Torah Pearls #35 – Naso (Numbers 4:21-7:89)

Naso (Num 4:21-7:89) - The Original Torah Pearls - NehemiasWall.comIn this episode of The Original Torah Pearls, Naso (Numbers 4:21-7:89), Nehemia Gordon shares a peak into his book Shattering the Conspiracy of Silence: The Hebrew Power of the Priestly Blessing Unleashed. What is holy water used for? Can the Law of Jealousy be explained? Was Yeshua a Nazarite? In Numbers 7:89 who is “he” and who is “him”? All this and more in this week’s Torah Pearls!

I look forward to reading your comments! Download Torah Pearls Naso Transcript
Torah Pearls #35 - Naso (Numbers 4:21-7:89)

You are listening to The Original Torah Pearls with Nehemia Gordon, Keith Johnson, and Jono Vandor. Thank you for supporting Nehemia Gordon's Makor Hebrew Foundation. Learn more at NehemiasWall.com.

Jono: G’day to Gail from Georgia, Anthony and Rebecca from Texas, Paul from Alabama, Morgan from Kansas, Kristine and Alberta from Canada. And wherever you may be around the world, it’s good to have your company. It is time for Pearls from the Torah Portion with Keith Johnson and Nehemia Gordon, the caffeinated Karaite. G’day, fellows.

Keith: The caffeinated Karaite. I’m telling you, ladies and gentlemen…

Nehemia: You have no idea.

Keith: You have no idea. Listen…I’m just going to throw him under the bus.

Nehemia: Whoo!

Keith: Whenever he gets on the radio before we start and I hear a “chhhh” that means he’s slurping, and I know what he’s slurping; he’s slurping coffee. Tell us, Nehemia, what are you drinking?

Nehemia: Well, now, for the record, I haven’t had caffeine in like probably a month. But I’m in training right now, so I’m trying to get in better shape so I can be healthy, and I’m eating kefir every day.

Jono: Hey!

Nehemia: Doing the green smoothies and doing walking. But then I also got to supplement that with some caffeine. I need my caffeine.

Keith: Wait, I thought you said you were off caffeine?

Nehemia: So, wait, what? I got back on caffeine today. Okay?

Keith: Oh my!

Nehemia: I want to do a shout-out to Ellen who is listening over in Staten Island, New York, and Miri, who I know listens to this program every Shabbat morning. Miri from Georgia who’s over at the Jerusalem window listening to this program, thanks for listening.

Jono: There it is. Today we are in Naso, Numbers 4:21 to 7:89. That’s right folks, chapter 7 has 89 verses, and we’re going to go through every single one. No, we’re not. So, it begins like this…okay, now when we left off, the beginning of chapter 4, it talks about the duties and the sons of Kohath. This is the duties of the sons of Gershon, and it says that, “Yehovah spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Also take a census of the sons of Gershon, by their fathers’ houses, by their families. From thirty years old and above, even to fifty years old, you shall number them. All who enter to perform the service, to do the work of the Tabernacle of Meeting.” And so…

Keith: Okay.

Jono: It goes on, it talks about those…

Keith: Wait, just a second.

Jono: Yeah?

Keith: Just a second, I got to stop here because I read this verse…

Nehemia: Doesn’t he have to read every verse?

Keith: No, no, I have to say something about this verse. I think this is really interesting. I was over in Rome, and when I was in Rome, I was digging deep and trying to learn and all this sort of thing, and there was one thing that really hit me - like really hit me. I was sitting in the general audience for the Pope, and the Pope came in on his popemobile and they brought him up to his deal. And he’s got like two or three different people that are caring for him as he’s going about his business, and they sit him down in the chair, and they bring him his water and these are all things that we could look at from a spiritual sense, “oh, well, they’re kowtowing the guy.”

But let me tell you why they take care of the Pope: he’s old. And when I tell you he’s old, he’s really old. And here I read in this verse, it says, “Count all the men from thirty to fifty years of age who come to serve in the work of the Tent of Meeting.” Now, here’s the good news, I’m so excited to be on Torah Pearls, I want to give you guys a hint. I know some of you think that I’m younger than Jono and Nehemia, but I’m actually…listen, I’m actually a little bit older and I’m now…

Nehemia: He walks faster.

Keith: And I walk faster, but the truth is when I read this verse, I think…

Nehemia: The fastest walker I’ve ever met.

Keith: I think about the Pope who’s really old, and I’m thinking, “he could never serve in the Tent of Meeting; he could never be Pontifex Maximus, he could never be…”

Nehemia: Wow, are you saying that when the third Temple is built and the Messiah’s reigning as king over Israel, the Pope will not be allowed to serve in the Temple? Is that what you’re telling me?

Keith: What I’m saying is that based on this verse…

Nehemia: Kohath.

Keith: No, no, if I’m wrong you guys can correct me - that if you were 51 years old you would not serve in the Tent of Meeting. Am I right or wrong?

Jono: Well, now you’ve got me thinking, Keith.

Nehemia: Kohath.

Jono: No, well, because I mean…

Nehemia: Kohath.

Jono: Aaron, right? The high priest, I mean as high priest…

Nehemia: Actually, this is for Levites, actually, it’s not…

Keith: This is for Levites. Okay. So, for…

Nehemia: …and that’s a lot of people who confuse Levites and priests or Kohanim. Kohanim are Aaron and his direct descendants, who are a sub-group within the Levites. And remember, Georgia of blessed memory was a Rhodesian ridgeback, all dogs…or no, how does it go? All ridgebacks are dogs, but not all dogs are ridgebacks.

Keith: Okay. So, here’s the softball I’m trying to…give you guys the softball.

Nehemia: So, all the Kohanim, or all the Kohanim are Levites, but not all the Levites are Kohanim.

Jono: Okay. So, can I just…

Keith: Oh…

Jono: Sorry Keith, can I just ask this question? So, the sub-group within the Levites, the Kohanim, did they serve until they just drop, or I mean…?

Nehemia: That’s what it sounds like.

Keith: Well, here’s what I wanted to bring up, this is what I wanted to bring up…

Nehemia: Well, Eli, who was the high priest in the time of Samuel, he literally…

Jono: He literally did.

Nehemia: …he literally dropped.

Jono: He served till…

Nehemia: He literally served till he fell over backwards…

Jono: Yeah.

Nehemia: …and died.

Jono: Broke his neck, I think.

Keith: So, this is why I was bringing this up, you guys. So here we have the people that claim that the Levitical priesthood, those who say, “Look, we’re Levites, pay us our tithe, etcetera.” This happens in the church, this happens in the Methodist church, it happens in all the denominations, and they claim the Levitical aspect.

Now, if you are claiming the actual Kohen, if you’re saying, “I’m a Kohen,” then therefore, maybe that’s what the present Catholic church’s deal is, I know what they said in the introduction was that he claimed rights back to Peter as the first Pope, that’s what they said publically. But my point was, as I’m reading this, I’m thinking “okay, I know for sure that, for me, anyway, I don’t think of myself as a Kohen, I don’t think of myself as a high priest. Who knows, maybe now that I’ve joined myself, I can say I’ve got some sort of Levitical connection.” But the good news that I was trying to get to on this whole thing was that at 50 you could serve in the Tent of Meeting, but at 51 you’d retire.

Jono: Yes. So, all the Levites…so you’re pointing out that all the Levites that serve are under 50 years old.

Keith: And what I’m excited about is, I’m now 51 years old, and I feel like I can now retire.

Jono: There you go.

Keith: That’s my whole point, I was trying to…I wasn’t claiming to be the Kohen. And I know the Pope is not a Kohen because he’s German, his name is Ratzinger; I know he’s not a Kohen. So really, he’s too old to be serving as the…

Jono: He’s too old.

Keith: …unless he claims he’s a Kohen.

Jono: Now, listen, Keith, while we’re on it, that’s the reason why they choose them so crusty - because they don’t really want them to last that long. They like to turn them over and, you know…

Keith: Oh.

Jono: …and keep it interesting. No, I’m serious. When they’re choosing them, they take this into consideration; they don’t want someone to linger on and linger on and linger on. They want to keep it fresh, fresh faces, you know. Let’s not get too…

Keith: So, keep it fresh with a really, really old guy?

Jono: Yeah. I’m serious, because they’re going to…

Nehemia: No, it’s a job for life, so…

Jono: It’s a job for life, so the sooner you die…

Nehemia: 20 years…

Jono: That’s right.

Nehemia: 20 years is bad enough.

