The Abrahamic Covenant—Foundation of the New Covenant

Old Semitic Man

The Abrahamic and Mosaic Covenants Are Subsections of the Torah Covenant (or the Old Covenant)

The Torah, the first five books of the Bible, is the chronicle of YHVH giving man instructions to follow, and of his entering into covenantal relationships with men and men either keeping those agreements or breaking them.

The word Torah means “instructions, teaching or precepts; specifically in biblical context: the teachings or instructions of YHVH to lead men into a righteous relationship with him through covenantal agreement.” The Torah is a giant b’rit or covenant. The Torah in a number of places even refers to itself by the Hebrew word b’rit or covenant. We see this in the following passages:

Exodus 34:27, And YHVH said unto Moses, Write you these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.

Deuteronomy 29:1, These are the words of the covenant, which YHVH commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, beside the covenant which he made with them in Horeb.

The Torah is not unlike an instruction manual that one might receive from the manufacturer of an automobile, computer or some such device to help the buyer to operate his new purchase in a manner that allows him to receive years of trouble-free service. The Torah is YHVH’s instruction manual to help man to live in a way that brings life and blessing; it helps man to enter into a loving relationship with his Creator and to have a trouble-free relationship with his fellow man.

Within the first five books of the Torah-covenant are several smaller covenantal subdivisions such as the Abrahamic and the Sinaitic or Mosaic Covenants. The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (TWOT) describes this as follows, “Deuteronomy 29:13–14 shows the Sinaitic Covenant was an extension of the Abrahamic ­Covenant…. The Sinai renewal merely stressed man’s responsibility where the Abrahamic Covenant emphasized Elohim’s promise… The Priestly Covenant of Num 25:12–13, the Davidic Covenant of 2 Sam 7 and the New Covenant of Jer 31:31 are all administrative aspects of the same covenant, Elohim’s Covenant of grace. This covenant reaches its Continue reading

 

The Rainbow—A Double Edged Sword

rainbow

Genesis 9:13, Rainbow. The rainbow is a glorious symbol of two opposing spiritual realities and forces relating to Elohim’s righteousness and holiness. It speaks of his grace in that he will not bring the cleansing judgment of water on the earth again. At the same time, it speaks of his judgment against the evil of the pre-flood world.

When the modern homosexual movement has appropriated the rainbow as its symbol, it fails to realize that the rainbow is a double edged sword representing both the mercy and the judgment of Elohim. It’s both ironic and prophetic that in looking to this as their representative symbol, homosexuals are unwittingly recognizing and even declaring the ultimate judgments of a righteous and set-apart Elohim against man’s wickedness and rebellion including the sin of homosexuality.

Although Elohim promised to never again judge man for his wickedness through drowning him in water and at the same time cleansing the earth of man’s wickedness, he will, at the end of the age, judge men by fire and at the same time purify the earth of the wickedness men have committed on it (2 Pet 3:7 cp. Isa 51:6; Rev 20:15; Matt 25:41). Water only partially cleans the surface of things. Fire cleanses more deeply.

It is necessary for the earth to experience a deep cleaning in preparation for it to be a suitable habitation for Elohim and his glorified sons and daughters in the New Jerusalem on the new earth.

 

Noah and the Flood from a Allegorical and Prophetic Perspective

Noah's Ark

Genesis 6–8, Noah’s flood provides allegorical insights relating to end-times prophecy. In Matthew 24:37, Yeshua compares the end times to the days of Noah. The story of Noah has allegorical implications that give hints about end-times prophecy.

In 1 Peter 3:18–22, we learn that the story of Noah is also a picture of salvation and water baptism. Noah is a prophetic type of Yeshua.

To start with, Noah building the ark is a prophetic picture of the redeemed believer working out his own salvation (Phil 2:12), yet while doing so according to YHVH’s exact plans or specifications (e.g., repentance from sin, faith in Yeshua, baptism for the remission of sins, and faithful obedience to YHVH’s commandments).

