That Dog Won't Hunt!

In the comments which followed my post The Linchpin of Armstrongism, some of the commentators brought up the fact that I am a celibate homosexual. For my regular readers, it will come as no surprise that I have always regarded my celibacy and faithfulness to God and my family as a tremendous source of moral authority for the things that I write about spiritual/theological issues. Hence, as part of my response to this mention, I wrote: "Perhaps, if Herbert Armstrong hadn't been such a narcissist and pervert, his teachings would carry more moral authority."

This statement provoked the following anonymous comment: "Earlier above, you excoriated HWA again for being such a 'narcissist and pervert' (doubting his conversion and believing the allegations against him, while calling yourself a redeemed one), and that if it hadn't been for that, 'his teachings would have carried more moral authority.' I detect a spirit of bitterness here. You don't know that Christ had him teach the truth for over 50 years, that many watched the WT and read the PT, and that attendance reached 140,000 until the apostasy set in? (to which you give assent if you disparage the law) His teachings did carry high moral authority from the Lord and led to many conversions (to which you have attested). Even after the trials and turmoil of the 70s, after all the allegations that he faced, he survived it until '86 when the church was still flourishing. If it was a work of men (which it began to be under the JWT's watch '93-'95), it would have come to nothing."

I completely understand where this person is coming from - once upon a time, I thought the same way. Like many of the folks who read this blog, I swallowed what Herbie was selling hook, line, and sinker! I believed that God had revealed THE TRUTH to that old guy, and that God had opened my mind to believe what He had revealed to Herbie. Later, however, I came to see that all that glitters is not gold - that there were a lot of holes in Herbie's "truth." I discovered that Herbie's dissertations on history and science were full of inaccuracies. Moreover, I eventually realized that many of his "prooftexts" had been taken out of context, and that his knowledge of the Bible and Christian theology was very superficial.

Finally, after an extensive reevaluation of Herbie's teachings, I came to understand that God had NOT worked through Mr. Armstrong. Indeed, it became very clear to me that he had twisted history, science, Scripture, research, and the thought process itself. Armstrong claimed that he had figured out God's plans, recovered First Century Christianity, and found the key to understanding prophecy. Sadly, it turned out that he didn't understand very much at all!

Then, I began learning more about the man himself - his character - his very real and glaring weaknesses and failures as a person. I talked to people who knew him personally and had worked with him. I reread his autobiography, and I saw things there that I had overlooked or ignored the first time I had read it. Herbert had written that his sister-in-law had been "indoctrinated" with the theory of evolution; and that she had called him "ignorant," because he had expressed his belief in Divine creation. The account continued:

"That accusation came hot on the heels of this Sabbath challenge from my wife. Of course, Hertha was only about 19, and had had but her freshman year in college. She was yet immature enough to be a bit oversold on what had been presented to her as a mark of intellectual distinction. Nevertheless, her manner was cutting, and a bit sarcastic, and 1 accepted it as a challenge. 'Hertha,' 1 responded, 'I am just starting a study of the Bible. I intend to include in this research a thorough study of the Biblical account of creation. Since it is admittedly one of the two - evolution or special creation - I will include an in-depth study of evolution. I feel sure that a thorough study into both sides will show that it is you who are ignorant, and that you merely studied one side of a two-sided question in freshman biology, and accepted what was funnelled into your mind without question. And if and when I do, I'm going to make you EAT those words!'" (spelling and punctuation were Herbert's)

Allow me to point out the things which I hadn't noticed the first time I read this passage. Notice that Herbie was responding to challenges from his wife and sister-in-law. Notice also that he disparaged his sister-in-law's college coursework (Mr. Armstrong did NOT have a college background of his own). He then proceeded to announce that he would launch his own independent study of science and the Bible, and that the results would be definitive. Finally, he told his sister-in-law that he would make her "eat those words." It hit me like a ton of bricks. This man was a classic narcissist! He was the smartest tool in the shed, and everybody else was inferior to him in intellect! This would become even clearer as Herbie continued the account of his life.

He wrote: "Most believers in the Bible and in the existence of God have probably just grown up believing it, because they were reared in an atmosphere where it was believed. But perhaps few ever studied into it deeply enough to obtain irrefutable PROOF. Likewise, the 'educated,' who have gone on through college or university, have, in the main, been taught the theory of evolution as a BELIEF. They have accepted it, in all probability, without having given any serious or thorough study of the Biblical claims." No one had studied the subject like Herbert Armstrong intended to study it! Look out "Darwin, Haeckel, Spencer, Huxley, and Vogt, Herbie was about to give those so-called intellectual giants the what for!