Jono: It’s seriously one of the things they take into consideration when they determine which one is going to be the representative of whatever, so...but I think it’s really sad because they drag these poor old blokes around and say “hey, now we’re going to this country, and now kiss the ground, and we’re going to this country, and we’re going to do this.” And you can look at them and they get… I’ll tell you what…

Keith: I have a certain level of respect now that I’ve come back from Rome, some different aspects that I have a certain level of respect. But I just wanted to say that I just thought it was interesting that we start this verse out. Same with the Torah Pearl and the portion, is that this idea that if you served as a Levite in the Tent of Meeting, at 50 your shtick was up, at 51 you’re not serving any…

Jono: That’s right.

Keith: So, I just, for those…

Jono: And so, it goes on to talk about the sons of Merari.

Nehemia: But we’re going to come back to the Pope, we’re not done with him; I got more to say about the Pope.

Jono: It goes on, there’s a Census of the Levites, and it adds it all up from 30 to 50. Keith, there’s eight thousand…

Nehemia: Jewish accountants.

Jono: Eight thousand five hundred and eighty of them.

Keith: Okay.

Jono: And, from 30 to 50, verse 49, “According to the commandment of Yehovah they were numbered by the hand of Moses, each according to his service and according to his task; thus were they numbered by him, as Yehovah commanded Moses.” Nehemia, the Pope?

Nehemia: No, I’ll get back to him. I won’t forget.

Jono: 0kay. We’re going to move on.

Nehemia: Right here on the program, I’m going to play a card, but I’m waiting for now.

Keith: I would like to say something; in the history of Torah Pearls, in the history of Torah Pearls, check every program for yourself, ladies and gentlemen, Jono has never gotten through that much Scripture that quick. He is on a roll; let’s move on.

Jono: So, the reason…okay, got to save this, the reason…

Nehemia: Hallelujah.

Jono: The reason is because we’ve got some real big, huge pearls, and this is right in the middle of this Torah portion, so we’ve got to hammer through this.

Nehemia: These are diamonds, they’re not even pearls.

Jono: Oh, my Goodness. They’re diamonds. “And Yehovah,” chapter 5, “And Yehovah spoke to Moses, saying: ‘Command the children of Israel that they put out of the camp every leper, everyone who has a discharge, and whomever becomes defiled by a corpse.’” Now, Nehemia, I do believe that you were referring to this verse, if I remember correctly…

Nehemia: Yes.

Jono: …when I was commenting on how the Christians, in regards to Leviticus 15 and the laws of niddah and they say to you, “oh, so you got to kick your wife out of the house and outside the gates every time she’s at that time of the month.” And, where do you get that from? This is the one, right?

Nehemia: Well, that’s how they interpret this.

Jono: That’s how they interpret it.

Nehemia: The way I read it is this is talking specifically…it doesn’t say, “out of your city.” It’s specifically talking about the camp, and there’s an idea we see later in Deuteronomy, and I think we did talk about this, but I’ll just repeat it real quick. There’s a section in Deuteronomy that talks about when you’re in the army camp when you go out to war, Yehovah walks in that camp. In that context, if you want to go to the bathroom, you’ve got to dig a hole and bury your feces because the camp is holy. It’s a holy place.

Jono: Go outside and…

Nehemia: And that’s what they’re talking about here. They’re talking about the camp being a holy place. So, in these specific types of ritual impurity, the people had to go outside the main camp. There’s some question about whether they actually had to go outside the entire camp; the way this has certainly been historically interpreted in Jewish sources is, we just finished talking about the Levites who are protecting the Tabernacle, and so this is understood - certainly in Rabbinical sources - as referring to that camp of the Levites. That if there was, let’s say, a woman who was in the time of her period, that she would then distance herself from the Tabernacle and be outside the camp of the Levites. That’s because the food of the Levites was food that was offered as holy things in the Temple, and if you’ve touched a dead body, or a woman during her time, isn’t allowed to actually touch those things.

Although actually, if you read this very closely, it doesn’t specifically refer to the woman in her regular period. It says, “hazav,” male or female. If you remember we talked about the “hazav”, the unusual period. It was the one that went beyond seven days, or it was multiple days, not in her regular time, which usually is explained as a miscarriage.

So, it’s those specific, narrow circumstances of those people that would be sent outside the camp. And probably only the camp of the Levites, not the entire camp, because then you’d have a bunch of people out in the desert, which doesn’t really make a lot of sense. The lepers they may have sent outside the entire camp because that’s a communicable disease, presumably.

Jono: Quarantine, right?

Nehemia: Although we don’t exactly know what leprosy was. But it sounds, even from the descriptions we have, for example in Kings, that the lepers were outside the cities because apparently it was a communicable disease of some sorts. We don’t even know if it was Hansen’s disease.

So, in any event, this is probably talking about these very narrow circumstances, and even in the narrow circumstances, this is talking about not being among the Levites who are protecting the Tabernacle from becoming ritually impure.

Jono: There it is. “And then Yehovah spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Speak to the children of Israel: When a man or woman commits any sin that men commit in unfaithfulness against Yehovah, and that person is guilty, then he shall confess his sin which he has committed and he shall make restitution for his trespass in full, plus one-fifth of it, and give it to the one he has wronged.’” So that’s 20 percent, right? “But if the man has no relative…”

Nehemia: It’s the principle plus 20 percent. And so…can we stop here? What is this talking about? If you just read up until about halfway through verse 7, you’d say, “okay, he’s committed some kind of wrong - a trespass is literally translated in the Hebrew - what would you think this meant? I think a lot of people reading this would say, “he’s stolen something from God.” But then we hear, “he will give it to him who he has committed the offense against.” So, this is actually repeating something that we read over in Leviticus, chapter 5, verses 20 to 26. I think, at the time, we may have mentioned that this is paralleled here in Numbers 5, and there it explains the situation, and maybe we can read that real quick. It gives a bunch of different scenarios - you find something that belongs to somebody else and you decide to keep it even though you’re commanded to return it; you find somebody’s gold watch and you say, “this is a really nice gold watch, I’m not going to return this.” Then you’re confronted and you say, “no, I don’t have that gold watch,” and you swear falsely about it, even. Or you steal, or you exploit, or extort money from someone; in those situations, you’re actually committing a sin against your fellow.

What’s so interesting is the way it words it. Maybe you can read verse 6; maybe Keith can read, in his translation, verse six. Because the way it describes it is, you’re sinning against your fellow man, but that’s an offense against God; which I find amazing. If you read just verse 6 you wouldn’t get that, but you get to verse 7 and you realize - wait a minute, an offense against the person he’s offended against; well, isn’t that God? When we look at the parallel here in Leviticus 5, and it’s very clear that we’re not dealing with what we would think of as an offense against God, but God is telling you it is an offense against Him.

Jono: Keith, what do you have in 6?

Keith: “When a man or woman wrongs another in any way and so is unfaithful to the LORD, the person is guilty…”

Nehemia: There it is.

Keith: “…and must confess the sin he has committed. He must make full restitution for his wrong, add one-fifth to it, and give it to all to the persons he has wronged.”

Nehemia: Okay. So, the person he has wronged isn’t God. And if you look over in the parallel, actually in the English it’s Leviticus 6:1 through 7, in the Hebrew it’s Leviticus 5:20 to 26…

Keith: Wait, wait, hold on…

Nehemia: So…

Keith: I’m sorry Nehemia, you’ll just have to let me slow down a little bit. I feel a little bit like Moses right now where he saw the fire burning and it was not consumed, and so he slowed down and he took a second look and it says that when Yehovah noticed that Moses was coming, then he spoke to him. So now, I want to slow down, and everyone slow down with me. It says, again…you brought this up now, you guys sure you want to bring up this verse?

Nehemia: Okay. Let’s do it.

Keith: It says, “When a man or woman wrongs another in any way and so is unfaithful to the LORD…”

Nehemia: Amen.

Keith: “…that person is guilty and must confess the sin he has committed. He must make full restitution for the wrong, add one-fifth to it and give it to all to the persons he has wronged.” I mean…

Nehemia: Yeah. That’s amazing. By sinning against your fellow man, you sinned against God. Let me read real quick the description of this in Leviticus 6, in the English, so you understand what we’re dealing with. So it says, “If anyone sins and is unfaithful to the LORD,” to Yehovah, “by deceiving his neighbor about something entrusted to him or left in his care or something stolen, or if he cheats him, or if he finds lost property and lies about it, or if he swears falsely or he commits any such sin that people may do. When he thus sins and becomes guilty, he must return what he has stolen or taken by extortion, or what was entrusted to him, or the lost property he found, or whatever it was he swore falsely about. He must make restitution in full, add a fifth of the value to it and give it all to the owner on the day he presents his guilt offering.” So, you’ve got…he sins against his fellow man, but that in itself is an offense against God; that is a sin against God, which…

Keith: So, wait a minute.

