In Gulliver's Travels, a book written by Jonathan Swift in 1726, talks of two Islands Lilliput and Blefuscu. These islands are inhabited by small people (1/12 the size of normal people) and are constantly at war with each other. Both islands are ruled by emperors and both subscribe to a prophet Lustrog whose teachings are detailed in their holy book the Blundecral.
In the teachings of the Blundecral it details that eggs should be broken on the convenient end. The Lilliputians believe that this means the smaller end as generations before a son of the emperor had cut his finger breaking an egg on the big end. He thus mandated that all eggs be broken on the small end. The Blefuscans, on the contrary, believe an egg must be broken on the big end. This resulted in centuries of conflict with many people displaced from their homes and others slain in conflict through the strife between the Big-Endians and the Little-Endians. In the story Gulliver washes up on the shore of Lilliput and gains their good graces until he refuses to conquer Blefuscu and force them to adopt the practice of Little-Endians. Gulliver is subsequently charged with treason. Shakespeare famously said, "A rose by any name would smell as sweet." I am a bit of a word-smith and I love the many wonderful ways words can be used. However, sometimes our debates are as silly and lacking in importance as the debate between the Big-Endians and the Little-Endians. A word never has the weight of its referent--as beautiful as the word "rose" is, it never can approach the beauty and fragrance of the flower itself. In our religious squabbles it pays to remember this.
0 Comments
I posted on FB a couple of weeks ago some observations about Passover and Easter. I notice that the misinformation doesn't seem to slow down. A quick review--neither the word Easter nor Passover appears in the original texts of the Bible. In the Hebrew Bible the word is Pesach and in the Greek New Testament the word is Pascha. Passover is the English word used to translate both Pesach and Pascha in most Bibles. In the original KJV in Acts 12:4 Pascha is translated "Easter." Remember that the word "Easter" is nearly 1000 years older than the word "Passover." I do think Tyndale came up with a great English word to translate the Hebrew Pesach but the English, Dutch and Germanic peoples were all using some variant of Easter as their term for the Resurrection long before he coined the word Passover.
Some think that Easter is a term that came from the Germanic goddess Eostre. This is difficult to prove or disprove and not worth your time in my opinion. Colored eggs at the celebration for the Resurrection have a long history and probably are connected to the egg on the Passover plate. At least they are found all through Christian history. The Easter Bunny is a fairly recent addition to the Resurrection celebration and is generally only found in Germanic cultures and thus also seen in England and America. It is not a feature even today in the traditional Christian churches of Italy and Greece. Its origins stem from the 13th century several hundred years after the Germans, Dutch and English began using the term Easter to describe the Resurrection. It is a practice that wormed its way into the Resurrection celebration and does not originate from Christian observance of the Resurrection. In spite of the often spurious and silly claims you might find in Encyclopedias and other reference sources there does not appear to be any relationship to calling Passover Easter and using bunnies. It is true that the countries that use the term Easter are the places the use of bunnies seem to have originated but this practice way postdates the name. You will also see a lot of memes saying that the Crucifixion could not occur on Friday and Yeshua (Jesus) arise on Sunday. The big objection to this is Yeshua's statement that the only sign he would show the people would be the sign of Jonah who was 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of the fish. This was a picture of Yeshua being in the grave for 3 days and 3 nights. (Matthew 12:40) Certainly a Friday Crucifixion does not work in this scenario. However, when we look at all scripture concerning the Crucifixion and the Resurrection the picture is not so clear. You can easily find 12 passages in the New Testament that say he will rise on the 3rd day. Only one or two mention 3 days and 3 nights. Perhaps in Hebrew idiom these two are synonymous but they are not in English. In 1 Corinthians 15: 3 "For I handed down to you as of first importance what I also received, that the Messiah died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." Paul goes on to say that He appeared to Peter, James and many others. Note, he says the items of first importance are 1- that he died for our sins according to the scriptures of which Isaiah 53 is an example. 