Even though Armstrong admitted that he was self-educated, he was going to challenge scientists and biblical scholars alike. He was going to get to the "truth" that no one else had been able to discover or discern! Even though he didn't have any training in research techniques and methods, he would ferret out the answers that had alluded all others! He continued:

I began this intensified study by obtaining everything I could find in the way of books, pamphlets and other literature both for and against what was often called 'the Jewish Sabbath.' I wanted, not only everything I could lay hands on, on the case for Sunday, and against the 7th-day Sabbath. I wanted, also, the arguments or proponents for it, which I hoped to be able honestly to refute. At the same time, I found, in the Portland Public Library, many scientific works either directly on evolution, or teaching in textbooks on biology, paleontology, and geology. Also I found books by scientists and doctors of philosophy puncturing many holes in the evolutionary hypothesis. Strangely, even the critics of evolution, being themselves scientific men, paradoxically accepted the very theory they so ably refuted."

Apparently, no one ever informed Mr. Armstrong that all sources are NOT created equal, or that some arguments are superior to others. It also appears that no one ever told him that a university library would be better for this kind of research than a public library - that he would have access to more of the latest thinking on any given subject in a university library than he would in a local public library. In Herbert's mind, his research was the most intensive that had ever been undertaken. His study would settle these questions for all time!

In addition to these personal revelations about Armstrong's narcissism and intellectual prowess, it was about this time that my father informed me about a conversation that he had had with Garner Ted Armstrong - before the masseuse and his messy exit from the Church of God International. To my shock and horror, GTA had confirmed to him that the rumors were true about his father's incestuous relationship with his sister! Prior to this, I had always dismissed the rumors and refused to look into the matter. I had assumed it was just sour grapes and character assassination. After my dad's bombshell, however, I became aware of the fact that there was a substantial body of circumstantial evidence which supported the accusation. So, Herbert Armstrong was a narcissist and an incestuous pedophile! He had also clearly divorced his second wife - it was a matter of public record. He wasn't even qualified to be a minister of Jesus Christ - let alone to be called an "apostle"!

In light of everything I had learned, it became clear to me that God had NEVER used Herbert Armstrong to reveal anything to anybody! "What about the success of the Worldwide Church?" my friends who were still entangled in Herbie's web of lies demanded. After all, Herbie had always pointed to PT circulation numbers, radio and television stations broadcasting The World Tomorrow, Ambassador College, and Ambassador IC Foundation, and income as proof that God was blessing his leadership of The Work. What we were never told, however, was that the Mormon Church and the Jehovah's Witnesses had an even greater reach and impact than we did. In fact, it turns out that financial and publishing success are NOT indicators of Divine favor! Bottom line, my apologies to the commentator referenced above - that dog won't hunt!

Keeping the Feast of Tabernacles in the Kingdom!

Herbert Armstrong and his followers have used a passage from the prophet Zechariah to "prove" that people will still be observing the Feast of Tabernacles after Christ returns. In that book, we read: "Then everyone who survives of all the nations that have come against Jerusalem shall go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the Feast of Booths. And if any of the families of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, there will be no rain on them. And if the family of Egypt does not go up and present themselves, then on them there shall be no rain; there shall be the plague with which the Lord afflicts the nations that do not go up to keep the Feast of Booths. This shall be the punishment to Egypt and the punishment to all the nations that do not go up to keep the Feast of Booths." (Zechariah 14:16-19, ESV) Well, what about it? Does this passage prove that Christians should be keeping the Feast of Tabernacles/Booths?

This post will demonstrate that Armstrong and his followers have completely ignored the context of this passage of Scripture and have misapplied and misinterpreted it so that they can use it in the capacity of one of their "prooftexts" for their contention that Christians are still obligated to observe certain provisions of Torah. Hence, we will examine the context of this passage within the book of Zechariah, and in the broader context of other passages which deal with the Feast of Tabernacles/Booths. In other words, we will use the whole Bible approach to properly understand this passage and demonstrate that Armstrong completely misunderstood and misapplied the meaning and import of this prophecy.

