A few things I can’t help but notice in study:

1. That pretty much all we need to know is already revealed in the first few chapters of Genesis, for example: the steps God takes to move creation (and our submitted spirits and lives) from a state of chaos and ‘choshek’ to shalom and Shabbat (and the pattern we are meant to follow); the way we fall (religion – our inclination to ‘shema’ any other word than God’s); the dark side of our free will, that is, our desire to be ‘god’ in our own lives, which results in our rejection of God; and His incredible and inexplicable mercy and compassion in the face of that rebellion.  It almost sounds blasphemous, but it seems a picture of a humble God, which seems contradictory to common understanding of what God ‘should be’.  Yet if this is so, and we are ‘made in the image of God’ then shouldn’t we be seeking to live from a mind/will/life that is also this kind of humble, compassionate, merciful?  It really seems to emphasize the critical need for humility and patience with each other as fellow sinners (or prone-to-sin-ners), instead of the usual condescending or critical or dismissive attitude we often hold with each other

2. The apparent contradiction between the utterly rebellious, rejecting, self-justifying ‘pass the blame’ actions and seeming mind-set of Adam and Eve (they never are recorded as having repented)…and God’s seeming actions of ignoring his own conviction and sentence (death) on them, yet He commands Joshua to destroy the inhabitants of Canaan, not only the adults, but the children, babies, animals.  Could they possibly be more guilty than Adam and Eve?  This is jarring and it is often hard to resist trying to explain it, it’s a trust issue at this point that God knows more of the details than I do.  But it is still there waiting for possible illumination. 

3. That there are consistent patterns taught in Torah that have to do with numbers…2, 3 and 7 for example

The number two, for example: the second day of creation isn’t called ‘good’ until the events of day three are initiated; there are two brothers or two wives…and there is a right to a blessing that belongs to the first, but is taken, given, stolen or rejected and it is the second who receives and keeps that right.  Cain/Abel, Jacob/Esau, Leah/Rachel…and then the interesting comment in 1 Cor 15:45 about the first and second ‘Adam’.  According to this text, the first Adam rejected his blessing (that was to be extended to all humankind) and the last Adam received and remained in it and through him, all the other righteous ones find rebirth and renewing; the reversal of what happened in the first Adam. 

4. From all that is written about Jesus it does seem a real possibility that somehow there is a picture of scattering (exile) in the first Adam and regathering (returning) in the last Adam.  Both completely human, but both somehow also unique from all other humans in their original state, and one chose death but the other chose life. Hope and life were rejected by the first but revealed through the last.  And the key seems to be repentance, humility and obedience…which isn’t a new thing!  Though if this is so, that Jesus is the ‘last Adam’ in this sense, then why isn’t there evidence to support it?  The world today seems no better off in any way than the world then, different, but not better. There were ‘tzadiks’ before Jesus and there are ‘tzadiks’ after…why isn’t there a real difference?  In the grand scheme, the concept of Jesus really fits, but the evidence is kind of shaky.

A Work in Progress

I hold the following understanding:

• God exists

• There is only ONE God   

• The Law of God was given at creation, and known and obeyed by Adam, Noah, Abraham etc

• The Word of God was given to Israel as the manifesto of their new nation, at Mt Sinai, where it was recorded by ‘the finger of God’ (which may or may not be an idiom, but which in any case attaches a very specific and distinct  importance to the ten words) and is divine and the ‘plumb-line’ for the rest of the Law as well as in determining how to interpret or accept other writings

• The Torah (first 5 books) contain the teaching of God, and understood in relation to the ten words

• The Prophets call people back to the Law, they don’t add new teaching

• The Psalms and Writings are descriptive of the Law and a lawful life, but don’t add new teaching

• The Rabbinic writings and the ‘New Testament’ may contain good description of a lawful life, but don’t add new teaching and aren’t necessary to understand the Law, and if they contradict or appear to contradict the Law, they’re either misunderstood or in error

• The teaching of God is understood as a whole unit and not bits and pieces, and it makes common sense

• The Law teaches how to honour God and how to show that honour in relationships with fellow creatures

• The ‘New Covenant’ is the Law written not on tablets of stone, but on thinking minds and expressed in daily life        

• I reject any concept of God not taught in Torah; including ‘trinity’, God being or becoming human, and of any other divine being (‘Satan’) holding power in opposition to God for the souls of men 

• We're meant to learn Torah individually but also as a community; our Teacher is our Father; there's a need to remain humble and teachable in all states of knowledge, arrogance kills communication and stifles growth

Psalm 23 verse 4 part 2

Psalm 23 isn’t just a pretty poem written by a post-card perfect shepherd, sitting on a grassy slope in the sunshine.  It’s a gritty testimonial of active trust in God while living through severe stress. 