Nehemia: …that’s an amazing concept. I think a lot of times we think, “you offended your fellow man, but I’m alright with God because I pray every day…”

Keith: Look…

Nehemia: “…and I, you know, keep these commandments, and I’m very careful about the ritual commandments.” But here’s it saying, if you sin against your fellow man, you’re not right with God. You’ve sinned against God Himself.

Keith: So, for those that are listening that tend to start at the back…

Nehemia: Whoo! Hallelujah.

Keith: No, no. So those that…

Nehemia: Wait, what?

Keith: …listen, that start at the back of their book, you know, in the English Bible, everyone knows this, that there’s this what they call the…and Jono, I know…you can’t tell me it’s not true, that you have what’s called the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Jono: Right.

Keith: So, there’s this big old book, the Old and the New.

Nehemia: Oh. There it is.

Keith: And what a lot of people do is they start at the back of the book, meaning they start with the new. And then they figure, every once in a while, if there’s a good story, they’ll do it. Now what we’re doing in Torah Pearls is we’re starting at the beginning of the Torah…

Jono: Amen.

Keith: …in Genesis, in English, through Deuteronomy, and these are the traditional portions that have been read throughout a long, long period of time. And here we are in Numbers chapter 5, and Nehemia wants to slow down and talk about this verse. Well, certainly, he expects for me, having been one who was conditioned to read the back of the book first, that if I’m now reading the beginning of the book, I’m still asking the question, where’s the connection with the back of the book? Ha! Here we go. So, what’s the connection with the back of the book?

Nehemia: There it is.

Keith: Instead of me starting, I’m going to just ask Jono - he’s got his Bible there.

Jono: Okay.

Keith: Jono, do you see anything? Because I have something, and Nehemia, you even might, because you’ve flirted with the New Testament a little bit yourself, specifically in terms of the text…

Nehemia: Let’s be clear. I’ve studied the New Testament, let’s be very clear about that…

Keith: We read about…okay, when I use the word “flirted…”

Nehemia: I always make it very clear that I’m a Karaite Jew; I’m not Messianic; not Christian.

Keith: Okay. Excellent. Absolutely. 100 percent. Ladies and gentlemen…

Nehemia: You know I make that very clear.

Jono: So, the question is…

Nehemia: Very clear. So, I’ve studied it as an ancient, historical Jewish document, which goes sometimes…just like I said…

Keith: Okay, Nehemia. Okay!

Nehemia: …writings of ancient Rabbis up to the Dead Sea Scrolls...

Keith: No problem. I would like to say he has not “flirted” with it; he’s studied it deeply. Now, let’s move on.

Jono: Okay. So, the question is: is this represented in the back of the book? Is it represented in the back of the Christian Bible? Keith, we have to say that it is, right? I mean it’s mentioned in Matthew chapter 5; do you have it there?

Keith: What do you mean? You’ve got a chapter and verse?

Jono: I’ve got a chapter and verse; it’s Matthew, chapter 5, verse 23 and 24.

Keith: So, wait a minute. Okay. So, read it.

Jono: “Therefore if you bring your gifts to the altar, and remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gifts there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gifts.”

Keith: Now, here’s what I want to say in honor to both Nehemia and Jono - first of all Nehemia, and I want to say to everyone, it has been an honor to actually study the New Testament; I approach that New Testament as a sacred text from my experience, and my background. Nehemia has approached that text as a textual scholar, and would you agree, Nehemia, as a result of studying some parts of the New Testament, specifically Matthew and the prayer and certain aspects of Matthew, Hebrew Matthew, that we were both surprised and actually encouraged by the fact that there were so many things in the New Testament that we studied that actually was actually rooted in the Torah? Am I right, Nehemia?

Nehemia: Well, it’s interesting that you say that because I’m looking back now, being I guess a little bit older and wiser than I was many years ago. And if you would have asked me, I don’t know, ten years ago, or really, more like 15 or 20 years ago, “As a Karaite Jew, do you think there’s anything of value in the Talmud?” I would’ve said, “Nah, throw that book out or stick it under your bed to prop it up when it’s, you know, lopsided. That book, that’s just deception; you don’t want anything to do with that.” And what I found out is that…it’s something Maimonides said, which I think is very profound. He was a Rabbi in the 12th century, he said: “learn the truth from whomever speaks it.” What I found is that, writings in the ancient Rabbis, there’s a lot of truth. Just because they said it, and I don’t agree with everything they said and I’m not a disciple of theirs, I shouldn’t throw it under the bus. I shouldn’t throw out the baby with the bathwater; there’s a lot of wisdom there that could be learned.

Keith: Excellent.

Nehemia: I think it’s the same thing, in a way, with what you find in the teachings of Yeshua - that there are things that he taught that are very profound. What he managed to do, which I think is so brilliant and which I’ve really come to appreciate, is; we could be reading through this chapter, which is kind of written by Jewish accountants, and it’s giving you a detailed instruction on how to carry out these commandments in different scenarios. And he comes and brings you this picture, this beautiful parable that, even if you’re a simple, illiterate fisherman like Peter was, you hear that and you’re like, “oh, okay, I don’t know about all those things that the priests are talking about, but I’m bringing a sacrifice and I’ve got an offense against my neighbor then, yeah, I better leave that there and go reconcile with my neighbor.” Does he remember that’s from Numbers chapter 5, verses 5 through 10? Maybe not, but, you know, me being the Jewish scholar, I go back and look at that and I say, “Okay, they’re saying the same thing.”

What they’re both saying is that, if you sin against your fellow man, don’t try to just brush that under the carpet and then think you can be okay with God if you bring sacrifices. There may be a sacrifice here, but first you’ve got to be reconciled with your fellow man. If you’ve stolen from him or damaged his property, you better make full restitution. Be alright with your fellow man, and then you can bring your sacrifice of expiation. Then we can talk about dealing with God, because you can’t deal with God until you’ve first reconciled with your fellow man. You know, one of the things I…

Keith: Okay.

Nehemia: …and here I’m going to…

Keith: Okay.

Nehemia: …no, now hold on. I’ve got to say this; I’m going to address my fellow Jews. Christians, Messianics; put your fingers in your ears, you don’t need to hear this. But what I’m going to say to my fellow Jews is, a lot of them will throw Jesus under the bus. They’ll say, “That guy, look what’s been done in his name for the last two thousand years. He’s the one who said, judge something by its fruits. And we’ve seen what the fruits of his teaching are; it was the crusades, and it was the disputations, and eventually the Holocaust. We want nothing to do with that tree that produced those fruits.”

What I would say to my fellow Jews is that, those are fruits that were produced, not by this tree, because this tree was actually a Jew whose teachings were co-opted. If you go back and actually look at what he taught, it’s actually the very same things that our sages taught, the very same things that our Torah teaches, and that we called holy and sacred. Let’s not throw him under the bus just because of the things that were done in his name that really had very little to do with anything he taught or represented.

So, let’s give the guy, you know, give the poor guy a break. It’s almost like, and maybe this has to be edited out because it’s too controversial, but I feel, it’s almost like what the Christians have done is, they’ve crucified Jesus a second time by defaming his name with their horrific actions and their poisonous fruit.

Jono: Nehemia, let me say I think it is fair to say that they have certainly taken the historical Yeshua and crucified his identity; there’s absolutely no doubt that, I think that’s very fair to say. Keith, can I ask you a question? Can I just ask you, what have you got in Matthew 5:23 in your translation? 23 and 24?

Keith: Okay. I’m sorry, I’ll go to Matthew 5, and then I would like to spend a card. I know we’ve got to keep going here.

Nehemia: Did I leave the reservation? Do we need…

Keith: It’s okay, you stay right where you’re at, Nehemia, just hold on. We’re not going to ask you any more questions. Okay, hold on here. So 5:23, “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and reconcile to your brother; then come and offer your gift.”

Jono: Okay. That’s interesting. Yours and mine are exactly the same. What were you going to ask?

Nehemia: Can I read what is says in the Hebrew Matthew?

Keith: No, Nehemia!

Jono: Sorry, Keith?

Keith: Okay.

Jono: Nehemia?