First, we must look at this passage's context within the book of Zechariah. Thus, backing up a few verses from the passage in question, we read: "Behold, a day is coming for the Lord, when the spoil taken from you will be divided in your midst. For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of battle. On that day his feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives that lies before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east to west by a very wide valley, so that one half of the Mount shall move northward, and the other half southward. And you shall flee to the valley of my mountains, for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azal. And you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him. On that day there shall be no light, cold, or frost. And there shall be a unique day, which is known to the Lord, neither day nor night, but at evening time there shall be light. On that day living waters shall flow out from Jerusalem, half of them to the eastern sea and half of them to the western sea. It shall continue in summer as in winter. And the Lord will be king over all the earth. On that day the Lord will be one and his name one." (Zechariah 14:1-9, ESV) Notice, that this is clearly referring to the return of Jesus Christ to this earth.

In the New Testament, we are informed that Christ and his apostles gathered on the Mount of Olives prior to his ascension to heaven. We read: "So when they had come together, they asked him, 'Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?' He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.' And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight. And while they were gazing into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white robes, and said, 'Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.' Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, a Sabbath day's journey away." (Acts 1:6-12, ESV) Thus, the two men in white robes confirmed Zechariah's prophecy of long ago - that someday Christ would return to the Mount of Olives to establish his kingdom over the entire earth.

This, of course, is also consistent with Christ's own statement that he came to this earth to fulfill the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 5:17). Indeed, the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are literally chocked-full of references to Christ doing just that - fulfilling the Law and the Prophets of the Hebrew Bible. As we have mentioned many times here, Christ and his apostles used the Hebrew Bible to teach people about HIM - they were the ONLY Scriptures available to them at the time (the New Testament had NOT been written yet)! In the Gospel of John, we read that "Philip found Nathanael and said to him, 'We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.'" (John 1:45, ESV) In the Gospel of Luke, we are informed that Christ told his disciples: "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.' Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem." (Luke 24:44-47, ESV)

Likewise, the Apostle Paul wrote to the saints of Colossae: "See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. Therefore, let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ." (Colossians 2:8-17, ESV) The NLT renders that last passage: "For these rules are only shadows of the reality yet to come. And Christ himself is that reality." In other words, the Sabbaths, festivals, and new moons pointed to Christ.

Now, we know that in ancient times, the Feast of Temporary Dwellings/Tabernacles/Booths memorialized the time that the children of Israel had wandered in the wilderness - living in temporary shelters, and the ingathering of the fall harvest in the Promised Land. What does that have to do with Jesus of Nazareth and his ministry? 

In the Gospel of John, we read: "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." (John 1:14, KJV) According to Blue Letter Bible, the Greek word translated here into English as "dwelt" literally means "to fix one's tabernacle, have one's tabernacle, abide (or live) in a tabernacle (or tent), tabernacle"! Notice how this same passage appears in some of the other English translations of the Bible: "So the Word became human and made his home among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness. And we have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son." (NLT) "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth." (NIV) "And the Word became flesh, and did tabernacle among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of an only begotten of a father, full of grace and truth." (YLT, Young's Literal Translation) So, like the Jews of old, this Jew from Nazareth temporarily pitched his tent/booth among his people!

Likewise, in the epistle to the Hebrews, we read that Jesus was "for a little while" made lower than the angels (Hebrews 2:9, ESV). Continuing, in that same passage, we read: "Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. Therefore, he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted." (Hebrews 2:14-18, ESV) Just like us, Jesus Christ tabernacled in the same flesh and blood, temporary dwelling, that each of us as humans currently inhabit!

Interestingly, the temporary nature of our current dwellings is a recurring theme in Scripture. Paul wrote to the saints at Corinth about the salvation that they had through Jesus Christ though it was currently contained in "jars of clay" (II Corinthians 4:7, ESV). A little later, in the same letter, he wrote: "For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands." (II Corinthians 5:1, NIV) In similar fashion, Peter wrote this about salvation through Jesus Christ: "Wherefore, I will not be careless always to remind you concerning these things, though, having known them, and having been established in the present truth, and I think right, so long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up in reminding [you], having known that soon is the laying aside of my tabernacle, even as also our Lord Jesus Christ did shew to me, and I will be diligent that also at every time ye have, after my outgoing, power to make to yourselves the remembrance of these things." (II Peter 1:12-15, YLT)

Alright, we've addressed the symbolism of the temporary dwelling, but what about the harvest aspect of this festival? Jesus equated his work in some of his parables to the harvest (see the Parable of the Sower and the Parable of the Weeds). In the Gospel of Matthew, we read: "And Jesus went throughout all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease and every affliction. When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, 'The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore, pray earnestly to the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest.'" (Matthew 9:35-38, ESV) Over and over again, Christ portrayed himself as a crop farmer or shepherd of flocks who expected his work to bear fruit or produce a harvest. After all, Scripture even referred to Jesus as the first of the first fruits of the great harvest!