2- that he was buried and 3- he raised on the third day according to the scriptures. The best scripture I can find to demonstrate this fact is Hosea 6: 2 "He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day, That we may live before Him." Thus I believe it is reasonable to posit a Friday Crucifixion as well as a Wednesday Crucifixion. (Some believe Thursday is correct.) I personally believe that the "third day" in our understanding has more evidence than "three days and three nights" in our understanding. My suggestion is that we all be humble enough to recognize we could be mistaken on this issue. Of greatest importance, is recognizing He died for our sins, He was buried and He was raised on the third day. Finally we should realize when we compare "Easter" to "Passover" that the focus of the Christian Easter is the Resurrection which Paul tells us is of first importance. To the practicing Jew the focus of Passover is the exodus from Egypt. We shouldn't be surprised that there is some variance in practice. Celebrating the Resurrection is not pagan--it is Christian/Messianic. Yeshua is identified as the Passover (Pesach) in 1 Corinthians 5 so for Christians He is the focus of the celebration. For Jews it is the deliverance from Egypt and they celebrate by following the Biblical injunctions to refrain from leaven and eat matza (unleavened bread.) If we really wanted to help people see this topic correctly, our first prerogative would be to understand their practice and figure out why they do what they do. While there is a wide chasm between Christian and Jewish observance, those in the Messianic community would be well-served to do a little more research and really try to understand those who differ in their practice from them. I see great value in doing a Passover Seder as it shows us so much of the ministry of our Messiah. It is also a way that we Biblically observe Passover. However, celebrating the Resurrection is also of first importance for us and should not be neglected. Abba Eban reputedly said, "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but everyone is not entitled to their own facts." This year the church will celebrate Easter (Resurrection Sunday) nearly a month before traditional Judaism celebrates Pesach (Passover) and the internet has already gone into overdrive on posts linking Easter to Ishtar and various other pagan entities.
First early Christianity does appear to have celebrated the Resurrection on the Passover week also observed by Judaism. Within less than a couple of hundred years a controversy developed over whether the Resurrection should be celebrated on the 14th day of Nisan (traditional night of the Passover Seder) or on the Sunday occurring during the week of Unleavened Bread. The famous martyr Polycarp was one of those pushing for the 14th of Nisan. This controversy never was really resolved but more and more Christians moved to the Sunday celebration. By the Council of Nicaea convened by the emperor Constantine in 325 AD the decision was made that the Resurrection should be celebrated on the first Sunday after the first full moon occurring after the Spring Equinox. Two major reasons for their decision was to produce uniformity of observance and completely separate Christian observance of the Resurrection from the Jewish calendar. Sadly while there is no evidence of paganism influencing this choice it is plain that Antisemitism was a major force in the change. All through church history and still today in the ancient churches of Rome, Istanbul, etc. the name of the Resurrection observance is some form of "pascha" taken from the Hebrew "pesach." In the Dutch, German and English churches the term for the Resurrection became some variant of Easter. This appears to have occurred some time in the 600s AD. In Tyndale's English translation of the Bible in the late 1300s he didn't want to use the Christian term "Easter" for the Hebrew pesach found all through the Tanach (Old Testament.) So he coined the word "Passover" to be the English equivalent of the Hebrew "pesach." Thus in terms of chronological age the term Easter is older than Passover. However much you like or don't like the silly Easter egg hunts or Easter bunnies they have nothing to do with the name Easter and it is not at all related to the Semitic Ishtar. Eggs are associated with the Resurrection celebration through most of Christianity and most of them have never used or had the word Easter in their vocabulary. They are clearly extraBiblical. You are all entitled to your opinion but for the sake of peace try to ascertain the facts of the situation. There are plenty of places you can do the research but I would suggest you don't pay much attention to FB memes. We can all make our choices without castigating those we disagree with. It also makes sense to develop a sound case for why you believe in the practice you follow but perhaps we could be a little less severe with those who haven't seen our light as of yet. It is the time of year for the Biblical celebration of Passover. Since memes seem to be the way we communicate and teach now, I thought I might clear up some confusion for many of you. Many are sharing erroneous information about this season. I have no interest in telling you how to think or what to believe. But facts can be helpful.