Tradition has it that David wrote this Psalm while on the run from Saul, who wanted to kill him.  The words of the psalm definitely do support such a tradition. He wrote about facing death, being ‘cut off’ from life.  This is what the expression ‘shadow of death’ as used elsewhere consistently means.  His enemy Saul was intent on killing him, on consigning his soul to ‘Hades’ the place of ‘shadows’.  He was ‘walking through’ this valley of shadows, of imminent death. 

But David had power too, he wasn’t helpless.  What was his power?  His trust in his God. David knew God was greater than Saul.  David had more than one opportunity to kill Saul, remember?  What kept him from just eliminating his oppressor?  Even his own men urged him to do it.  Surely to eliminate the competition would clear the way to the throne?  David faced a physical danger from Saul.  But he also faced perhaps even greater spiritual danger from his own desire to act contrary to trusting in God.

And the men of David said to him, "Here is the day of which the LORD said to you, 'Behold, I will give your enemy into your hand, and you shall do to him as it shall seem good to you.'"

So what kept him from it?  He did go stealthily towards Saul with a knife in his hand.  But something stopped him, and instead of cutting off Saul’s life, he cut off the corner of Saul’s robe. 

And afterward David’s heart struck him, because he had cut off a corner of Saul’s robe. He said to his men, "The LORD forbid that I should do this thing to my lord, the LORD’s anointed, to put out my hand against him, seeing he is the LORD’s anointed." So David persuaded his men with these words and did not permit them to attack Saul.

See how he was under pressure to take for himself?  Instead of trusting that God would establish him in God’s own time and in God’s own way…David was under great pressure (temptation even) to take what didn’t belong to him.  Doesn’t this sound familiar?  It should.  Both Adam and Eve (Gen 3) and Jesus (Mark 4) faced similar situations of temptation to take something that according to human common-sense, seemed good.  But in each situation, the temptation was really to act in a way that denied trust in God. 

God anointed Saul as king.  And only God could take the king-ship away.  That wasn’t David’s job.  And he understood this because of his trust in God.  David’s trust translated into trusting and obedient action.  He knew that his only deliverance was to trust in God to keep, provide and bless him.  And that God would do this through His Law; that obedience to God’s word was what would protect and deliver David.  So David allowed his trust in God to determine his actions.

David knew that as long as he trusted God, he could count on God's help to keep him from acting sinfully.  God's 'rod and staff' of correction and direction encouraged and reassured David that he didn't have to fear giving in to the temptation to act on his own understanding.

So back to Psalm 23, reading it with this situation in mind. 

Even when I must walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no danger, for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff reassure me. 

Pharisees and Sadducees and the soul after death

The following is an interesting bit that’s quoted (in part) and edited (slightly) from a random website I came across while looking up something else…

The first-century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus wrote about the Pharisees being believers in reincarnation. (As a matter of interest, Paul was a Pharisee).  Josephus wrote about the Pharisees' belief that the souls of evil men are punished after death and the souls of good men are "removed into other bodies" and will have "power to revive and live again."

From time to time throughout Jewish history, there was a persistent belief about dead prophets returning to life through reincarnation. The Sadducees rejected these Persian concepts of resurrection and all Hellenistic influences involving reincarnation. They accepted only the orthodox Hebrew belief in Sheol. So there were a variety of influences going on in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus.

When Jesus began his ministry, many people wondered if he was the reincarnation of one of the prophets. From Luke 9: “And he asked them, "Who do the crowds say that I am?" And they answered, "John the Baptist. But others say, Elijah, and others, that one of the prophets of old has risen."

Throughout his ministry, Jesus taught people about the true resurrection - a spiritual rebirth within a living person. Thus, when Jesus stated that he was the resurrection and the life, he was teaching them about a rebirth of the spirit - not into a new body - as when we are born from our mother's womb - but a rebirth of our spirit within the body we now inhabit. Jesus was distinguishing between what was believed in those days concerning an afterlife, and the teaching concerning a spiritual change within us that can lead to liberation (in THIS life!) He was making a distinction between "the resurrection of the body" (returning to life from physical death) and "the resurrection of the spirit" (returning to life from spiritual death). This confusion concerning Jesus teachings is documented in John 3 when Jesus had to explain to Nicodemus the difference between physical rebirth and spiritual rebirth.