Nehemia: So Hebrew Matthew 5:23 to 24 is, “ve-im takriv korbanha lamizbe-ach,” if you bring your “korban,” your sacrifice, to the altar - that’s something that’s mentioned in a different place, he actually uses the word “korban,” in the Greek in another passage. “Ve-tazkir she-haya lecha im havercha din,” and you remember that there was a matter of judgment with your friend, “ve-hu mitahe mimcha,” and he’s enraged against you, “me-eize davar,” from some matter. And in verse 24, “hanech korbaneh sham lifnei hamizbe-ach,” leave your sacrifice there before the altar, “ve-lech leharatzato kodem,” and first go and appease him, or get acceptance from him. And that’s a very interesting word, “leharatzato,” because that’s the word that’s used always in the context of sacrifices in Biblical Hebrew. “Leratzot” is to get acceptance from God, to make it right with God. It’s a technical term, it refers to sacrifices. And here, the choice of this word, I think, is very significant. What he’s saying is, don’t try to get acceptance from God for your sacrifices until first you get acceptance from the guy you’ve wronged. They say, “ve-acharkach takriv korbaneha,” and afterward bring your sacrifice. Which is, you know, very interesting…

Jono: There it is.

Nehemia: …as a side note about what He’s saying. He’s not abolishing the whole sacrificial system; he’s just saying something that, actually, many of the prophets said, which is, “don’t bring Me rivers of oil and blood; do righteousness, and then we can talk.”

Jono: Yeah. Fair enough. Keith?

Keith: So Jono, I just wanted to say, this is one of the reasons that I appreciate you, in terms of the way that you’ve walked this line with Nehemia and myself, and the way that you have mediated it, though I think sometimes you’ve got to do a better job at telling Nehemia to be quiet so I can talk. But other than that, I think you’ve done a phenomenal job. But let me say this - one of the things that I think you’ve also been able to do is…in a situation like this, right away we say, “so where is that?”, and you’re able to say, “isn’t that Matthew 5?”

Well, in order for you to be able to do what you’ve done, you’ve had to know both sides. You’ve had to know what’s going on in the New Testament - that’s been your upbringing, that’s been where you have been. You had to also embrace and learn what’s going on in the Torah, both through language and all of that. So I think this is what’s so powerful about the role that you’re playing, other than your beautiful reading and the way that you ask questions back and forth - this is stuff that you know, and so I want to tell you that that’s no small thing that you’ve been able to do that. So, thanks for bringing up Matthew 5.

Nehemia: Can I add one more thing? Which is…

Keith: No.

Nehemia: May I add one more thing? Ma ze? So, you know, it’s kind of funny because I’ll go around and I’ll speak to Christian groups and Messianic groups, and I’m not Christian or Messianic, I tell them that up front. Sometimes I’ll get people who come up to me and they’re very upset. They’ll say, “Well, where is Jesus in what you just said? Where is Jesus?” And I say to them, “What are you talking about?” You know, I’ll give like, a talk on the Hebrew origins of the Lord’s Prayer and show how it’s really teaching things that we’re talking about in the Tanach. And they’ll say, “Well, where is Jesus in what you just taught?” And I’m like, “What are you talking about? Everything I said had to do with Jesus because he taught these exact things. So how can you say, ‘where is Jesus in this?’”

I get the impression, and maybe this isn’t my place to say as a Jew, but I sometimes get the impression that people say that they believe in Jesus, but they don’t believe anything he actually said. It’s like, we want the man and the image of the man, but we don’t want what he actually represented and taught and lived his ministry and life for. And, frankly, was eventually, you know, killed for, and died for. I mean, am I naïve here? I mean, you know…

Keith: Well, listen.

Nehemia: These are the things…I don’t know.

Keith: Look, we can go back and forth and talk about how people are conditioned through tradition. I like that; ‘conditioned through tradition’. And so many Christians have been conditioned through tradition; many Jews have been conditioned through tradition.

Nehemia: Amen.

Keith: And I think, again, that’s why it’s so powerful for us to do this. Because what we’re trying to do is, we’re coming from these different places, but the common ground is the Torah itself…

Jono: Amen.

Keith: …it’s saying, what does the Torah say? So, here’s an example where a pearl came out and we were able to connect it with the tradition or the understanding of the back of the book and then bring it forward and say, “Wow, this is where he got it from.” I think that’s an example of eyes being opened, and it’s a great opportunity for us to say a prayer that we continue to find out where our eyes can be opened and see the hidden things of the Torah.

Jono: Amen. That’s great, I’m glad you brought that up, Keith, because we need to pray that prayer, but before we continue from verse 11.

Keith: Yes.

Jono: Nehemia, Psalm 119 verse 18.

Nehemia: I did it last week, let’s…

Jono: Oh.

Keith: Let’s have Jono have it do it finally.

Jono: Must be my turn.

Nehemia: Jono, do it with your funny accent.

Jono: Psalm 119, verse 18, and it says, in my funny accent, it says, “Yehovah, would you open our eyes that we may see the wondrous things, the wondrous hidden things from Your Torah.” Amen.

Keith: Amen.

Nehemia: Amen.

Jono: And this is certainly one of the most wondrous…this is something I’ve wondered about a lot, okay? I’m just going to start reading it, and this is what it says. “Yehovah spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: If any man’s wife goes astray and behaves unfaithfully toward him, and a man lies with her carnally, and it is hidden from the eyes of her husband, and it is concealed that she has defiled herself, and there was no witness against her, nor was she caught— if the spirit of jealousy comes upon him and he becomes jealous of his wife, who has defiled herself; or if the spirit of jealousy comes upon him and he becomes jealous of his wife, although she has not defiled herself— then the man shall bring his wife to the priest. He shall bring the offering required for her, one-tenth of an ephah of barley meal; and shall pour no oil on it and shall put no frankincense on it, because it is a grain offering of jealousy, an offering for remembering, for bringing iniquity to remembrance. And the priest shall bring her near and set her before Yehovah. The priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel,’” holy water, Keith, it’s some holy water. “The priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel.” Can I just stop there and ask you out of curiosity?

Nehemia: Is that what you use against vampires?

Jono: Yeah, that’s what I thought. Did you have holy water in the Methodist tradition, Keith?

Keith: No, we never had holy water.

Jono: Okay. Just curious. When you went to the Vatican and St. Peter's and all of that, did you have?

Keith: Yes. They do have holy water; many places have holy water in their churches.

Jono: There it is.

Nehemia: So, tell a simple Karaite what exactly is…I mean, I’ve seen it in the movies and stuff.

Jono: Yeah, vampires.

Nehemia: What really is, other than the vampires…

Jono: Are you sure there’s no vampires in the Vatican, Nehemia? What are you…?

Nehemia: No, come on, what is it really?

Jono: Keith?

Keith: It’s water that’s holy.

Jono: It is. Now, you know what?

Nehemia: So, what…

Jono: Honestly, I don’t know that much about Catholicism, but I live next to a Catholic - well, he was a professing Catholic, he never went to church or anything. But he was upset one week, and I noticed the priest turned up with his little bottle, and I asked him, my next-door neighbor, I said, “so what’s going on there?” And he goes “ah, you know, I get a bit upset blah blah blah, so I rang the priest and he came down with his bottle and he just anointed the…he went through the house and splashed the holy water everywhere.” “And so, what does that do?” “Ah, you know, just makes it better.” That’s all I can tell you, that’s my experience, Keith. Could you help us out here?

Keith: No, listen, I don’t have the information about it. Let’s just say that there are many things like that that are symbolic and, etcetera, and that’s just one of them. But here I guess my bigger question is, he says, “Then he shall take some holy water.” So, what’s this holy water?

Nehemia: That’s a good question. I think that goes back to Leviticus 11:36, and it talks about…I’ll just read that real quick. It says, “A spring, however, or a cistern for collecting water remains clean, but anyone who touches one of these carcasses is unclean.” Meaning, carcass of certain animals that fall in it. “If water has been put on the seed…” so basically what it’s talking about here is that if you have, let’s say, a spring of water which has a pool next to it and the carcass of a rat falls into it, then that water doesn’t become ritually unclean because that’s water…it’s essentially a part of nature.

Whereas, if you take the water in a cup and then the rat falls in the cup, well, then that water is ritually unclean. So, I think your holy water simply means water that is ritually clean, that hasn’t been defiled…

Keith: There it is.

Nehemia: …which probably would be most water, because it’s in an earthenware vessel here. That would probably be most water that you just took out of a clean source. I think that’s what holy water would be in this context

Jono: Alright.

