision of a future ruler who would belong to both the priestly and kingly lines. If the rabbis could have only read Hebrews, they could have seen that only one person in history ever fulfilled both of these roles and his name is Yeshua! If the rabbis of today would do the same, I believe the same conclusion would be reached! But the book of Hebrews says something else about this man Malki-Tzedek that is very peculiar indeed. In Chapter 7:3-8, it is stated that There is no record of his father, mother, ancestry, birth or death. It does not state that he never had any of these, nor that he is alive forever more. It says he is testified to be still alive, which means midrashically (for teaching purposes only), not literally. Even the Babylonian Talmud has him identified as the son of Shem, Noachs son (Talmud Bavli, Ndarim 32b). The Torah only leads us to that seeming conclusion without explicitly stating it. We need to be careful when interpreting the text here. Do not make it say something it does not. But by seeing in Malki-Tzedek our Messiah Yeshua, the connection is strengthened as to his (Yeshuas) role as both king and priest! To be sure, I believe thats exactly what the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit) had in mind when he inspired King David to make the messianic prophecy about his future ancestor.

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy 

QUESTION 20:

I was raised Catholic, as you are probably aware, priests do not want to discuss 'Jacobs Trouble'. The only opinion I have heard is the protestant view. I would appreciate hearing my Jewish brothers and sisters view of this. Thanks.

ANSWER:

This Torah Teacher is not altogether familiar with what exactly the Catholic position is concerning Ya'akov's Tsuris (Jacob's Troubles), nor their silence on the matter, but I can imagine it has something to do with the Replacement Theology that is rampant in some of their teachings. Simply put, Replacement Theology believes that the Church has replaced physical Isra'el as the New Isra'el, thereby becoming the new People of HaShem. All of this is supposedly in response to the corporate rejection of Yeshua, by the Jewish people, and accomplished through the institution of the New Covenant. Part and parcel to this rejection is that the Jews are now left to face the full brunt of the Wrath of HaShem in what is known in evangelical circles as the Great Tribulation. According to today’s leading evangelical scholars, the Christian Church is raptured away just before the Tribulation starts, leaving behind the unbelieving Gentile nations and the (unfortunate) Jews, to suffer. This popular (although inaccurate) view of end-time events gains support from such texts as 1 Thessalonians 5:9 where the subject is the Wrath of HaShem and the proximity of believers to that wrath. In my opinion, unnecessary emphasis is placed on exactly who will be in the Great Tribulation (if such an event actually has Scriptural support). Dont get me wrong; I do believe in a coming time of persecution on the world. But great care needs to be taken when blatantly placing the Jews in the Tribulation while conveniently excusing the Christian Church. To be sure, the prophets of the TaNaKH had much to say about the coming trouble for the Jewish nation. Unfortunately at this time, an agreeing consensus, among Jews and Christians alike, has not been reached as to what that trouble exactly means. Perhaps this is why the Catholic Church is shy. A lack of adequate information on a subject that the Bible should be clear on, may suggest weakness or even worse, error, on the part of the largest organized-religious denomination the world has ever known. Do you really think they want to risk that kind of image?

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy

QUESTION 21:

Do you believe in the doctrine known as "Once saved, always saved"?

ANSWER:

Part One:

This question is controversial, but worth addressing anyhow. My answer is not intended to slander anyone else’s opinion which doesn’t line up with my own, yet, I am amazed at the completely opposite points of view which this question can generate. So here goes mine:

The reference mentioned in Hebrews 6:4-6 does NOT explicitly teach that you can lose your eternal salvation, necessitating a need to be renewed again via grace; it DOES teach that IF you were able to lose this eternal salvation provided by Yeshua’s ONCE and for ALL sacrifice (Heb. 10:12) then the only thing that would save you would be another sacrifice from him, which is not only unnecessary, it is impossible! The logic explained here by the writer of Hebrews (possibly Rav Sha'ul) is addressing an "impossible remedy" to an "equally impossible situation". If those who are genuinely saved fall from that grace, then the only way back to restoration is another sin offering. Elsewhere in Hebrews the writer proves that, compared to the sacrificial system employed during his day (before the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E), Yeshua's blood atonement was surely superior (10:1-18). Therefore, if the yearly sacrifices CANNOT be duplicated today for the sake of atonement, HOW MUCH MORE (using a "kal v'chomer" teaching tool) would it be IMPOSSIBLE for Yeshua to go to the execution stake again. This is implied in the author’s use of the phrase "they keep executing the Son of God on the stake all over again". This describes the state of mind that people with false security go through internally. Therefore, if they are suffering (plagued in the mind) from feelings of a lack of genuine saving grace, then this may be an indication of their lack of genuine salvation to begin with. And it only stands to reason logically that they are not really "losing" their salvation. For, using logic, you don’t "lose" something that you were "never" in possession of to begin with.