(End of edited quote) The part that really struck me is underlined.  It brings up some related questions.  First, the question is what exactly is meant by reincarnation?  Secondly, what exactly is (and isn't) meant by our 'spirit'?  It also brings up a question of how we traditionally understand the teaching of Jesus.  Do we properly understand what he actually taught?  Did he consistently teach that the resurrection means 'a spiritual change within us (NOW) that can lead to a liberation (life)'?  This change of course, would be a real and tangible thing, there would be identifiable evidence of such spiritual change...by an identifiable change in one's behaviour, attitude and actions.  Or did he teach about some future event that would result in life in an indefinable 'heaven'? This of course could not be proven, as nobody had ever gone there and come back.

Seems to me that Jesus might more logically have taught the former.

A few questions to keep in mind while studying... 

Psalm 23 verse 4 part 1

Even when I must walk through the darkest valley, I fear no danger, for you are with me; your rod and your staff reassure me.

Greek:

For if even I should go in the midst of the shadow of death, I shall not be afraid of evils, for you with me are.  Your rod and your staff they comfort me. 

I spent most of my study time on this verse, dissecting each word, searching out how it was used in the Scripture, and also if and how it was used in the Torah.  This passage seems the heart of the psalm.  The verses before speak of God, as do the verses that follow it.  This verse seems to speak more personally of the writer. 

Key words and terms in the verse are ‘valley of the shadow of death’, ‘fear no evil’, ‘your rod and your staff’ and ‘comfort me’. 

What seems peculiar to this verse is the traditional interpretation which gives the impression of David ‘fearing’ or reverencing something with awe, of being afraid of some vague ‘evil’, right after he’s been so very clear that God is His shepherd.  Shepherded sheep don’t fear things when they’re with their shepherd, they only fear when they’re away from their shepherd, when he’s not in their sight.  So why, if David has firmly established his trust in the provision of YHVH, does he speak of fear of something else?

The term ‘shadow of death’ isn’t one found in Torah.  It’s found most often in Job (9 times) and there, seems to refer to things that are unknown or unseen, primarily what happens after death.  The ‘land of darkness and the shadow of death’ (Job 10:21) speak of Hades, the place souls were considered to go after death. Remember that Job was facing severe calamity and quite possibly his death.

In Psalm 44, David speaks of the ‘shadow of death’, the pattern of this psalm is very much like the pattern of psalm 23.  He begins by expressing his sure trust in God.  Then suddenly the tone shifts to ‘now You have rejected and humbled us…my face is covered with shame’.  He seems to ask ‘Why?’ expressing a great unknown.  ‘We had not forgotten you, we had been faithful to your covenant’.  Yet ‘you have broken us, you have covered us with the shadow of death’. Here the 'shadow of death' seems to refer to being cut off from God's provision, presence, love and care.

In Psalm 107, David speaks of the shadow of death as imprisonment, bondage or slavery, another picture of being ‘cut off’ from the land and from God’s provision.  Isaiah 9:2 also has this kind of reference.  So does Jeremiah 13:15-17, ‘Give glory to God before He cause darkness, before your feet stumble…while you look for light, he turns it to the shadow of death, and makes it gross darkness…the Lord’s flock is carried away captive.’ Jeremiah 2:6 refers to the time of wandering in the desert, in ‘a land of deserts and pits,  a land of drought and the shadow of death, a land that no one crossed and where no one dwelt’.  Amos 5:8 speaks of God who ‘turns the shadow of death or deep darkness into the morning and darkens the day into night…who calls for the waters of the sea and pours them out onto the face of the earth…who causes sudden destruction’. 

None of these references are about a traditional concept of ‘evil’ being a satanic being or beings causing destruction or calamity.  So in its context, that’s probably not the ‘evil’ David refers to here either.

Sheep

From various sources:

Sheep are highly social herd creatures. They naturally seek a leader, on their own; they’re prone to wander.  Social isolation is highly stressful for them, as is contact with humans. They are greatly affected by the quality of the handling they receive.