Keith: Okay.

Jono: There it is. So, it’s nothing too mystical. But then he takes dust that is on the floor of the Tabernacle and he puts it into the water. “Then the priest shall stand the woman before Yehovah, uncover the woman’s head, and put an offering for…”

Nehemia: Jono…

Jono: Yeah?

Nehemia: We’ve got to stop here. Is that what yours has, Keith? “Uncover the woman’s head”?

Keith: Let’s see here…give me that verse.

Nehemia: 18, verse 18.

Jono: Yep, verse 18, that’s the one.

Keith: So, verse 18…it says, “After the priest has had the woman stand before the LORD, he shall loosen her hair…”

Nehemia: Loosen her hair?

Keith: “…and place in her hands…”

Nehemia: What it really says is, “He will mess up the head of the woman,” is what it literally says. And what that is referring to is that the style that people wore in ancient times, women I guess especially, but men too, is they would have locks of hair, and what he comes and does is, he undoes the locks of their hair. In certain context that was a sign of mourning, in fact.

Now, one of the weird things that’s been done with this passage, and I find this, to be honest with you, entirely bizarre, is people have taken this passage and said, this is a proof that a woman needs to always have her hair covered. Because, when he uncovered her hair, that was a special circumstance. Have you heard that? Have you guys heard that?

Jono: I have heard that, actually. I have, yeah.

Keith: I haven’t heard it from this verse, no.

Nehemia: Okay. And I haven’t heard it from Jews. I’ve heard it, I guess, from people who were trying to follow the Torah from the Christian and Messianic perspective. But what they’re missing here is, first of all, it means, “to mess up her hair.” Meaning, he’s essentially undoing her locks. And secondly, even if it meant to uncover her hair, this would actually prove that a woman isn’t required to cover her hair, because the argument that’s made, and you’ll hear this essentially from Muslims - the Muslims will say, “well, the woman has to cover her hair otherwise…you wouldn’t walk around without a shirt, a woman wouldn’t walk around without a shirt, so why would she walk around with her hair uncovered?” It’s considered a nakedness, essentially.

That’s very different from even traditional Judaism, where only a married woman covers her hair; an unmarried woman would never cover her hair. It’s just…I mean, unless it was hot outside and she wanted to put a hat on. But as far as ritually covering her hair, she would only do that if she was married. And frankly, the reason that she did that is that people lived in a rough neighborhood in the old days, and if the woman didn’t cover her hair then the Gentiles would come and say, “oh, she’s unmarried,” and kidnap her and take her as their wife. So, she’s covering her hair so the Gentiles didn’t see her and kidnap her. That’s really where that comes from.

But in Islam, it’s a different concept because even unmarried women, among the Muslims, cover their hair, because the woman’s hair is considered nakedness. And then some Messianics, for some reason, have adopted that concept as well - that a woman’s hair is considered nakedness. But this proves it’s not nakedness because you can’t be naked in the Temple. We have a commandment; we read that in Exodus 20, that you even go to the extreme measure of not having steps, you have a ramp so when the priest is walking up, you don’t see his nakedness. So, the idea that a woman would uncover her hair and be naked in the Temple is ridiculous, that would never happen…

Jono: Sure.

Nehemia: …and this proves that a woman’s hair is not nakedness. We don’t need to be afraid of a woman’s sexuality and her beauty. Her hair is her beauty and that’s a gift from Yehovah, a gift from God.

Jono: Amen.

Nehemia: It’s not an ugly, disgusting thing. It’s something that God has blessed us with, and we should celebrate that, and not be afraid of that.

Jono: Grand.

Nehemia: Can I get an Amen, Johnson?

Jono: Amen.

Keith: Amen.

Jono: And so…

Nehemia: He’s like, what the…

Keith: The Methodists got it right.

Jono: “He puts the offering for remembrance in her hands, which is the grain offering of jealousy. And the priest shall wave in his hand the bitter water that brings a curse,” is what I have here. “And the priest shall put her under oath, and say to the woman, ‘If no man has lain with you, and if you have not gone astray to uncleanness while,’” and then it goes on to say, “under your husband’s,” and in italics, “authority. And the priest shall put her under oath, and say to the woman, ‘If no man has lain with you, and if you have not gone astray to uncleanness while under your husband’s authority, be free from this bitter water that brings a curse. But if you have gone astray while under your husband’s authority, and if you have defiled yourself and some man other than your husband has lain with you then the priest shall put the woman under the oath of the curse, and he shall say to the woman, ‘Yehovah make you a curse and an oath among your people, when Yehovah makes your thigh rot and your belly swell; and may this water that causes the curse go into your stomach, and make your belly swell and your thigh rot.’ Then the woman shall say, ‘Amen, so be it.’”

Now, this is super, super weird. I’ve got to say, a passage of scripture that I have often wondered about, and I thought, “what strange things are going on here, what is it with the thigh rotting and the belly swelling?” Not only that but as we read on, we see that the priest then writes all of this out, scrapes, it seems like he scrapes the words off into the water, the holy water that has the dust of the Tabernacle…

Nehemia: He actually blots them out. He takes water and dissolves the ink…

Jono: He dissolves the ink into the…and then she has to drink it?

Nehemia: …into the mixture. Right.

Jono: Okay. Nehemia, I mean, seriously, what is going on here, because the end of it…

Nehemia: It’s some interesting stuff; I don’t know. So, what we’re seeing here is that, there was this miraculous event that would take place. A man would be overcome with the spirit of jealousy, and he would have this option of bringing her to the Tabernacle, and later the Temple, and she would essentially be tested, in a way. A blessing would come out of it if it turned out that she was innocent, and if she was guilty, then…there would be a miraculous blessing, and there’d also be a miraculous curse if she was sinning.

Essentially this is showing the power and miraculous nature of God’s presence in the Tabernacle. It also shows you the power of the written word, that this written word that’s then dissolved and put into this mixture has this effect that it causes the woman, basically, to die, or to get extremely sick.

So, I think this is a miraculous thing. I think one thing to point out to people is that, since we don’t have a Temple or a Tabernacle, that this is something that we can read about and study about, but it doesn’t have a practical application today.

Keith: Sure.

Nehemia: The only practical application, I would say, is if you’re jealous of your wife. In some religions, in some cultures, merely accusing a woman of adultery, or a man, is enough for them to be guilty. There’s this horrible movie called, “The Stoning of Soraya,” which is actually a movie made in Iran. It’s in Persian, the language of Iran. It shows how this woman is accused of adultery and eventually stoned, and there are no witnesses to her actually committing adultery. There are witnesses to innuendo and assumption about what took place, but there are no actual witnesses.

Now, what this is saying here is, if you don’t have any witnesses you can go before God and there could be this test, but you can’t stone the woman for committing adultery. If you want to be able to prove adultery, you need to either go to this miraculous test or you need to bring actual witnesses. I think that’s a very important point - that accusing somebody of something they’ve done without proof, without solid evidence, is not valid.

Jono: So…

Nehemia: It doesn’t stand.

Jono: So, my question is this, “your thigh rot and your belly swell;” is that what it says in Hebrew? Is there a deeper meaning to that? Or is that really just literal?

Nehemia: Well, it says, “your belly swell,” and literally, “your thigh fall,” whatever that means. Maybe ‘fall off’; I don’t know, it’s not very clear. I hope we never get a chance to see this in action, I pray, and I mean anyone. I think when the Temple is restored, I’m pretty sure this won’t need to be tested.

Jono: I hope so. Well, now, listen, let me just say what I’ve got here. I find it interesting because, in my New King James Study Bible, in the study notes, this is what it says for verse 21; “Your thigh rot and your belly swell,” it says, symbolically speaks of a miscarriage (of an illicit child) if the woman was pregnant, and an inability to conceive subsequently. In the biblical world, a woman who was unable to bear children was regarded as being under a curse; in this case, it would have been true.” Does that ring a bell with you in any way in the Hebrew? I mean, does that?

Nehemia: It’s a cute idea, but it doesn’t say that.

Jono: It doesn’t say that, but I guess what it’s tying it to is verse 28, that says, “But if the woman has not defiled herself, and is clean, then she shall be free and may conceive children.”

Nehemia: Okay.

Jono: Why would it…

Nehemia: That would imply that she’s not pregnant.

Jono: Okay. I guess so.

Nehemia: So, she’s obviously…yeah.

Jono: That’s bizarre.