Here is the author’s allusion (a very serious teaching tool used here to show the effectual nature of Yeshua's atonement) : IF it WERE possible to lose genuine salvation (which the author implies it isn’t), then he informs his readers that the ONLY way to redeem a (once genuinely saved) lost individual would be to crucify the Messiah all over again, which (as stated above, and supported by every genuine, knowledgeable believer), is IMPOSSIBLE! This view is also supported by many other New Covenant promises (John 10:25-30 and Romans 8:31-39 just to name two). In fact, to strengthen the connection, the passage in John directly singles out those with a lack of genuine trust as "not included as Yeshua’s sheep" (John. 10:26). This is the same situation taught in the Hebrews chapter 6 passage, singling out those who lack genuine saving faith, offered through grace.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and I believe that this issue has far reaching, NEGATIVE implications for those who feel that salvation is temporal until they backslide. I believe that the individual who lives his life believing that he could, at any moment, lose his salvation, defeats his very conscience, which has been created to carry the mind and actions of the Messiah (Romans 12:2b; Ephesians 2:8-10; Philippians 2:5). I’m not saying that genuine believers don’t go through moments of "doubt" and uncertainty in their lives. What I am saying is that genuine believers at some point in their lives really should (under the guidance of the Ruach HaKodesh) appropriate (internalize) the full measure and realization of what it means to fit the description given by the author of Hebrews in 6:4, 5. They have "graduated" from the "basics of Christianity" as delineated in vv. 1, 2, and are assured that they WILL not and CAN NOT fall away from this saving grace.

Part Two:

Q: I just read your answer. I'm troubled. If a person continues to violate, transgress the mitzvot…

A: By using the word "transgress" you must start with a person who is regenerated in the heart by the Power of the Ruach HaKodesh (someone like Avraham Avinu, whose faith it was credited unto him as righteousness due to his genuine trusting faithfulness in HaMemra [the Word of the LORD]). Such a persons "transgressions" are ultimately atoned for by the bloody sacrifice of Mashiach, but true heart-felt confession is a necessary ingredient in his ongoing, dynamic relationship with HaShem.

Q: …are you saying that the grace extended through the sacrifice of the Mashiach Yeshua will cover them even though there is no confession and repentance for that sin and transgression…?

A: If there is NO confession and repentance then the works are dead. And if the confession and repentance are dead and there is NO work, then there is NO forgiveness. If there is NO forgiveness then I would question the regenerative state of the heart of such an individual. The Torah (book of Ya'akov [James]) clearly teaches that "faith without works is dead." True Biblical faith always accompanies true Biblical obedience. Moreover, such obedience stems from a heart of true faith. When these two are in matured accord in the life of an individual then evidence of true regeneration is present. That is the crux of the message in Ya'akov's letter. Anything short of both faith and obedience (resulting in forgiveness) is tantamount to legalism, which HaShem condemns.

Legalism is a misunderstanding of God's holiness and his righteous standards. The Torah (Law) is holy, just and good, as Paul stated in Romans. The problem is not with the Law; the problem is with man's inability in consistently and correctly interpreting God's Laws.

The Torah does not teach legalism; religions seem to misinterpret God's perfect laws and turn them into legalism.

Obedience to God's Torah brings about maturity in a believer's life. Allow me to illustrate using a portion of Scripture taken from 1 Kings 2:1-12.

In this particular haftarah, Dah-vid instructs his son to be careful to observe the Torah of ADONAI (2:3, 4), and to be aware of the fact that it is in this obedience that the blessings of ADONAI will flow to him. This is not legalism or performance-based righteousness. This is simply the method that HaShem has established, whereby we, as righteous individuals (based upon his sovereign choice, through grace) receive the abundant blessings intended for those who are his. To put it in simple language: we don’t follow the Torah to become saved; we follow the Torah because we are saved!

The following is from my commentary to the Torah portion of Genesis 47:28-50:26:

In Deuteronomy chapters 27-30, Moshe (our main character of the next few parash’ot to follow) gives a lengthy discourse to Am Yisra’el (the people of Isra’el) as to what will come about as a result of obeying or disobeying the Torah of HaShem. In this rather detailed and sometimes frightening revelation from HaShem, he informs them that covenant faithfulness was their individual responsibility. In other words, there is a part of the Torah that is directly effected by what we do or do not do. It is possible that HaShem might bless us or withhold blessing based on our performance measures? Contrary to conventional wisdom, this question can be answered in the affirmative. Before I get labeled as a legalist, let me explained myself.