Sheep are easily influenced by a shepherd who provides an effective, calming presence. They need the most care of all livestock in that they constantly require fresh water and fresh pasture. Their best water source is the early morning dew.  They like to rest a lot, and they don’t like to be handled, as in being sheared or cleaned. 

Sheep are creatures of habit who can get into ‘ruts’, and can be jealous and competitive for dominance.  They stampede easily and are vulnerable to ‘mob psychology’.  With little or no means of self-defense, in real or perceived danger they panic and run, and are vulnerable to frustration, pests and hunger.  They’re easily killed by enemies, and can even die of panic.  Too much wool can cause them to flip over on their back, where they’re helpless and unable to right themselves. They will die of starvation if not turned over by the shepherd. 

Psalm 23 verse 3

He gives new life to my soul: he is my guide in the ways of righteousness because of his name.

He restores my strength. He leads me down the right path for the sake of his reputation.

My rough translation from Hebrew:

My breath, my vitality, the image of He on me is restored, from the inside out.  (There seems a kind of play on words here…literally it says His breath breaths into me again, as it did on the day man was created). He guides me on the track, the entrenched circumvallation, cleansing and clearing, justifying and vindicating me, with the goal and purpose that I heed, and testify and respond as visible, earthly witness and sign of His renown, of His loftiness.

Greek:

My life he returned, he guided me upon roads of righteousness because of his name.

Drawn from various commentaries:

The psalmist is confident that God takes him down paths that will ultimately lead to something beneficial, not destructive.

The ways in which God guides me in life – both the “resting” and the “changes” – are intended not only for my physical well-being, but also for my spiritual and moral welfare; thus, “He restores my soul.”

“He restores my soul” also refers to Torah study, as David also wrote: “The Torah of Hashem is whole, restoring the soul” (Psalm 19:8).

It is known that the Torah emphasizes justice for both the individual and society. It is therefore not surprising that David proclaimed: “He leads me on paths of justice for His Name’s sake.”

The Hebrew word for justice in this verse is tzedek – a word which also refers to righteousness.

“Hashem will establish you as His holy people, as He swore to you, if you observe the requirements of Hashem, your God, and you walk in His ways. Then all the peoples of the earth will see that the Name of Hashem is proclaimed over you, and they will revere Hashem – because of you.” (Deuteronomy 28: 9,10)

We, the people of the Torah, are to live our lives in the spirit of this Name.  Our Shepherd leads us on the paths of tzedek for the sake of the compassionate, loving, and life-giving attributes associated with His Name.

Psalm 23 verse 2

He takes me to lush pastures, he leads me to refreshing water.

According to commentary, David is emphasizing that God’s provision is lush and refreshing, it is abundant and perfect.  The sense is that God allows His sheep to access not only what they need, but to receive it in abundance.

From Greek:

In the place of tender shoots, there he encamped me.  At the water of rest, he nourished me. (This one is my favourite!)

The Greek word that’s translated ‘encamped me’ means tabernacle, nest, take up residence, lodge, rest.  The Greek word translated ‘nourished me’ here also means to bring to maturity, to nurture, to cherish and train up. 

This is (I think) a rare case of the Greek being more picturesque than the Hebrew!

Psalm 23 verse 1

A psalm of David. The Lord is my shepherd, I lack nothing.

A Psalm. Of David. The Lord takes care of me as his sheep; I will not be without any good thing.

My own rough translation from the Hebrew:

A song of the beloved.  The One who exists, who has existed and who will exist, shepherds without diminishing.

Interlinear translation from the Greek (LXX):

A psalm to David.  The Lord tends me, and not one thing lacks for me.

Some commentary from various sources about this verse or particular words in it:

The word for ‘shepherd’ goes beyond merely feeding, guarding and guiding the sheep.  It implies rulership; a relationship of provision and authourity to receiving and obedience.  Even within this authourity, a shepherd is the sheep’s companion and true friend.  The Hebrew word for shepherd is ra’ah, interestingly, the Hebrew word for evil is ra.  The meanings given for ra’ah include idolater, devour, evil entreat, also wander and waste. 

The Strong’s number for ra’ah (shepherd) is H7462, a primitive root and a verb.  A related word is re’eh (H7463) a friend of the king.

The statement made in this verse establishes that the God who made Adam in His image, can be entirely trusted to rule over him/us in a way that is only for his/our good.  That even through adversity, we can continue to trust in God’s good provision.