In the Tanach (Old Testament) the word translated Passover is the Hebrew פֶּסחַ (pesach.) In the New Testament the word translated as Passover is the Greek πάσχα (pascha.) In the King James Version "pascha" is translated once as Easter but most Bible versions use only the term Passover to translate pascha. Pesach refers to not only the ritual celebrated on the evening of the 14th day of Nisan (Aviv) but often to the entire 7 day Feast also known as Unleavened Bread. In the New Testament there is a clear link between Yeshua's (Jesus's) crucifixion, burial and resurrection and the Passover and Unleavened Bread observances. Yeshua arguably was crucified on the evening of the 14 or 15th day of Nisan, was buried and then rose from the dead on the first day of the week which corresponded to the waving of the barley sheaf performed during the week of Unleavened Bread. Since Yeshua said he would give the sign of Jonah by being buried 3 days and 3 nights but many more places say he would be raised on the third day there is not general consensus on what day of the week he was buried. Some believe he was resurrected on the night after the Sabbath but by Jewish reckoning that would still be Sunday the first day of the week. In 1 Corinthians 5 Paul clearly states that Yeshua is our Passover. (Some versions say "our Passover Lamb" which is not wrong but does add a word.) The earliest Christians (Messianics) kept Passover like their Jewish neighbors with the major difference being their emphasis on the celebration of Yeshua's resurrection. As Jewish influence waned in the early church the crucifixion and resurrection themes dominated and the exodus and unleavened bread themes retreated. Less than 200 years after Yeshua's death and resurrection a controversy arose in the church now known as the quartodeciman controversy. Basically the quartodecimans believed that the resurrection should be celebrated on the 14th day of Nisan and their opponents believed the resurrection should be celebrated on the Sunday during the week of Passover. The martyr Polycarp subscribed to the quartodeciman theory and claimed he had been taught this by the apostle John. The opponents of the quartodecimans also claimed apostolic authority. By the time of the Nicean Council 325AD where the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity was established, an effort was made to establish a uniform date for celebrating the resurrection but this effort failed. Constantine and the Council made clear however that they felt it was an error to be dependent upon the Jewish/Biblical lunar calendar and that they wished for the church to set the date for this important celebration and not the Jews. The calculation favored by the Nicean bishops eventually became the Christian practice which was to set the celebration on the first Sunday following the first full moon occurring on or after the Spring Equinox. Thus the dating for Passover as observed by Jews and the dating for the Resurrection became independent of each other. Around 600 AD the word Easter became the word to describe the Christian celebration of the resurrection for people who spoke English, German and Dutch. Its origin is thought to be from a German goddess, Ostara or Eostre, or some believe it came from a word describing the direction of the rising sun, the East. Regardless of its origin it became the word to describe the resurrection in these languages. The word became so entrenched that even English Jews used Oester to describe their Passover celebrations in England in the 14th and 15th century. When Tyndale translated the Bible into old English he felt that the word "Easter" was too sacred and special to use to translate the Hebrew pesach of the Old Testament. He is the one to invent the English word Passover so it is actually a much younger word than Easter. It was an excellent term that fit the Biblical pesach very well as it had the connotation of passing or leaping over. The ancient historical churches have always used the Biblical term pascha to describe their observances--Latin, Greek, Aramaic and Syriac. The word Easter is not a part of Catholic, Orthodox, and Maronite worship in their original languages. It is a purely Germanic term and thus has only impacted those cultures using the English, German and Dutch languages. Ancillary activities that many Christians observe on Easter/Pascha had nothing to do with the name of the festivity. They were cultural practices that gradually became a part of Pascha celebrations in many groups--Easter bunnies, colored eggs, etc. Particularly the bunnies are a rather modern innovation only emphasized in the last 200 years. Finally in the Old Testament the Biblical term translated Passover is pesach. In the New Testament the Biblical term translated Passover is pascha. The term Passover is never used in either testament. It is a great term coined by Tyndale to translate the Hebrew and Greek terms, pesach and pascha. A subject I have been thinking about for some time. Not an exhaustive treatment but pretty long. Nevertheless, many important points left out or not sufficiently covered.