‘For those who trust HaShem for the promises, the proper order for faith and obedience is set by the sequence in which the covenants were given. In other words, faith must precede obedience. But the kind of faith accepted by HaShem is one, which naturally flows into obedience. True obedience never comes before faith, nor is it an addition to faith. It is always the result of true biblical faith. To rephrase this in terms of the covenants: the covenant of promise (Avraham) must come before the covenant of obedience (Moshe). If we were to put Moshe first, attempting to secure those promises by obedience, we would be going against HaShem’s order. (This, by the way, is the key to unlocking the difficult midrash used by Sha’ul in Galatians 4:21-31.) All we could hope for would be a measure of physical protection and a knowledge of spiritual things. But we could not receive justification or a personal relationship with the Holy One through obedience to the Torah; it all had to start with faith. Avraham came before Moshe, but Moshe did not cancel out Avraham! The two complemented each other–as long as they came in the proper order.’ (Taken from Torah Rediscovered, Ariel and D’vorah Berkowitz, FFOZ Publications)

What does this mean for the Jew as well as the Gentile? Apart from a being a well-reasoned theological argument for combating legalism, the concept taught here defines our identity, as, not only being grounded in the Torah–but it is who we are in Messiah! If the blood of the Sinless One has redeemed us from sin and unrighteousness, then we now have been clothed in his holiness! We now have a new identity–the righteousness of HaShem! The old man has died with the death of our Messiah; the new man has been raised unto life everlasting just like him (2 Corinthians 5:17-21)! And all of these promises are secured for us within the pages of God’s Torah!

Q: …or are you saying that the sacrifice was the one to end all for our atonement provided we do confess and repent…?

A: Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. The context of Lev. 4:20 also bears witness:

Forgiveness was offered provided the individual bringing the offering exercised his trusting faithfulness in obediently becoming submissive to the commandment. The sacrifice was simply the shadow or token of the forgiveness; the object of the individual's righteousness must of necessity be the [coming] Messiah. Also, the New Covenant bears witness:

Notice the features of such forgiveness: walking in the Light, fellowship, confession, cleansing.

The sacrifice of Yeshua is ONLY efficacious if we exercise true Biblical trust and righteousness (to the Hebrew mindset trust [emunah] and righteousness [t'zedekah] are synonymous concepts).

Q: …or are you saying that a truly "saved" individual will not sin or transgress…?

A: I am not saying that a truly "saved" individual will not sin. Allow me to let the Torah speak for itself. What does the Torah say:

and again:

and here also:

But this is explained elsewhere (notice the presence of the conditional "ifs"):

Finally:

Q: I’ve always had a very hard time with the once saved always saved teaching as it purports that no matter what you do, after you accepted the Jewish Mashiach you'll be in the kingdom…,

A: Anyone purporting that "no matter what you do you are in the Kingdom" obviously misunderstands that that condition of forgiveness via Yeshua's sacrifice is trusting faithfulness in that sacrifice. John 3:16 is, in a manner of speaking, conditional on one's response to God's demonstration of Love. But once your "in" you are "in" to stay, provided you maintain genuine trust.

Q: …regardless of whether you confess and repent or not.

A: Genuine confession and repentance are earmarks of genuine trusting faithfulness. God is not interested in "lip service" believers.

Conclusion: We see, unequivocally, according to the Torah, that it is the Power of HaShem that brings about a true change of heart. Judaism has a term for this "turn around", it’s called "t’shuvah". In it’s truest definition it always involves a 180-degree forsaking of the error, in return back to the truth.

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy

QUESTION 22:

Dear Rabbi,

Now about Calvinism Vs Arminianism:

Like a river that flows between two banks, so the truth of God's Word flows between the extremes of Calvinism and Arminianism. As it has been pointed out, both are true and both are false. Election and predestination are Biblical doctrines. God knows everything and therefore He cannot learn anything or be surprised by anything. Thus, He knows, and has known from eternity past, who will exercise their free will to accept Him and who will reject Him. The former are the elect, the latter are non-elect. As D.L. Moody once said, the "whosoever wills are the elect, and the whosoever wont's are the non-elect." Every person who is not saved will have only himself to blame; HaShem will not send anyone to hell, but many people will choose to go there by exercising their free will to reject the Messiah.

On the other hand, no one who is saved will be able to take any of the credit. Our salvation, from start to finish, is 100% God's work, and is based entirely on the finished work of the Cross. We were dead in trespasses and sins, destined for hell, when God in His grace, drew us to Himself, convinced us of our sin and our need for a Savior, and gave us the authority to call Yeshua ADONAI. Is this grace, this wooing, irresistible? No, we have free will and we can resist, even to the damnation of our souls, but God does everything short of making us puppets to draw us into His family.