Hence, as we have demonstrated that this festival pointed to Jesus Christ, we are ready to return to the passage in question and give it another look. In the fourteenth chapter of Zechariah, we read: "In the end, the enemies of Jerusalem who survive the plague will go up to Jerusalem each year to worship the King, the Lord of Heaven’s Armies, and to celebrate the Festival of Shelters. Any nation in the world that refuses to come to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of Heaven’s Armies, will have no rain. If the people of Egypt refuse to attend the festival, the Lord will punish them with the same plague that he sends on the other nations who refuse to go. Egypt and the other nations will all be punished if they don’t go to celebrate the Festival of Shelters." (Zechariah 14:16-19, NLT) Notice, that I chose to use the New Living Translation of this passage, because I believe it better conveys the intent of the Hebrew verb "hagag" which indicates celebrating rather than simply keeping or observing a day or time. Moreover, this same Hebrew verb is used in the twenty-third chapter of Leviticus to describe THIS festival - that the Israelites were expected to celebrate it (the same terminology is not used of the other festivals listed there).

Thus, when we put all of this together, Zechariah is clearly predicting a time when the whole earth will celebrate the fact that Jesus Christ tabernacled in the flesh and inaugurated the great harvest which will then be in full swing! Notice again, the language which the prophet used in this passage: (they) "will go up to Jerusalem each year to worship the King, the Lord of Heaven’s Armies, and to celebrate the Festival of Shelters." In other words, worshipping the king is considered an integral part of this particular celebration. Hence, we must conclude that Zechariah is referring to a celebration of Jesus Christ and what he has done for the whole earth, rather than a simple resurrection of the physical observance of one of the festivals of Torah! In short, this prediction is much more profound and meaningful than anything Herbert Armstrong or his followers ever imagined!

Thank you, Lord!

I am happy to announce that my extended family is finally free of the pernicious influence of Pastor Bill Watson of Medina, Ohio. True to form, over time, Bill showed his true colors to them and demonstrated that he was no friend to my deceased father or his offspring. Of course, my father's widow continues to associate with Bill and Marge and attend their Church (she hasn't spoken to me since my father's death). Even so, all of my father's progeny are now free of Bill's ministry. Hence, going forward, I will not be as interested in what Mr. Watson has to say, write, or do. For the sake of my own audience and the people who are still under his sway, I will continue to monitor his website from time to time and report on any outrageous developments from that direction, but my own kin and loved ones are FREE!

Jesus of Nazareth: A Man Emasculated

In the previous post, we demonstrated that Torah was focused on preventing the men of Israel from being emasculated. Indeed, we saw that the Law was addressed to men and was designed to protect their status, honor, and prerogatives within Israelite society. Conversely, we also observed that women were assigned an inferior and submissive role within that society, and that it was considered taboo for a man to assume any role associated with womankind.

Likewise, in past posts on this blog, we have noted how Jesus Christ came to this earth to fulfill Torah and the Prophets. Moreover, we have demonstrated in many of those posts that he did exactly that. Hence, it is only natural that we would feel compelled to examine exactly how this particular aspect of the Law pointed to him. In other words, how did this preoccupation with men and their proper role in society point to Jesus Christ?

We are told in the New Testament that Jesus was God's own Son, and that "He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power." (Hebrews 1:1-3, ESV) In the Gospel of John, we read that "the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men." (John 1:1-4, ESV) In other words, Jesus Christ was the perfect man/God!

Even so, the New Testament also makes very plain that Jesus was the antithesis of the male role protected by the commandments of Torah! When some of his disciples expressed a desire to be in leadership positions, Christ told them: "You know that those who are considered rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many." (Mark 10:42-45, ESV) A man acting in the capacity of a servant? Christ came to fulfill Torah and the Prophets? Weren't the children of Israel looking for a powerful Messiah to overthrow Roman rule and restore the Davidic Kingdom?