Spirit versus the Flesh/Reality versus Shadows 1 Corinthians 15: 46 However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. 47 The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven. There is an age old debate—what is more important—the physical or the spiritual? Does one replace the other? Once the spiritual has come is the physical no longer needed? What are the consequences of abandoning one in favor of the other? Yeshua (Jesus) made strong statements concerning intent versus deed. In Matthew 5:28 when discussing the command prohibiting adultery he said that looking at a woman with lust in your heart is committing adultery. Furthermore the prohibition against murder makes one “liable to the court” but he stated that being angry with your brother also makes one “guilty” before the court. These statements remind us that the intent to sin is comparable to committing the actual sin. For most Christians the physical commands of the Old Testament are considered unnecessary and non-binding. The vision of Peter where he is instructed to rise, kill and eat unclean animals is cited as evidence that God has changed his mind and no longer cares about such ceremonial law but only about moral laws such as murder and stealing. Even though in Acts 10 the text makes clear that the vision was about people and not food we can eat. Even the Sabbath is seen as something you can keep every day or in your heart or on a convenient day. If the intent is good, then no sin is committed. I have read excellent Christian commentaries on Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 which speak of clean and unclean food. These all say that the problem is not eating swine but eating what swine represents. Thus the letter of the law is seen as the actual physical obedience to the law but the spirit of the law is seen as keeping the spiritual “intent” of the law. This thinking also figures in another current hot topic among both Christians and Messianics. Will a 3rd temple be built? If so, will it be sanctioned by God? Many are saying that since we are the temple (1 Cor 6:19) that the body of the Messiah is the third temple.[The first temple is Solomon’s temple and the second the one built by Zerubbabel and refurbished by Herod.] Paul says in Ephesians 2: 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God’s household, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Messiah Yeshua Himself being the corner stone, 21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit. In the same vein Peter proclaims in 1 Peter 2:9b “you also, as living stones, 10 are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Yeshua the Messiah.” Similarly in Revelation 3 Yeshua speaking to the church of Philadelphia says “12 ‘He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God, and My new name.” Based upon these passages many are saying that the temple prophesied in Ezekiel is a spiritual one, a structure of people, not an actual building. Many also say that the 2nd exodus forecast in Jeremiah 16: 14 is a description of people coming to the Messiah and not an actual physical event. “Therefore behold, days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when it will no longer be said, ‘As the LORD lives, who brought up the sons of Israel out of the land of Egypt,’ 15 but, ‘As the LORD lives, who brought up the sons of Israel from the land of the north and from all the countries where He had banished them.’ For I will restore them to their own land which I gave to their fathers.” In the last few years many in the church are backing away from this dichotomy when it comes to the people of Israel. For years most of the church taught that we are spiritual Israel and that we have replaced literal Israel (in this case, the Jews.) Much of the reason for abandoning this teaching stems from the horrible consequences of replacement theology. First we replaced the Jews as Israel and then we started down a slippery slope that ended with us calling Jews an accursed race that wasn’t fit to live. To say our theology contradicted scripture puts it rather mildly. There are some important ideas to consider when we view the idea of the physical versus the spiritual. First, metaphors and similes are not literal. Yeshua is not a lamb with wool that chews the cud—he is the Messiah, the King who is likened to a lamb. In Romans 11 Paul makes an impassioned claim that Israel is the domestic olive tree and the Gentiles coming in are branches of wild olive trees being grafted into the root that Israel rests on. It is an apt metaphor but it is a metaphor. We are talking about people here and not trees. Certainly not a dicot tree that grows from the ground and produces a fruit that can only be eaten after processing. Regardless of the number of parallels this tree may have to Israel, it remains a tree and Israel a people. In my thinking this also applies to us being the temple. It is a wonderful metaphor with striking reality but we are not really a building. We are people--not sticks and stones. Second, exaggeration is useful in making a point but it remains exaggeration. Lusting after a woman can certainly lead to sin but in no way does it create the damage that actual commission of the sin does. A person dealing with illicit lust can repent and confess his/her sin and go through a process of transformation and restoration. A person who has committed adultery can also go through this same process in obedience to Biblical instruction. However, the aftermath of committing adultery is infinitely more damaging and life-altering than the consequences of lust even though if left unchecked it may lead to committing adultery. The same is true of murder and being angry with your brother. They may be sins on the same downward path but physical implementation of the temptation carries a much greater weight of consequential damage than the temptation not acted upon. Third, saying that the spiritual principle is binding and true but the physical principle unimportant, can be foolhardy. The Bible testifies in several places that the worst adultery that people commit is in following other gods