Nehemia: Let’s be honest here, let’s call a spade a spade; this is a weird passage.

Jono: It’s super weird.

Nehemia: It’s weird. It is. And you know, it is what it is. But I think what it is recognizing is that it’s human nature to be jealous, and it’s human nature to be suspicious. But give the woman the benefit of the doubt, and the man. I think this is actually a pretty revolutionary concept, which later became…well, we take it for granted as part of Western law, which is “innocent until proven guilty.” I think that’s the clear principle here - that you can be jealous and accuse somebody of something, but unless there’s clear evidence, either through this miraculous event or through witnesses, the person has to be deemed innocent.

Jono: Fair enough.

Nehemia: Until you can prove them guilty by one of these means. That actually is a revolutionary idea, and we take it for granted, but it’s not obvious. Or, it’s obvious in retrospect, but it certainly isn’t part of the general tradition of ancient law. So that is a revolutionary thing the Torah is giving us here.

Jono: There it is. Fair enough. Moving on, Keith, chapter 6 - what I don’t understand is why would you put up your hand and say, “I don’t want to drink wine anymore, I don’t want to eat grapes, I don’t want sultanas; I’m going to shave my head.”

Keith: Wait. So, I wanted to say one thing. It says, “Then this, this…,” and now you guys call this weird, and I actually look at it just a little bit different, and it says, “This then, is the law of jealousy when a woman goes astray and defiles herself while married to her husband.” And I just think this idea that He says, “this is the law of jealousy,” or maybe, Nehemia, you’ll give us if it’s a different word…I’m looking at my NIV here. But just this concept that it was something that would be addressed. And the fact that it was addressed means that it must be important.

So to me, when I look at this - I may not know all the reasons that the thigh wastes and the stomach swells, but I do understand it was important enough to have it in the Torah, which obviously means that it was something that needed to be addressed. And so that’s the way I looked at it, I guess I wasn’t so caught up on how this would be revealed as much as it needed to be.

Nehemia: Okay. And by the way, where it says there, “under her husband’s authority,” I looked it up and, in the Hebrew, it says, “tiste isha tachat isha.” Which means, a woman shall stray instead of her husband. Meaning, it’s not that she’s under her husband’s authority, it’s that she’s going and having relations with someone, instead of having those relations with her husband.

Jono: With her husband, right.

Nehemia: That’s the more literal translation…

Jono: Interesting.

Nehemia: …and she’s, you know… yeah.

Jono: There’s a lot of italics in that phrase in my Bible. So, Nazirite, now, seriously fellows, now, we don’t really have much information besides this in regard to the Nazirite. It just seems to be a guy who says, “hey, I’m going to shave my head, then I’m going to grow my hair for a certain period of time, and I’m not going to drink wine, or have anything basically from the grapevine.” There are a couple other things that he can’t do: he can’t go near a dead body, he cannot make himself unclean even for when member of his family dies. He can’t go to their funeral, I suppose. And why? What I want to know is, why would you put up your hand and volunteer to take the vow of Nazirite?

Nehemia: I’m going to let Keith field this one because I’m saving my card for the next section.

Jono: Keith, have you got any idea? Because honestly, I’ve thought about it and thought about it. Is there…does it somehow make him closer to God somehow? I don’t understand.

Keith: Well, I guess the best question is, where do we see the Nazirite vow being taken in Scripture? And that could be something to look at, to ask, where do we see that? What does that mean? How is there manifestation? And obviously, there’s something that happens for that person that takes that vow, that there has to be some reason for them wanting to do that.

Jono: So, well, we see that right? We see it in Judges with Samson, but again I saw…

Nehemia: Well, no, there he doesn’t take the vow. The situation of Samson is a little bit different. He doesn’t take the vow, it’s the situation of…being a Nazirite is imposed upon him by an angel through his parents.

Jono: Yeah…

Nehemia: And secondly, the Nazirite that Numbers six is talking about, that we’re reading here, is for a set period of time. There’s no such thing as a lifelong Nazirite in Numbers six, and that’s exactly what Samson is. So, in a sense, Samson is something that really goes beyond what’s being described in Numbers six - it’s a lifelong situation of being a Nazirite. And that got Samson in a lot of trouble, because you’re not allowed to become ritually unclean from the dead if you’re a Nazirite, and Samson killed lots of people.

Jono: Yeah.

Nehemia: You know…

Jono: He really did.

Nehemia: …he became ritually unclean from the dead all the time. So, the explanation that’s usually given is, that only applies to a person who has a period of being a Nazirite. But if you’re a lifetime Nazirite, then you are allowed to become ritually unclean from the dead. But in any event, either way, he’s sort-of a different situation.

But that actually raises the question that I want to ask Keith, and you Jono, coming from your traditions, and I know this is maybe a little bit beyond the Torah portion, but I’ll bring it up anyway. It kind of ties into what we were talking about before. So, I hear from a lot of people that Jesus the Nazarene, that that actually means he was a Nazirite. I was wondering if either of you guys had some input on that; anything to say on that?

Jono: All I can tell you is that whenever you see a picture of him, whenever there’s a painting or a depiction of Jesus, or Yeshua, he’s always got long hair, but that’s really all I’ve got to offer on the topic. I mean…

Nehemia: What do you got, Keith?

Keith: Well, all I know is, unless there was something else in the cup, they were drinking wine.

Jono: It’s true, they were drinking wine.

Nehemia: So, you’re saying he couldn’t have been a Nazirite because he drank wine.

Keith: Not according to Nazirite…

Nehemia: Neither a Nazirite nor a Baptist.

Keith: Alright.

Jono: I know it comes from a verse in Matthew if I remember correctly…okay so here it is. So Matthew 2:23, I think maybe what you’re in reference to, “And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken by the prophets, ‘He shall be called a Nazarene.’”

Now what do you got in…I’m just curious, Nehemia, while we’re doing this, is that, “Nazarene,” is that in regards to Nazirite? Or is it in regards to Nazareth? Or, what is it in regards to? What have you got in the Shem-tov Hebrew Matthew, perhaps?

Nehemia: Alright, so that’s interesting because Shem-tov Hebrew Matthew was used in these debates with the Catholics, and a lot of times they would stick in a Latin word, especially where there was a technical term. It seems that instead of the word, the Hebrew word for Nazareth, they’ve all of a sudden stuck in the Latin word “Nazarit,” which would simply be a word that…the idea was that when the Jew was reading this and he had to respond to the Catholic in the debates - this is something Shem-tov did, they didn’t want the Jews to be surprised and say, “Natzeret? I never heard of Natzeret, what’s that?” So, they put, basically the Hebrew transliteration of the Latin word, although it doesn’t say that explicitly, I have to point out.

So here is what it says, “And he shall dwell in a city called Nazarit,” and again, the normal Hebrew word Nazareth would be Natzeret, not Nazarit, “to fulfill what was said of the prophet, Nazeret,” or Nazareth, “he will be called.” Which actually, if you translate that literally as a Hebrew word - the word would be “girded,” like, to gird the loins, “he shall be called ‘girded’,” which I don’t know really what that means.

So that’s why I suspect this is a Latin word, but maybe I’m just not understanding the significance of it in Hebrew. In any event, it definitely is closer to the word “Nazirite,” than it is to the word “Nazareth,” in Hebrew Matthew.

Jono: Okay. Fair enough. So, Keith, is there some sort of allusion there? I mean what prophet are we talking about? Where’s the difference?

Keith: All I would say is this, and to me, this is not, for me personally, it’s not complicated from the standpoint of looking at the vow and then asking the question about whether or not that vow translated over to the ministry of Yeshua/Jesus. All I would do is say, “okay, what are the things that it means to take a vow, and I’d say are those things he did or not?”

For example, wine. Did he ever touch a dead body? Was he…so to me, I’m not sure why that is of issue. Again, looking at the Torah and saying, “what does the Torah say?” And then asking, how is it applied, versus retrofitting. I’d ask, “okay, here’s what it says about the Nazirite vow. Who do I see living that particular vow? Is that what Paul did for example when he…was he making a vow when he came to the Temple? I mean I…

Jono: He went to the Temple…

Nehemia: Oh, definitely. Absolutely.

Keith: So then…

Nehemia: Absolutely. It talks about that in...

Keith: So then, hold on, Nehemia.

Nehemia: That’s obviously a Nazirite vow.