Moreover the concept of a limited atonement, that Yeshua only died for the elect, and not for the sins of all people, is clearly unbiblical. The Bible is crystal clear that Yeshua’s death on the cross was for all people, and that there is sufficient power in His blood to cleanse away every sin. "Whosoever will may come" is meaningless if man has no free will and no ability to choose God.

So just what is Hebrews 6:1-6 teaching? Without attempting to fall into either ditch dug by these two theologies, here goes Rabbi Ariel’s opinion:

It is imperative to remember that both Calvinism and Arminianism are systems of theology devised by godly, devout, Bible-believing men in the 1600's. Both systems are based on the Word of God, and both contain essential elements of truth, but neither can be substituted for reading and believing the Word of God. The Apostolic church knew nothing of either system; they simply believed what HaShem had revealed. The difficulty arises when it seems that some of what God has revealed contradicts something else He revealed. How can man be absolutely free and God absolutely sovereign and directive simultaneously? How can salvation be entirely God's work, yet require the cooperation of mere men simultaneously? These are unanswerable questions ultimately. The Torah teaches both the sovereignty of God and the free will of man. It teaches what appears to be unconditional perseverance in some places and conditional perseverance in others. These things can never be intellectually reconciled because God is simply too big for us to understand. Both systems of theology emphasize one set of Scriptures while either ignoring or drastically twisting and explaining away others.

We are not called to fully understand God, only to believe Him. I am a free moral agent, responsible for my own sin, hopelessly lost. Yeshua not only died for me, He drew me to Himself with bands of loving-kindness and grace, convicted me of my sin, gave me the power to call Him LORD, and will one day present me faultless before His presence with great joy. I am, by His grace, His child. And yet, I am still free to walk with Him or not to walk with Him. And what applies to me, applies to every human being. Messiah died for all of us and desires fellowship with all of us. Whosoever will may come and receive of His forgiveness and grace and salvation. Innocent babies who die are safe in heaven. God's election excludes no one; Messiah’s atonement includes everyone. As has been pointed out, we are looking at two sides of the same coin. Election is God's side, free will is our side. Someone once said that as we enter life, we see emblazoned over the gateway the words "Whosoever will may come;" then as we enter and look back at the backside of the same gateway, we see inscribed with the words "Elect from the foundation of the earth." Election is God's side of the coin we call salvation, human responsibility is our side.

A famous Talmudic rabbi adequately described the typical Judaic view: "All is foreseen yet free will is given."

Rather than interpreting the Bible based on any theological or philosophical structure, it behooves us to simply read and believe the Torah of ADONAI. As we teach the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation, verse by verse, in context, we will at times sound like staunch Calvinists, preaching those passages which emphasize God's sovereignty, while at other times we will seem like devout Arminians, as we preach those passages which emphasize man's responsibility. The key to successful ministry is balance - to stay focused on the Torah, and not become distracted by the doctrines of men.

HaShem bless you brother! Keep the faith!

Torah Teacher Ariel ben-Lyman HaNaviy

QUESTION 23:

What is a Mezuzah and why are there many different designs on it, and how do you find out the significance of each design?

ANSWER:

The word "mezuzah" is the Hebrew word usually translated as "door post", but the normative usage of this Hebrew word refers to a small, Isra'eli ornament. Specifically this word is used (in the plural) in verse nine of the Shema, Deuteronomy 6:4-9. Because this verse instructs the B’nay Yisra’el (Children of Isra’el) to write them (the words of this Covenant, i.e. Torah) on the door posts of their houses, they did just that! Literally! And why not? Isn’t that what the verse says literally? Today, the practice of affixing a mezuzah on the door frame of a Jewish home is a nice reminder to all, that the occupants are both Jewish and/or Torah Observant, specifically in response to this verse. If you look inside a mezuzah, you will find this passage (and a few others) from the Shema! As is the custom, the mezuzah is usually inclined with the top leaning towards the inside of the dwelling place, signifying the "spiritual direction" that the blessing should travel.

A prayer is always said upon affixing a new mezuzah to a doorway. The small decorative plaque is fitted with a pocket to hold this particular scripture and a few others in a type of a "mini Torah-scroll", which can be taken with the occupants upon moving to a new home. Traditionally, the Hebrew letters ‘Shin’, ‘Dalet’, and ‘Yod’ adorn a typical mezuzah. These three letters spell out the name "Shaddai", one of the familiar titles used for HaShem, which means "Almighty". They also serve as an acronym to the promise given in Psalm 121:4, "Hineh lo-yanum v’lo yishav shomer Yisra’el (No, the guardian of Isra’el never slumbers or sleeps), more affectionately remembered as, "SHomer D’latot Yisra’el" (watcher of the doors of Isra’el).