In the book of Isaiah, we read: "He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned—everyone—to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth. By oppression and judgment, he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people? And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth. Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore, I will divide him a portion with the many, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong, because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many and makes intercession for the transgressors." (Isaiah 53:2-12, ESV)

Jesus, the Son of God, the One through whom Father God created and sustains the universe, submitted himself to the Jewish religious authorities and the Roman overlords of Judaea. The armies of Heaven were at his command, but he never summoned them to fight on his behalf! Moreover, he taught his disciples that the poor in spirit would inherit the Kingdom, that the meek would inherit the earth, and that peacemakers would be called God's sons. He instructed those disciples "if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." (See the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5, ESV) He told them to "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." He declared: "So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets." (Matthew 7:12, ESV) And, wonder of wonders, he even interacted with women and treated them as co-heirs of the Kingdom (see Mark 5:24-33, Luke 7:36-50, 10:38-42, John 4:1-42, 11:1-44, 12:1-8, etc.)!

In short, Christ turned the traditional view of Israelite masculinity upside down! Indeed, the Apostle Paul was compelled to write: "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28, ESV) Now, I defy anyone to tell me that a Torah observant Jewish male could have written such a statement prior to the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth!

So, YES, Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled the Law and the Prophets. He also transformed the patriarchy of the Hebrew Bible. He was dishonored, abused, falsely accused, beaten, emasculated FOR US. Now, that is LOVE. He willingly submitted himself to the most humiliating and painful execution which the Romans could devise. Moreover, Torah declared that anyone who was hung on a tree was cursed. Once again, Jesus was the antithesis of the children of Israel's notion of masculinity and the rights and privileges which they believed were attached to that gender! This is the message of the New Testament. 

Torah: NOTHING Must Emasculate Men

Unfortunately, the commandments of Torah are too often presented in a format completely devoid of the very pertinent context of the society to which they were addressed. This has led to many imaginary problems and theological issues. For example, there are a number of commandments related to slavery, polygamy, and property rights which some folks have misinterpreted as Divine endorsements of behaviors which most folks consider to be immoral. In their proper context, these commandments simply reflect the reality of a society founded on male dominance, prestige, rights, privileges, and harsh treatment for those who did not enjoy this status within it. In other words, the existence of these commandments should NOT be regarded as a Divine endorsement of things like slavery, polygamy, primogeniture, misogyny, etc.!

Indeed, Torah is addressed first and foremost to males, and its primary interest is in outlining their rights and responsibilities relative to God's covenant with the children of Israel. After all, most of the commandments are addressed to the males within that society, and those same men were commanded to bear in their flesh the sign of that covenant (male circumcision). In the book of Genesis, we read: "And God said to Abraham, 'As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.'" (Genesis 17:9-14, ESV)

Moreover, as we have already suggested, many of the commandments of Torah were directly addressed to the MEN of Israel. Although it is not apparent in English translations, the Ten Commandments use masculine singular pronouns in Hebrew. Likewise, even in English, it is clear that the last commandment is addressed to the men. We read: "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor's." (Exodus 20:17, ESV)

This masculine preoccupation is even more apparent in the very next chapter of Exodus. We read there: "When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. If she does not please her master, who has designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has broken faith with her. If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her as with a daughter. If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights. And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money." (Exodus 21:7-11, ESV) Continuing, in the same chapter, we read: "When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money." (Exodus 21:20-12, ESV) Likewise, in the book of Deuteronomy, we read: "Three times a year all your males shall appear before the Lord your God at the place that he will choose: at the Feast of Unleavened Bread, at the Feast of Weeks, and at the Feast of Booths. They shall not appear before the Lord empty-handed. Every man shall give as he is able, according to the blessing of the Lord your God that he has given you." (Deuteronomy 16:16-17, ESV) At any rate, I think that we've demonstrated the point. And, although this phenomenon has been missed by a good many casual readers of the Bible down through the years, it is easily discernible in Torah if you're looking for it!

Now, unfortunately, this focus on Israelite men in Torah was also accompanied by a clearly inferior and subordinate role for most Israelite women. Notice this passage from Leviticus: "The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 'Speak to the people of Israel, saying, If a woman conceives and bears a male child, then she shall be unclean seven days. As at the time of her menstruation, she shall be unclean. And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. Then she shall continue for thirty-three days in the blood of her purifying. She shall not touch anything holy, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying are completed. But if she bears a female child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her menstruation. And she shall continue in the blood of her purifying for sixty-six days." (Leviticus 12:1-5, ESV) Still not convinced? A little later, in the same book, we read: "When a woman has a discharge, and the discharge in her body is blood, she shall be in her menstrual impurity for seven days, and whoever touches her shall be unclean until the evening. And everything on which she lies during her menstrual impurity shall be unclean. Everything also on which she sits shall be unclean. And whoever touches her bed shall wash his clothes and bathe himself in water and be unclean until the evening. And whoever touches anything on which she sits shall wash his clothes and bathe himself in water and be unclean until the evening. Whether it is the bed or anything on which she sits, when he touches it he shall be unclean until the evening. And if any man lies with her and her menstrual impurity comes upon him, he shall be unclean seven days, and every bed on which he lies shall be unclean." (Leviticus 15:19-24, ESV)