Psalm 23 - Background and one Jewish translation

A little background to Psalm 23:

According to tradition, this Psalm was composed during one of David's most difficult periods - while on the run from Saul and his men, alone in a desolate forest (1Sam 22).  Clearly, there was no Temple standing in Jerusalem in David's time - his son, Solomon built the First Temple.  But David was instrumental in building a temporary sanctuary to house the Ark in the City of David, i.e., in Jerusalem (2Sam 6:17).

One Jewish translation, provided just to see that it is similar to Christian translations:

A song of David. The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.

He causes me to lie down in green pastures; He leads me beside still waters.

He restores my soul; He leads me in paths of righteousness for His name's sake.

Even when I walk in the valley of darkness, I will fear no evil for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff-they comfort me.

You set a table before me in the presence of my adversaries; You anointed my head with oil; my cup overflows.

May only goodness and kindness pursue me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for length of days.

Psalm 23 in a different light

Many years ago, I participated in a study of Psalm 23.  Once every week for the three month study time, we recited this Psalm together.  It stuck in my memory!

What also stuck was a few oddities about the song (psalm).  It's beginning is all about God. Then it's focus suddenly seems to shift to another being, at least in reference.  Now it seems as if God is being compared, in a sense, with another being or beings the writer is afraid of, or could be afraid of.  

I always wondered about verse 4 and 5.  What was the significance of 'the valley of the shadow of death' and why was the psalmist insistent that he would not be afraid of it? What did the rod and staff have to do with anything?  Was God going to beat up enemies in the valley?  Could God not protect the Psalmist in the dark valley?  The Psalmist's language seems confident, maybe even overly so, but it almost sounded like bravado.   As if he had to reassure himself by his words.

So after many years, and in a more Torah-knowledge based understanding of 'satan' and 'ha-satan' that is fairly recent, I took another look at this Psalm.

Who is Satan - Part 7

The passages in parts 4-6 are all the ones in the Hebrew Tanak (Christian ‘Old Testament’) that contain the terms satan or ha-satan (H7853 and H7854).  In all of them, there is no support for the idea of an evil being named Satan, who has opposed God and seeks to destroy humankind because he hates God.  There is no support at all for the idea of God allowing this being free reign on earth, or of God allowing this being to terrorize or harm humankind, whether they ‘believe in God’ or not. 

When studying the role of ‘satan’, this evidence and these boundaries need to be respected.  Later Hebrew philosophy, also Greek and Egyptian philosophy all begin to introduce a different perspective of ‘satan’ and Christian philosophy continues in this perspective.  From very early on, religions personified evil (made it into a personal being).  Egypt feared the ‘powers of darkness’ in the form of the gods Set or Tryphon.  Ancient Chaldeans worshipped Tiamat as the chaos that was in the beginning, as the ‘monster of the deep’.  This idea of personifying evil has evolved over time, with new interpretations appearing. The present conception of the Christian ‘Satan’ is very different from that of the early Christians. 

But one thing is consistent.  This evil being is seen as the source of misery, suffering, trials and irresistible temptations that lead to our helpless sins.  God is not seen as the sole Creator as He is described in the Torah, and eloquently described in this example of a parallel statement of Isaiah 45:7:

I form the light and create darkness, I make peace (wholeness) and create calamity (evil); I, YHVH, do all these

I form the light and create darkness, I make peace (wholeness) and create calamity (evil); I, YHVH, do all these

The beginning part of this verse affirms God’s control over the cycles of light and darkness; the latter part of the verse is symbolic of His control over deliverance and judgment. God made man in His image, man is created with choice.  Choice requires a ‘good’ and an ‘evil’ option.  Both these options are allowed by God, and just as He is the creator of light and dark, He is fully and completely in control of good and evil.  He is sovereign over this world, over creation and nations.  He can cause wars to begin or to end, He can cause the exile of His people or He can cause them to be returned home. 

A real danger comes when we begin to shift responsibility for sin and trials to a being called ‘satan’ when in fact the sin comes entirely from us, and the trials are all allowed by God for His purposes.  And His purposes are good!   If we don’t test and learn the truth of what God teaches about adversity, then we can too easily be carried along by error.

And in that error we can fall into law-lessness, by unwittingly ascribing honour to another being that rightly belongs to YHVH alone.  This is very serious.