Keith: Okay. So, then my point is, I would say those are the things that I would look at and say that connects here. So, when they ask, if there’s someone who says… well, then… and then I get, I really get frustrated with this, Jono, actually, to be honest. This whole thing about picking some little aspect and then saying, “is this such and such,” and they would say, “this such and such,” and versus… and over and over again, and over and over again. What does it say in the Torah, how do we understand that, historically, contextually, and linguistically? Okay, now we don’t need to try to put a square into a circle; it doesn’t fit.

Jono: Must acquit.

Keith: Exactly.

Jono: There it is.

Keith: Let’s get to the good part here, come on.

Jono: I will just say…

Nehemia: Come on with that.

Jono: I will just say that in my study notes in the cross-references it takes me back to Judges 13:5 and Judges 13 chapter…

Keith: Well, that’s because the study notes are not Scripture.

Jono: I know. So…no, no, it’s the cross-reference…

Keith: The commentary - the reason I’m trying to be funny, because people will say that to me all the time, “it says it right there.” My wife will come, and she’ll say to me, “look, it says in the study notes of this Bible such and such.” I go, “yeah, but honey, what does it say in the verse?”

Jono: And this is what it says, it says in the birth of Samson, “For behold, you shall conceive and bear a son. And no razor shall come upon his head, for the child shall be a Nazirite to God from the womb; and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.” So that’s…

Nehemia: Is that what you got Keith, “deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines”? That’s… wow. So, yeah, so I’m looking at the NIV, “He will begin the deliverance of Israel from the hand of the Philistines.” The Hebrew word there is, “lehoshia”, “he will save Israel from the hands of the Philistines.” That’s the same word as in names like Joshua, Yehoshua, which means, “Yehovah saves.” And, of course, obviously, that’s the same word as in the name Yeshua.

Jono: Ah! There’s the connection!

Nehemia: Which is short for- there it is…

Jono: Yeshua! There it is. Be a Nazirite to God.

Nehemia: So, if you translate this literally you can say, “and he will begin to Yeshua Israel from the hands of the Philistines.” So, isn’t that interesting that they stick the word ‘deliver’ into there because they want to avoid the theological connotations? Incredible.

Jono: There it is. It all makes so much more sense now. Oh, my Goodness, I cannot believe that… Keith we’re still waiting for the book.

Keith: Yeah. I don’t think the book is going to be written.

Jono: I’m starting to think that the book is just a figment of his imagination. Some book that he’s been writing what - for two years now?

Keith: I’ve been holding back but, Jono, since he doesn’t want to release the book, I’m going to speak in Torah Pearls about the Priestly Blessing, and he doesn’t get to say anything.

Nehemia: No. Oh, no! So in all seriousness, I believe that by the time this is broadcast, my hope is, that we’ll be past the editing stage and we’ll already have the book in the hands of the printers, it’ll just be a matter of weeks before it’s available to the people. What we’re talking about, of course, is my new book entitled - what is the title, again? It’s my new book on the Priestly Blessing. And…

Jono: You see? You see? It’s a figment of his imagination, he makes it up as he goes along; we’re never going to see…

Nehemia: Oh, it’s called “Shattering the Conspiracy of Silence: The Hebrew Power of the Priestly Blessing Unleashed.”

Jono: Yeah!

Nehemia: Or something like that, and it’s about the Priestly Blessing, and, really, my journey of discovery in understanding this Priestly Blessing, which has really been obscured by generations of tradition and religious agendas. On top of that, there’s been an outright conspiracy to hide from the people the key aspect of the Priestly Blessing. May I read this section?

Jono: Can you please read it.

Nehemia: Number 20 through 27, it says “And Yehovah spoke to Moses saying: ‘Speak to Aaron and his sons saying, thus shall you bless the children of Israel, Say unto them.’” Then we have a three-lined blessing, it says, “ivarecha Yehovah ve-ishmerecha,” literally may Yehovah bless you and keep you, “ya-er Yehovah panav elecha ve-yechunecha,” Yehovah shine his face towards you and be gracious towards you, “isa Yehovah panav elecha ve-yasim lecha shalom,” may Yehovah lift his face towards you and give you peace. And then it concludes in verse 27, “ve-samu et shmi al bnei-Israel,” and they shall place My name on the children of Israel, “ve-ani evarechem,” and I will bless them. There’s a promise there that Yehovah will bless the people if His name is placed on the people. A large part of this conspiracy, to keep this blessing from really being proclaimed in the way it was commanded, is the banning of the name that scribes, priests, and rabbis have forbidden us…

Jono: Amen.

Nehemia: …from speaking this name for the last 1800 years. That ban has been joined in the 21st century by the man that Keith saw a few weeks ago in Rome…

Jono: Yeah.

Nehemia: …by Pope Benedict, who issued a ban forbidding people to speak the name. And we’ve now gone from the rabbis… and it’s interesting, because it started out as a Roman ban under the emperor Hadrian, who’s known as the high priest, the Pontifex Maximus. It was then adapted by the Rabbis; it’s now gone back to the Pontifex Maximus of Rome, reinstituting the ban of his predecessor, the emperor Hadrian. We’ve gone full circle now, people, and I think now is the time to break the ban and to do what it says here - to place the name of Yehovah, the Creator of the universe, upon his people so that he may bless us.

Jono: Amen.

Nehemia: You know, there’s this passage that changed my life, and it’s not from the Bible. It’s a passage from the writings of the ancient rabbis from the Midrash, and it says, “the reason that Israel prays but is not answered is because they don’t pray using God’s name.” And I’m thinking, “are you kidding me?!” The very same rabbis who instituted the ban on the name, who forbade us to speak the ban on the name, are the very same ones that are now telling us that, well, “that’s why your prayers aren’t answered - because you follow our ban.” I don’t know if that’s why the prayers aren’t answered or not, that’s already a theological issue, but here, these very same people are telling me, “yeah, look at Scripture, you need to be praying in the name, and praising the name, and calling upon the name, and blessing the people in the name.”

On that note, if you’ll allow me, I want to… there’s a lot of weird phrases in this prayer, in this blessing - “Yehovah, may He shine His face towards you.” Well, what does that mean, “shine His face”? And, “may He lift his face,” and even to be “gracious towards you.” And I was actually inspired a while ago - it was after we did the program together, Jono, on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, I actually went out… and it may have been the same day, but I don’t remember, or a few days before, but then I went out on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, 9/11/2011, I went to Israel’s 9/11 Memorial. I had just finished writing the book, before the editing phases, but I finished writing the book. And I prayed a prayer in the spirit of the Priestly Blessing, after uncovering the meaning of what it actually meant. In other words, translating essentially into modern English, what it means when he says, “may He shine His face towards you,” and “may He be gracious towards you.” And this is what I came up with. Can I share this prayer, pray this prayer?

Jono: Please.

Nehemia: So this is the prayer I prayed at the 9/11 Memorial, the 10th anniversary, I said, “O Yehovah, let Your name be known from the east all the way unto the west, from the rising of the sun all the way into the place of its setting, for You are the one who blesses us and protects us, You are the one who smiles at us with a twinkle in His eye, You are the one who looks at us, performing miracles, overtly and covertly. You Yehovah, are the one who gives us peace; may we have peace in our lives today, and may all mankind soon, in our days, stand shoulder-to-shoulder calling on Your name in a time of global peace.

Jono: Amen.

Nehemia: Amen.

Jono: Amen.

Keith: Amen.

Jono: That’s beautiful. Keith?

Keith: No, I just think this whole thing is such an interesting… and I’ve been sitting and watching this whole process with Nehemia. And what’s been so exciting for me is to see him, what I call, regarding this issue of the name, if I can say it this way - his voice, regarding the name, has been so profound, because it’s one thing for different groups of people and different scholars and folks to attempt to address this so controversial issue of the name, but here’s a guy who’s lived this his entire life, and who has made it a point to try and find out how it is practical to him. So that’s why, for me, this has been exciting, and I can’t wait until the book is done so we can make it a companion deal - you know, buy a book and get the second one half-price.

Jono: There you go. Now it is an excellent book, it’s an incredible book, I’ve had the privilege of reading it, and I’m telling you now, listeners, the moment it hits the shelves, you want it, get it quickly. And apparently, as Nehemia is telling us, it’s going to be a matter of weeks, so hopefully, that’ll be the case. Nehemia, in the prayer that you just read out to us…

Nehemia: Bear in mind, though, this is the Middle-East, and it’s on Middle-Eastern time so…

Jono: Let me ask you about one aspect of something that you just read out, the prayer you just read out, “the twinkling of the eye.” Can you go into some detail there for us?