Think that all of this is outrageous and reflects poorly on YHWH? We must NOT forget that this Law was meant to address the children of Israel where they were - to make sense to their reality, NOT ours! Sure, by the U.S. and European standards of 2026, this stuff sounds outrageous; but it would have made absolute sense to these ancient people. Moreover, as we have already suggested, the fact that these commandments were introduced to regulate their behavior does NOT constitute an endorsement by God of their society or its behaviors! This is something that should be comprehensible even to us in our modern age. Our own government regulates the use and distribution of marijuana and alcohol, but that doesn't constitute an endorsement of their use by the government!

Now, although we might not be able to discern any positive benefit to society for many of these commandments, we must remember that the folks to whom they were addressed would have had a very different perspective on them. Indeed, from their perspective, it was extremely important to protect the status and honor of the men in their society. We see this as being especially apparent in the commandments dealing with human sexual relations. For example, in the book of Leviticus, we read: "None of you shall approach any one of his close relatives to uncover nakedness. I am the Lord. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, which is the nakedness of your mother; she is your mother, you shall not uncover her nakedness. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's wife; it is your father's nakedness. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your sister, your father's daughter or your mother's daughter, whether brought up in the family or in another home. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your son's daughter or of your daughter's daughter, for their nakedness is your own nakedness. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's wife's daughter, brought up in your father's family, since she is your sister. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's sister; she is your father's relative. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your mother's sister, for she is your mother's relative. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father's brother, that is, you shall not approach his wife; she is your aunt. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your daughter-in-law; she is your son's wife, you shall not uncover her nakedness. You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother's wife; it is your brother's nakedness. You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and of her daughter, and you shall not take her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter to uncover her nakedness; they are relatives; it is depravity. And you shall not take a woman as a rival wife to her sister, uncovering her nakedness while her sister is still alive." (Leviticus 18:6-18, ESV) Notice how all of these prohibitions were designed to protect the honor and dignity of the family's patriarch (by not uncovering his nakedness).

In fleshing out our understanding of these commandments, we must also never forget that women were viewed as being the property of their father, brother, or husband. In other words, the men in their lives were always in control of their destiny. We have already observed how a woman's spousal rights, childbearing, and menstrual cycles were viewed by Torah. Nevertheless, the perceived inferiority of women to men went even deeper within Israelite culture. Jacob's/Israel's daughter, Dinah, was viewed as having been humiliated and defiled by Shechem (Genesis 34). She was ruined for other men, and her brothers proceeded to kill all of the men connected to Shechem to avenge her ruination! You see, Israelite society believed that a man "HUMBLED" a woman when he had sexual intercourse with her (see Deuteronomy 21:14 and 22:9). How so? Because the man was looked upon as the active agent in the sexual act! He was the penetrator. The woman merely received what he gave her!

This understanding is especially important when we consider the two commandments prohibiting male on male sexual activity. In the same chapter as the above passage, we read: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination." (Leviticus 18:22, ESV) Later, in the same book, we read: "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them." (Leviticus 20:13, ESV) How does this infringe upon the dignity of a man or emasculate him? In other words, why is this prohibition given in Torah? It should be obvious to us by now! The man must NOT be emasculated. He must always be the penetrator. He must NEVER be the one who is penetrated! He must NEVER be placed in the passive role in a sexual relationship. He must NOT be humbled, humiliated, or ruined!

Still unconvinced? This reasoning is intrinsic to many of the stories of the Hebrew Bible. Think about the stories of Abraham and Sarah with Abimelech and Isaac and Rebekah with Abimelech. Think about the story of how Ham dishonored his father Noah by uncovering his nakedness (Genesis 9:20-27). What about the story of Lot and the two angels who visited him in Sodom? What about the narrative surrounding the Levite and his concubine? Indeed, in this context, I think that it would be especially instructive to take a look at these so-called hospitality narratives.