Who is Satan - Part 6

The term ‘satan’ (H7854) is used a number of times in the Tanak, more often without the definite article ‘ha’ (English ‘the’) but in some cases (in Job and Zechariah) with.  The ‘ha’ is used to show the term is a title bestowed on a being.  The emphasis however, is on the title, not the being.  In other words, ‘ha-satan’ doesn’t mean ‘an adversarial being named Satan’, it means ‘a being acting in the role of an adversary (satan)’.  This being would be called ‘the satan’ or ‘the adversary’. 

The following segments come from Job 1 and 2.  These passages are unique in that the term ‘ha-satan’ is uniquely translated (or perhaps mistranslated) as ‘Satan’.  The Hebrew term portrays this role as that of a prosecutor, and it should be kept in mind that the intent of the passage is NOT to bring glory to a being or even to a role, but to bear witness to the glory that belongs to YHVH alone.  In every case the term rendered ‘Satan’ in Job is the same as the one used in previous passages to refer to a role filled by human adversaries, the ‘angel of YHVH’ or even apparently YHVH.  To help with reading these passages from Job and Zechariah in the way the Hebrew text states, I’ve substituted ‘Satan’ with ‘the adversary’, bearing in mind the Hebrew term is ‘ha-satan’.

Now there was a day when the sons of God (Elohim) came to present themselves before YHVH, and the adversary (ha-satan) also came among them.  And YHVH said to the adversary (ha-satan), "From where do you come?" So the adversary (ha-satan) answered YHVH and said, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it." Then YHVH said to the adversary (ha-satan), "Have you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God (Elohim) and shuns evil?" So the adversary (ha-satan) answered YHVH and said, "Does Job fear God (Elohim) for nothing?” Job 1:6-9

And YHVH said to the adversary (ha-satan), "Behold, all that he has is in your power; only do not lay a hand on his person." So the adversary (ha-satan) went out from the presence of YHVH. Job 1:12

Again the day came when the sons of God (Elohim) came to present themselves before YHVH, and the adversary (ha-satan) also arrived among them to present himself before YHVH. And YHVH said to the adversary (ha-satan), “Where do you come from?” The adversary (ha-satan) answered YHVH, “From roving about on the earth, and from walking back and forth across it.” Then YHVH said to the adversary (ha-satan), “Have you considered my servant Job? For there is no one like him on the earth, a pure and upright man, one who fears God (Elohim) and turns away from evil. And he still holds firmly to his integrity, so that you stirred me up to destroy him without reason.”

But the adversary (ha-satan) answered YHVH, “Skin for skin! Indeed, a man will give up all that he has to save his life!  But extend your hand and strike his bone and his flesh, and he will no doubt curse you to your face!”

So YHVH said to the adversary (ha-satan), “All right, he is in your power; only preserve his life.”

So the adversary (ha-satan) went out from the presence of YHVH… Job 2:1-7

The last segment comes from Zechariah 3.  It’s similar in some ways to the Job passages in that it’s often translated as ‘Satan’, as if to present a being with a name, rather than a being in a role. 

Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the Angel of YHVH, and the adversary (ha-satan) standing at his right hand to oppose (satan) him.  And YHVH said to the adversary (ha-satan), "YHVH rebuke you, adversary (ha-satan)!  YHVH who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is this not a brand plucked from the fire?" Zechariah 3:1-2

Who is Satan - Part 5

Here are more of the passages in the Tanak that refer to a being acting in the role of accuser (satan – H7854):

And God’s (elohim’s) anger was kindled because he went; and the angel of YHVH stood in the way for an adversary (satan) against him… Numbers 22:22a

And the angel of YHVH said to him: Why have you beaten your donkey these three times?  Look, I went out to oppose (satan) you, because your way is perverse before me.  Numbers 22:32

…the princes of the Philistines said to him, "Make this fellow return, that he may go back to the place which you have appointed for him, and do not let him go down with us to battle, lest in the battle he become our adversary (satan). From 1 Samuel 29:4

And David said, "What have I to do with you, you sons of Zeruiah, that you should be adversaries (satan) to me today? 2 Samuel 19:22

But now the LORD my God has given me rest on every side; there is neither adversary (satan) nor evil occurrence. 1 Kings 5:4

Now the LORD raised up an adversary (satan) against Solomon: Hadad the Edomite; he was a descendant of the king in Edom. 1 Kings 11:14

And God raised up another adversary (satan) against him: Rezon the son of Eliadah, who had fled from his lord, Hadadezer king of Zobah… He was an adversary (satan) of Israel all the days of Solomon…1 Kings 11:23, 25