Noah builds an ark of safety from Elohim’s wrath or judgments against sinful man. The ark is a metaphorical picture of the believer’s salvation, and Noah is a spiritual picture of Yeshua. The flood is also a picture of water baptism for the remission of sins, which ceremonially pictures the death of the old sinful man, and the birth of the new spiritual man (Rom 6:3–6). Unregenerated sinful or carnal men perished in the floodwaters in Noah’s day, while the new, redeemed man (as pictured by Noah and his family) who had found grace in the sight of Continue reading

 

Giants, Demons, Nephilim and the Book of Enoch

toon cyclop barbar

Genesis 6:4, Giants. Heb. Nephilim. This Hebrew word is found only one other place in the Bible. This is in Num 13:33 where it is used twice and where the nephilim are called to the descendants of Anak (see also Num 13:28; Deut 9:2; Josh 15:14; Judg 1:20). Scholars most often translate this word either as giants, mighty ones or fallen ones. Scholars disagree as to meaning of the root form of this verb and whether the stem means “those that cause others to fall down” or “fallen ones.” BDB confesses that the basic etymology of the word is questionable. At issue, according to The TWOT, is whether the root of nephilim is nepel meaning “untimely birth or miscarriage” (resulting in the production of superhuman monstrosities), or the more likely from the root napal, which relates to other Hebrew words meaning “be wonderful, strong or mighty.” The LXX (as apparently do the majority of the Targums) translates nephilim as giants, though The TWOT admits this may be misleading. This word is of unknown origins and may even mean “heros” or “fierce warriors.”

Adding to the confusion of this passage is the ambiguity as to whether the nephilim are the sons of Elohim or their offspring.

Whatever the meaning of nephilim and/or sons of Elohim may be, two schools of thought have prevailed in Jewish and Christian circles as to who these people were. One line of reasoning asserts that they were the children of Seth, while another presents the idea that the sons of Elohim were the offspring of sexual unions between fallen angels or demons and the daughters of men (called incubus) resulting in half-breed demon-humans (called cambion). This idea has its origins in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Enochic literature, the Old Testament pseudepigraphal writings including the Book of Jubilees (Jub 7:21–24). Some early church historians (e.g. Tertullian) shared this belief as do the Aramaic Targum Pseudo-Jonathan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephilim). Some Bible commentators view Jude 1:6–7 as substantiating this viewpoint. 

Some scholars have taken the term “sons of Elohim” to mean “angels,” and in this case fallen angels or demons, thus ostensibly substantiating the fallen angel-women union idea. Every other place beside Gen 6:2 where the actual term “sons of Elohim” is found in the Tanakh (OT), it refers to angels. This is the case in Job 1:6, 2:1; and 38:7. On the other hand, there are several passages in the Tanakh that have similar terms such as “sons of Elohim” that refer to men (e.g. “children/sons of the YHVH your Elohim,” Deut 14:1; “sons of the most high”; and Ps 82:6; “sons of the Living El,” Hos 1:10). Beyond that, there are numerous passages where Elohim refers to the nation of Israel or certain Israelites as his son (Exod 4:22–23; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 17:14; 22:10; 28:6; Jer 31:20, etc. ). In several biblical passages in the Testimony of Yeshua (NT), the term “sons of God/Elohim” refers to humans (John 1:12; Rom 8:14, 19; Phil 2:15; 1 John 3:1, 2). Based on this, some biblical researchers take the term “sons of Elohim” and declare it to be synonymous with other similar, but not exact biblical terms. Whether these terms are equivalent in the minds of the biblical writers or not is a debate that has been raging among biblical scholars for hundreds of years.

On the meaning of the term nephilim, since the biblical linguistic evidence seems unclear in the minds of many Bible students as to the exact meaning of the word nephilim, let us now consider the opinion of the ancients on this subject to see how they understood the meaning of the word. Perhaps this will bring some light onto this confusion.

The idea that nephilim is a result of the union between demons and women is largely promoted in the Ethiopian Book of 1 Enoch, which, though mentioned in the Scriptures (Jude 14), the version that is currently extant is barely 500 years old and is of questionable origins and, in some instances, contradicts the Bible. The biblical Enoch lived more than 5000 years before the oldest extant copy of the modern book that bears his name. Therefore, some modern scholars reason that it is highly unlikely that the current book of 1 Enoch is the same as the one that is mentioned in the Bible, and, therefore, discredit its content. 

On the other hand, modern biblical scholars such as Dr. Michael Heiser in his recent well-researched books, The Unseen Realm—Recovering the Supernatural View of the Bible and Reversing Hermon—Enoch, the Watchers, and the Forgotten Mission of Jesus Christ, gives strong and eye-opening linguistic, historical and biblical evidence to the validity of the book of 1 Enoch.