You know the story of Sodom. Two angels came to the city, and Lot invited them to spend the night in his home. Next, we read: "But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. And they called to Lot, 'Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.' Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, and said, 'I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.' But they said, 'Stand back!' And they said, 'This fellow came to sojourn, and he has become the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.' Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and drew near to break the door down. But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them and shut the door. And they struck with blindness the men who were at the entrance of the house, both small and great, so that they wore themselves out groping for the door." (Genesis 19:4-11, ESV)

There are a number of important elements to underscore here. Notice that the entire male population of the city came together to humiliate Lot's guests. It doesn't say that all of the males in the city were homosexuals. It does, however, clearly state that they were intent on gang raping Lot's visitors - "Bring them out to us, that we may know them." Their objective was to humble/humiliate/ruin Lot's guests! Notice too, that Lot offers his daughters as substitutes. In other words, he obviously believed that it was his prerogative to offer up his two daughters to the mob! After all, if anyone was going to be penetrated or humbled, it had to be a female!

Later, in the time prior to the establishment of the Kingdom of Israel, we read of a Levite and his concubine (a kind of second-class wife) who were traveling home and stopped to spend the night near the village of Gibeah. Fortunately, they came upon one old man who was willing to provide them lodging for the night in his home. Continuing in the story, we read: "As they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, worthless fellows, surrounded the house, beating on the door. And they said to the old man, the master of the house, 'Bring out the man who came into your house, that we may know him.' And the man, the master of the house, went out to them and said to them, “No, my brothers, do not act so wickedly; since this man has come into my house, do not do this vile thing. Behold, here are my virgin daughter and his concubine. Let me bring them out now. Violate them and do with them what seems good to you, but against this man do not do this outrageous thing.' But the men would not listen to him. So the man seized his concubine and made her go out to them. And they knew her and abused her all night until the morning. And as the dawn began to break, they let her go. And as morning appeared, the woman came and fell down at the door of the man's house where her master was, until it was light." (Judges 19:22-26, ESV)

Sound familiar? Once again, the obvious objective of the men of Gibeah was the humiliation of the Levite. There is absolutely no indication that the men of Gibeah were homosexuals. Once again, we see that the men believed the women to be more suitable candidates for humiliation than the said male. This time, however, the man actually sent his concubine out to the mob, and we are informed that they raped her all night long. In fact, we are told that the Levite found his concubine had died as a consequence of all of the abuse. Moreover, we are informed that the man cut up her body and sent a piece to each one of the tribes of Israel, and that a civil war ensued as a consequence of what had happened (and the tribe of Benjamin was almost exterminated in the process).

The bottom line? Women were clearly inferior to men, and a man must never be treated like a woman! In Deuteronomy, we read: "A woman shall not wear a man's garment, nor shall a man put on a woman's cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God." (Deuteronomy 22:5, ESV) In another passage, we read: "When men fight with one another and the wife of the one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of him who is beating him and puts out her hand and seizes him by the private parts, then you shall cut off her hand. Your eye shall have no pity." (Deuteronomy 25:11-12, ESV) In other words, "If that b-tch has the audacity to grab his junk, cut her hand off!" Men could divorce women, but there was no provision for a dissatisfied woman to get rid of an unwanted husband! (Deuteronomy 24:1-4) Indeed, a man could be excluded for ANYTHING that remotely equated him with the female gender. In one passage, we read: "No one whose testicles are crushed or whose male organ is cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord." (Deuteronomy 23:1, ESV) In yet another passage, we read: "None of the daughters of Israel shall be a cult prostitute, and none of the sons of Israel shall be a cult prostitute. You shall not bring the fee of a prostitute or the wages of a dog [male prostitute] into the house of the Lord your God in payment for any vow, for both of these are an abomination to the Lord your God." (Deuteronomy 23:17-18, ESV)

Thus, we have demonstrated that the prohibitions against male-on-male sex in Torah were intended to protect Israelite males from being emasculated. It was strictly a matter of how a man and a woman were perceived in Israelite society, and a man must never be placed on the same level with a female - period. After all, maintaining the honor and integrity of the men was paramount. A woman could be humbled, but a man must never be humbled or defiled in any way!

 

Putting It All Together: Christians and Torah

In the previous four posts, we examined a lot of scriptural passages in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. These passages have added to and enhanced the other understandings about the Law which this blog has explored over the last twelve years. To summarize, then, we have demonstrated that:

1) Torah was addressed to the children of Israel, NOT to anyone else.

2) They were instructed NOT to add to it or take anything away from it.

3) They were instructed to obey ALL of the commandments included in Torah.

4) The Law underscored their uniqueness among the peoples of the earth and marked them as YHWH's.

5) Both the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament portray that legislation as an inseparable whole - an indivisible body of laws.