This next one is most interesting, as it has a parallel text:

An adversary (satan) opposed Israel, inciting David to count how many warriors Israel had.  1 Chron 21:1

Again the anger of YHVH was aroused against Israel, and He (YHVH, acting as the adversary) moved David against them to say, "Go, number Israel and Judah." 2 Samuel 24:1

Set a wicked man over him, And let an accuser (satan) stand at his right hand. Psalm 109:6

Who is Satan - Part 4

The use of the term ‘satan’ (H7853) in the Tanak:

They also that render evil for good are my adversaries (satan); because I follow the thing that good is. Psalm 38:20

For my love they are my adversaries (satan) but I give myself unto prayer. Psalm 109:4

Let them be confounded and consumed, they are adversaries (satan) to my soul; let them be covered with reproach and dishonour that seek my hurt.  Psalm 71:13

Let this be the reward of my adversaries (satan) from YHVH, and of them that speak evil against my soul.  Psalm 109:20

Let my adversaries (satan) be clothed with shame, and let them cover themselves with their own confusion as with a mantle. Psalm 109:29

And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of YHVH, and Satan (ha-satan) standing at his right hand to accuse (satan) him. Zechariah 3:1

Who is Satan - Part 3

Why is it important to understand, from the beginning of Torah, what satan is (and isn’t)?  It’s important for the same reason all study of Torah is important…to learn truth.  To learn what God actually says. And then to begin to live in that truth.

Most people believe ‘Satan’ is the personification of evil.  Most believe that evil is in a battle with good, that Satan battles God for supremacy of creation, that there are two forces at work, that there are, in effect, two opposing gods, with mankind in the middle.  ‘Of course’ eventually it’s taken for granted that ‘God wins’.  But what a god this idea portrays!  One who doesn’t step in and get rid of ‘Satan’ so His people can have peace…that god would seem a monster.  And this question is one that many people struggle with.

But that’s not at all what Torah teaches about God or evil or satan.  Torah teaches that evil is conceived from the desire of man to be like God, and birthed in willfully rebellious actions of law-lessness.  According to this, it’s not ‘Satan’ who is responsible for evil…its us.

Which is a pretty humbling concept.

Who is Satan - Part 2

In Genesis 1, we’re first introduced to the concept of darkness and light.  The English word ‘darkness’ is translated from the Hebrew word ‘choshek’ (H2822).  This word has the literal meaning of darkness, but has a figurative (representative) meaning of misery, destruction, death, ignorance, sorrow, wickedness, obscurity.  Only light is identified as ‘good’, light and dark are separated.  All creation happens during the times of light.  Yet darkness definitely has its place as well. 

The times of darkness separate the times of light, yet the times of darkness are barren of creative happenings.  The darkness is not specifically identified as good or bad; though in Genesis 1:31 all creation, including the times of darkness, is called ‘very good’.  From this we can begin to recognize that darkness is from the Creator and is included in His pronouncement of ‘very good’.  In other words, darkness has its purpose.

In Genesis 3, while Creation was still under the pronouncement of ‘very good’, we are introduced to a being described as a ‘serpent’, who seems to be taking the role of opposer or obstructor.  The Hebrew word ‘nachash’ (H5175) is translated as ‘serpent’ in English.  Nachash is from a root-word that means to practice divination, to learn by experience (not trust).  The serpent is described as ‘aruwm’ (H6175), a word translated as ‘subtle, crafty, cunning’ in English. But this word is used elsewhere as ‘prudent, shrewd, sensible’ also ‘naked’ (uncovered, exposed).  Doesn’t this sound like the character of an opposer or accuser or a legal adversary, seeking to uncover? 

It’s important to note that Genesis 3 does not call the serpent  ‘ha-satan’.  In other words, it does not appear that God assigned this role to the serpent.  Rather, it seems the serpent used shrewdness in a sinful way, and we later see that to act this way brings a curse (Genesis 3:14-15).

In Judaism this being is said to represent the ‘evil inclination’, the temptation that we’re supposed to resist by remembering the commandment.  Why are we allowed to be tempted this way?  It appears to be in order to ‘test’ or strengthen our faith, with the goal of maturing it.  Israel was tested with hunger, thirst or through battles (Deut 8:2, Judges 2:21-22) Abraham was tested (Gen 22:1-2), the righteous are tested (Psalm 11:5, 2 Chronicles 32:31).  In a sense, these ‘bad things’ are allowed as necessary, even good.