and being unfaithful to the true God. No one would ever argue that as long as one remains a believer in the God of the Bible that physical adultery is unimportant as it is the spiritual principle that carries priority. Another thing we can do is look at history. What has resulted when people spiritualize the Bible and emphasize the moral code at the expense of literal and physical commands contained therein? For over a thousand years most of the Christian church believed that God’s covenant with the Jews (Israel) had been replaced by a new covenant with the church. All scriptures throughout the Tanach (Old Testament) spelling out God’s promises to Israel were co-opted by the Church but we generously let them keep the judgments and disasters meted out to them in passages like Deuteronomy 28. The Torah (Pentateuch) repeats the promise 100 times that the children of Abraham will have the land of Canaan as an earthly inheritance. In the prophets God strengthens this promise by saying his covenant with Israel and her land will last as long as day follows night. Yet you can go on Christian radio today and find well-known Bible teachers and authors proclaiming that the Jews have no claim to the Land and that God no longer has an active specific covenant with them. Furthermore, Jerusalem no longer has any significance as a place God chose for a specific purpose. What happened as a result of spiritualizing the promises to Israel? 1- The church became the stronghold of Anti-Semitism in the world. 2- Pogroms, holocausts, unthinkable horrors were visited upon Jews at the hands of the church or with at least their approval. 3- Scriptures in the New Testament that promoted loving Jews were ignored or completely overlooked i.e. Romans 3:1-2 “What advantage then has the Jew?.. Much in every way.” Romans 11:28 From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; 29 for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. If you doubt this analysis, consider this: why did Casper Ten Boom and his family hide Jews from the Nazis and endanger their lives to protect Jews? Of course, they believed it was their Christian duty. But why did they represent such a tiny fraction of the Christian population? Because they also believed that God’s covenant with Israel was still in effect and that the Jews were God’s chosen people. What we believe dictates our actions. Where do we hear the statement that “the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable” in our churches? Generally in regard to the charismatic gifts. That interpretation may be true but its primary meaning is that God’s covenant with Israel stands and cannot be abrogated. Another serious consequence of minimizing the literal meanings of scripture is the forgetting of the city of Jerusalem. If you study the rupture between the Northern Kingdom and the Southern Kingdom many factors operated together to impel the split. But the Achilles’ heel that drove the Northern Kingdom’s headlong descent into idolatry was the decision made by King Jeroboam to abandon the city of Jerusalem and build his own houses of worship at Bethel and Dan. Making the golden calves, instituting his own feasts and creating his own priesthood all stemmed from his abandoning Jerusalem and the House of God there. Reading the New Testament we see scripture that speaks of the Jerusalem that is above, the New Jerusalem, and the Jerusalem that is our mother. While recognizing the validity of these descriptions I think it is dangerous to think this abrogates God’s covenant with Israel and the city of Jerusalem. One of the hallmarks of Biblical thinking is its circular or cyclical nature. There can be an earthly Jerusalem and a heavenly Jerusalem and both can be an indispensable part of God’s plan for mankind. The fact that John sees the New Jerusalem as a metaphor for the bride doesn’t require us to throw out all of God’s promises to the place, the real estate, the mountains of Jerusalem. He proclaims in Zechariah “that once more I will choose Jerusalem” and I suspect he means exactly that. My comments clearly reveal my bias. I suspect that an earthly temple will be rebuilt. I may be wrong but I think it is important to recognize that the temple and tabernacle are metaphors of the body of Messiah and its individual members. The temple itself is a pattern of something structural in the heavenly places as the books of Hebrews and Revelation so aptly point out. The temple is a picture or pattern of our approach to His Majesty, our King. Granted we are all temples of the Holy Spirit and when we relate to each other properly we provide a corporate structure where the presence of God dwells. This is an important discussion but one that need not divide us. We can all admit that we don’t know all the answers nor exactly what the future holds. My concern is that we not fall into historical pitfalls that cause us to denigrate or castigate others of God’s children. Does God fill the heavens and the earth? Certainly. But does he choose particular places? Absolutely. Deuteronomy 12: 5 But you shall seek the LORD at the place which the LORD your God will choose from all your tribes, to establish His name there for His dwelling, and there you shall come. There is a place where Abraham offered Isaac—where David offered sacrifice to atone for his sin in counting the people—where after Solomon built a temple the presence of God drove the priests out of the temple because the presence was so heavy and powerful. This same place God sent his Ruach (Holy Spirit) upon Yeshua’s disciples and transformed their world and ours. I suspect this place has not stopped being important and essential to our lives. The validity of spiritual truth is not abrogated by recognition of the physical basis of that spiritual truth but is, in fact, substantiated. |
House of Aaron Articles/ TeachingsPlease remember that these resources represent the understanding of the author and the conditions at the time of their presentation. Any reference to particular groups or persons is for the purpose of illustration and explanation. Categories
All
|
Location |
Contact Us |