6) Christ and his apostles were Torah observant Jews, and Jesus of Nazareth came to this earth to completely fulfill the requirements of Torah, which he accomplished on our behalf.

7) Christ identified the Two Greatest Commandments of Torah as encapsulating and fulfilling all of the individual commandments of Torah, including the Ten given at Mount Sinai.

This set of facts allows us to comprehend what happened at the Great Council of Jerusalem, what Paul wrote to the Romans and Galatians about the Law, and why God permitted Jerusalem and the Temple to be destroyed by the Romans. An event that rendered it impossible even for Jews to observe the tenets of Torah as originally written.

Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled the commandments of Torah, including the Two Great Commandments. His righteousness and sacrifice allow us to stand before Almighty God whole and clean. Moreover, if we truly accept what he has done for us (and with the help of the Holy Spirit), Christians will want to love God with their whole hearts and love each other as themselves. Christ's work wrought a change in our nature, and obedience is a consequence of what he did for us. It doesn't save us or earn us anything. HE did all of that and gifted us with a glorious future. Our obedience is merely the evidence that what HE did worked!

Christ and His Apostles Observed the Sabbath and the Holy Days

Yes, Jesus and his apostles observed the Sabbath, Holy Days, and avoided unclean meats.

They were Jews, living under the terms of God's Covenant with the children of Israel. They were also circumcised and never wore clothing made out of blended materials. They observed Temple protocols. They tithed, never entered the Holy of Holies, and presented the appropriate offerings demanded by Torah. They observed the appropriate protocols for bodily discharges, skin diseases, and mildew. They came to Jerusalem and the Temple to observe the three pilgrimage festivals. They didn't round off the corners on their beards or have any tattoos. They also didn't eat rare meat or consume any fat.

The argument that Christians should observe parts of the Law because Christ and his apostles observed them is like saying Americans should abide by the terms of Magna Carta or the Articles of Confederation. No, American citizens are expected to abide by the terms of the United States Constitution - the successor to those other documents and the current standard. Likewise, we would think it absolutely absurd for a group of Americans to observe all laws related to taxation, while simultaneously refusing to obey any traffic laws. We simply don't get to pick and choose which laws we will obey and which ones we'll ignore!

Protestants and Catholics also cherry pick Torah. So, because they do it - it's ok for me to do likewise? Jesus Christ identified Two Great Commandments (Love God and love each other). He said that those two commandments comprehended the whole of Torah and constituted the foundation of God's Law. In other words, in this instance, Christ did the picking. Lonnie didn't pick. The Pope didn't pick. Martin Luther or John Calvin didn't pick! 

Moreover, as was noted in previous posts here, Torah was addressed to the children of Israel - NOT to the world at large! In the most recent post over at As Bereans Did, we read: "Some people say, "Look what the Lord says to us," as they turn to Leviticus. Well, I have some bad news for you. The Lord didn't say that to us. He said that to ancient Israel." Jesus Christ said that he came to fulfill Torah and the Prophets. In other words, THEY POINT TO HIM! That is their value for us. ABD went on to note: "The Old Testament was not written to us; it was written for us. Big difference." 

In the Gospel of John, we are told that Jesus went to Jerusalem during the celebration of the Feast of the Dedication (Feast of Lights, Hanukkah). Does that mean we (Christians) are expected to observe it? Didn't Christ say that we are supposed to follow his example? "That's not what he was talking about!" the Legalists will snap back. "EXACTLY," is my response. 

Christ came to this earth to fulfill God's Law for Jews and Gentiles. He did. He fulfilled it perfectly - as NO other human has EVER been able to duplicate. Moreover, his righteousness/innocence was the perfect cure for our sinfulness/guilt before God. Likewise, his original disciples were ALL Jews - born under the terms of the Old Covenant (Torah). Hence, we would expect to find them observing the commandments of Torah - ALL OF THEM, and we do! Even so, it does NOT follow that we (Gentile Christians) should be doing likewise in 2026! Indeed, a good many things have happened since then: Christ's death, burial, resurrection, and ascension to heaven; the coming of the Holy Spirit and the establishment of the ekklesia; the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple (which I don't believe was happenstance), and the reformation of Judaism.

Thus, we have seen that the argument that Christ and his disciples were Torah observant Jews is completely irrelevant to the notion of a Christian's obligation to that legislation! That's worth repeating - let it sink in: The fact that Christ and his disciples were Torah observant Jews is completely irrelevant to the notion of a Christian's obligation to that legislation!