Remember that one of the places the term ‘ha-satan’ (the accuser) appears is in Zechariah 3?  Translated directly into English from the Greek of the Septuagint, Zechariah 3:1 would actually begin something like this, “Next I saw Jesus the high priest standing before the face of a/the messenger of YHVH, with the adversary (ha-Satan) standing according to the right hand, opposing (satan).”  There is quite a fascinating parallel between the account of this vision in Zechariah 3 and the portrayal of temptation of Matthew 4, which is linked closely in the accounts of Mark 1 and Luke 4 by an entering into ministry and by baptism and acceptance by God.  In other words…a testing.

Who is Satan - Part 1

Christianity and Judaism see ‘Satan’ quite differently.

In the Hebrew Scriptures, the word ‘satan’  means to act as an accuser, adversary or opposer.  This opposition (and the one opposing) is always subordinate to the will of God, and appointed or allowed by God to test man’s faith.  In the Torah, the term satan refers to a human acting as adversary.  In the Tanak there are several instances where ‘satan’ could be understood to be an evil influence or character, which may reflect Jewish understanding at that time.  In the Jewish pseudepigrapha (writings that are not included in the canon of Jewish Scripture), there is at times a picture of Satan being an adversary of God Himself; though this understanding is generally rejected by Judaism. 

The Hebrew term ‘satan’ (H7853) is a noun from a verb, and means to oppose or obstruct.  The word ‘ha-satan’ (H7854) is a title bestowed on a being, rather than the name of a being.  In a proper English translation, ‘ha-satan’ would be ‘the satan’.  ‘The satan’ is not a prominent figure in the Torah.  The term ‘ha-satan’ appears in Job 1-2 and Zechariah 3:1-39.

The Christian perspective is that ‘Satan’ is a specific divine or superhuman entity who is self-appointed as the arch-enemy of God; who is the chief of an army of similarly fallen beings cast out of heaven by God; and who works on his own initiative to destroy man’s faith. The Greek manuscripts of the Christian New Testament, as with the Jewish pseudepigrapha, may reflect a particular philosophy of the day, as they do uphold a similar view.

Yom Kippur

Today, according to the moon cycles, is the tenth day of the seventh month.  That is the day christians generally refer to as the ‘Day of Atonement’, which in Hebrew is ‘Yom Kippur’.  Yom is translated ‘day’ and ‘kippur’ is literally translated ‘covering’.  It means covering in the sense of ‘to cover over, to expiate, to cancel’.

Leviticus 23:27 gives instruction for this day, which is translated as ‘you shall afflict your souls’, ‘you shall humble yourselves’, ‘you shall deny yourselves’ or ‘you shall fast’.  Traditionally, the Jewish custom is to fast. 

Few people question this long standing tradition, or verify if this is really what ‘humble yourselves’ is intended to mean.  What exactly is the Hebrew word used, and how is it used elsewhere in the Bible?

Leviticus 23:27 uses the Hebrew word ‘anah’, Strong’s H6031.  Interestingly enough, it’s never translated as ‘fast’ in the sense of doing without food.  Its primary meaning seems to be to look downwards, to be humble.  It’s linked with words that mean to heed, to respond, to answer, to testify of, to bear witness to. 

The Hebrew word that means to ‘fast’ or to do without food in a religious context, is ‘tsum’, H6684.  That word means to ‘cover the mouth’, to abstain from food.  The first time it appears in the Hebrew Bible is Judges 20:26.  It’s not found in the Torah!

Leviticus 23:27-32 should be read as a whole.  There is not one command to fast from food.  There is, however, a very strong command to abstain from all work.  It’s actually mentioned 4 times!  If you add in the references to Shabbat, it’s mentioned 6 times.  If you consider that ‘humble yourself’ and ‘do no work’ may mean similar things in this context…then it’s mentioned 8 times!

If you fast on this Day, you aren’t fulfilling any commandment of Torah.  Is fasting wrong then? Not at all! To abstain from food in an effort to increase one’s awareness of humility before YHVH may be quite helpful.  But to fast simply to observe a religious ritual is to miss the point.  To ‘humble yourself’ according to the actual command is the point.  To fast from religious tradition and to feast on Torah’s command is perhaps a far better use of the Day.