Moreover, in further substantiation of the ancient origins of the book of 1 Enoch and the veracity of its account pertaining to the sons of Elohim being fallen angels, confirming Heiser’s assertions, the first century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus assumes that the nephilim were evil giants and the offspring of the union of angels and women. He writes,

…for many angels of God accompanied with women, and begat sons that proved unjust, and despisers of all that was good, on account of the confidence they had in their own strength, for the tradition is that these men did what resembled the acts of those whom the Grecians call giants [i.e. the demigod Titans].” (Ant. 1.3.1)

Here Josephus indicates that the idea that the fallen angels were the fathers of the giants is the general opinion of antiquity and thus favors the idea that the word nephilim should carry the meaning of giants. Philo of Alexandria, the first century Jewish philosopher, expresses the same opinion (Allegorical Interpretation, “On the Giants,” chap. IV.16; XIII.32). 

Moreover, the Jewish scholars who translated the Hebrew Tanakh into Greek during the intertestamental period translated the Hebrew word nephilim from Gen 6:4 as giants (Gr. gigantes) and not as “fallen ones.” 

 

Did Adam and Eve’s children commit incest?

Genesis 5:4, Sons and daughters. How did Adam and Eve’s children have children without committing incest, which is a sin according to the Torah (Deut 27:22). Does this fact prove the inconsistency of the Torah, thus invalidating it as a standard to be followed today?

As an example of this belief, one Christian teacher claims that YHVH’s law, “changes all the time.” As ‘proof’ he points to incest between Adam and Eve’s sons who had to marry their sisters for life to continue. Another example of this, the teacher claims, is Abraham marrying his half sister. Theses examples of incest appear to be direct contradiction of Deut 27:22, where we see the command that those who lie with their close family members will be cursed.

My response is as follows:

This teacher’s logic is very weak. This is arguing from a weak position and trying to leverage it into a strong argument. This a fallacious or specious argument, and shows little understanding of the rules of Biblical interpretation or basic logic. To take a weak or obscure verse out of the Bible and to use it as a pretext to disprove the validity of the rest of Scripture is a dishonest method of interpretation and fails to pass the scrutiny of solid scholarship.

First, it’s fallacious to take one obscure example out of the Scriptures and then use it to attempt to invalidate thousands of others strong, direct passages about the validity and inviolate nature of the Torah. There are so many scriptures to the last book of the Bible that shows that Torah is the standard of righteousness by which all humans are to live and by which YHVH will judge humans.

Second, underlying the whole of Torah is the heart, mind and will of Elohim. Torah reflects the character and nature of the Creator. Torah is a vast ocean or universe because it’s the mind of Elohim, which is limitless. Humans only have Continue reading

 

What is man and what is he to do?

peasant silhouette on white background

Genesis 3:23, To till/work [Heb. abad] the ground [Heb. adamah] from which he was taken. Adam means “man, mankind, ground, land, and is a cognate to adom meaning “red,” and relates to the ruddiness of man’s complexion. According to The TWOT, this word has to do with the man as being created in Elohim’s image, the crown of his creation.

In this verse, Elohim commissioned Adam to work or to serve the earth/adamah.

In a homiletic sense, this command of YHVH could be construed to mean that Adam/man who is spiritually rough and ruddy, yet who is created in the image of Elohim, has been commissioned to work on himself to work on and to conquer his [base] sin nature and to bring himself into conformity with the image of YHVH.

Another facet of this idea could be that through the experiences and struggles of hard work, man will learn to overcome his fallen sin nature and rise to the higher calling of becoming like Elohim in nature. In a sense, hard work is part of man’s redemption process.

In a most fundamental sense, YHVH created man to serve or take care of the earth. Therefore, agriculture and horticulture are the professions that are the closest to YHVH’s original purpose for man.

 

Where are you?

La decisin correcta

Genesis 3:9–13, Where are you? Elohim asks Adam and Eve direct and specific questions, but instead of taking personal responsibility and answering the questions, they defend themselves, make excuses, justify themselves, blame shift, and accuse others including blaming Elohim. When confronted with their sin, humans have been doing this ever since—defending self and ego at all expenses. This is the result of the taint of sin and this behavior has been passed on from one generation to the next. The Spirit-led person must counter this proclivity of the soul to justify, excuse and obfuscate one’s sin.

Furthermore, when YHVH asked the first humans where they were after they had sinned, he wasn’t asking them where they were physically. Being omniscient, he knew this already. Instead, he was asking them them, “Where are you spiritually in your relationship with me in regards to obedience to the instructions in righteousness I gave you to obey?” This is the same questions the Creator is still asking men to this day.