Nehemia: Yeah. Okay. I don’t want to spoil the book for people, but I guess I will share this. So, one of the things that I discovered - I was trying to understand what it means when it says, “may He be gracious towards you.” In verse 25 of Numbers 6 - what does it mean for God to have grace? A lot of times I’ll hear from Christians, and one Christian in particular really had an impact on me, when she said something like, “Nehemia, you’re going to burn in hell because you Jews have got no grace.” She was a southern lady; that’s my southern accent.

Anyway, I thought about that, and here I have the Priestly Blessing, where it says, “may He be gracious towards you.” This is to the children of Israel as the original context here. So, what the blessing that He’s promising to His people is, to be gracious. It got me thinking, what does it mean to be gracious? Maybe she means something different than what I understand. Maybe she’s using some other concept of grace.

I looked up the term ‘grace’ and studied it in depth and found out the literal meaning of “chen” - the word ‘chen’ is the Hebrew word for grace - the literal meaning is ‘the twinkle in the eye’. The most common phrase you’ll find throughout Scripture is, “he found chen,” he found favor in his eyes; literally, he found grace in his eyes. What it means is, a person looked up to God, or there’s also, you see in human relationships - someone looked up to another human, and they had that look, that twinkle in their eye.

The twinkle in the eye is what we think of as… my sister’s actually an optometrist and is an expert on eyes. I asked her – physiologically, what’s a twinkle in the eye? Where does that come from? Where it actually comes from is when someone expresses great emotion and love, their pupil expands and a little tear will well up in their eyes sometimes, and those two effects together, the expanding pupil and the tear, cause more light to reflect.

That’s why we think of the twinkle in the eye as a sign of lovingness. So much so that in the 19th century there were women who would put this stuff in their eye - I believe it was some chemical they would put in their eye - that would cause their pupil to dilate and that would make men think that they were more loving, that the woman loved them more. They were basically causing it to artificially happen, what happens naturally, when there’s an expression of love.

When it says, “may He be gracious towards you,” may He “chen” you, maybe have that twinkle in His eye towards you, what it means is Yehovah, our heavenly Father, looks down upon us with that look of love in His eye, and we look back at Him and we see His eye twinkling because He loves us so much. That’s what grace is about. Grace is the expression of the Creator’s love - it’s not a reward, it’s a free gift.

And the word ‘free’ actually comes from the same exact word, the twinkle. The word free gift - and also, a gift is something that you give when you have so much love, you just give it, you give that gift. And Yehovah loves us so much, He’s saying here, and He’ll bless us if we are blessed in His name. He’ll look at us with that twinkle in His eye. That’s such an amazing picture of fatherhood, and I know both of you men are fathers and have had that opportunity, but I’m really looking forward to that time when I can look at my child with the twinkle in my eye as our heavenly Father looks down upon us with that unconditional love. Can I get an Amen? Hallelujah. Whoo!

Jono: Amen.

Nehemia: I’m excited.

Jono: And that’s just…Keith, that’s just a little piece of the book, and the rest of it is just as brilliant if not more so. I highly recommend it when it comes out.

Keith: Yes. I’m telling you - we just have to get him to get it done.

Jono: Yeah. That’s right. He’s just got to…

Nehemia: I’ve been working on it.

Jono: Alright. So, chapter 7, really, is long, and listeners can read that and… if you have comments to make, feel free. Okay.

Keith: Yes.

Jono: We’re done.

Keith: Well, let me say this.

Nehemia: What do you mean? You’re going to skip the longest chapter in the Bible?

Keith: No, no, I wanted to say…

Nehemia: Numbers 7 is the longest chapter of the Bible, and you’re going to skip it? I don’t understand.

Keith: No, no, what I was going to say, Jono…

Jono: Keith?

Keith: …was using just one line, and this line is repeated. So, could we talk about this one line and then understand that the line is repeated?

Jono: Yep, it’s all the way through, and it’s verse 1, is that what you want?

Keith: No, it’s just the part where it says… I’m just talking about this particular thing, it talks about the day…

Nehemia: It’s actually, yeah, it’s on the first day. Let’s see, Number chapter 7, where does it say…

Keith: Look; I’m doing my thing, Nehemia.

Jono: Are you, Keith?

Keith: Yes.

Nehemia: Verses 12 through 17.

Keith: Verse 12, I’m going to interrupt him, “The one who brought his offering on the first day,” and then it says the name of the person, “the tribe of Judah.” And then it goes on and goes on and goes on. And what I thought was so cool about this was, again, this whole issue of the day - the first day, the second day, the third day, the fourth day. I mean it’s like… the part that maybe, and we can talk about this just for a second, but it’s going through this whole deal, and it goes all the way into the 12th day.

And it says the name of the person, the leader of the people and of the tribe, and the thing that catches my attention was that he’s bringing his offering. That he’s bringing this gift, this offering. And, I don’t know, there was something about that that kind of caught me, was, what did that actually look like? Okay, here comes this tribe, you know, you see this happen in…

Nehemia: What does that look like to you?

Keith: Yeah, I don’t want to go back to Rome too much, but there’s this idea after this whole thing happens, and I’m going to share this, but people, they bring on behalf of their congregation, or behalf of their group; or behalf of their country. For example, Mexico was there when I was in Rome, and one of the things that Mexico did is they sent their ambassador, and then the ambassador brought a gift, and the gift goes up to the Pope, etcetera. So, when I’m reading this, and certainly that’s not what we’re talking about here, but just this idea of this one person bringing this on behalf of the tribe because there’s 12 tribes, and…

Jono: You know, when we read through this and, now, you got me thinking again we’re back in the Vatican and I’m thinking, “on the 12 days of Christmas my true love sent to me.”

Keith: Right.

Jono: Is that where we get this from, 12 days of Christmas? And we have gifts and all of that…

Nehemia: That’s an excellent question.

Jono: I wonder about that.

Nehemia: I know there’s 8 days of Hanukah. Are there 12 days of Christmas?

Jono: I don’t know. I don’t understand it. “Now it came to pass, when Moses had finished setting up the Tabernacle, that he anointed it,” he anointed it? What does it say?

Nehemia: He anointed it.

Jono: Yeah.

Nehemia: Well, we read about that - he commanded in Exodus how he would anoint each of the vessels…

Jono: He mashiached everything, everything was a mashiach, right?

Nehemia: He mashiached it.

Jono: There’s one big mashiach, “consecrated it and all its furnishings, and the altar and all its utensils; so, he anointed them and consecrated them.” And there it is, and so we have 12 days, as Keith said, it was for 12 days, and, basically, we have a summary. If you want the summary, folks, it starts in verse 84, “This was the dedication offering for the altar from the leaders of Israel, when it was anointed: twelve silver platters, twelve silver bowls, and twelve gold pans. Each silver platter weighed one hundred and thirty shekels and each bowl,” wow, “seventy shekels. And the silver of the vessels weighed two thousand four hundred shekels, according to the shekel of the sanctuary. The twelve gold pans full of incense weighed ten shekels apiece, according to the shekel of the sanctuary; all the gold of the pans weighed one hundred and twenty shekels. All the oxen,” there’s oxen, and there were bulls, there were rams, and there was grain, and there was so much, and there it is. And verse 89, can I read it?

Keith: I love this verse.

Nehemia: Before you end this in verse 89, can I point out two things in this chapter?

Jono: Please.

Nehemia: Okay. One thing I find very interesting is, we’re reading here about each day it’s the ‘nasee’ who, can we translate it as prince, or can we translate is as the nobleman? Basically, he’s the head honcho of each of these tribes, of the 12 tribes, and I think it’s interesting that the head guy who’s coming, he’s bringing the gift out of his own pocket. He’s not saying, “okay, I’m going to now levy a tax from the people so I can then give that to the Tabernacle in my name.” He’s giving it out of his own pocket.

Jono: Yeah.

Nehemia: I think that’s really interesting, instead of the nobleman taking, he’s actually giving, which I think is something. He’s giving to God, instead of taking from God. There’s something profound about that.

Jono: I think that’s beautiful. That’s beautiful, yeah.

Nehemia: And the second thing that I noticed in this chapter is, we’ve got 12 days, one after the other, and I really don’t think I’ve thought about this until today, when I was reading the portion, preparing for today. But if you read in verse 48, it says, “On the seventh day the prince of the sons of Ephraim, Elishama son of Ammihud,” etcetera, etcetera, he brought his sacrifice, he brought his bowl and he brought all the things. And they didn’t take… and I don’t know what to make of this, I’m just going to kind of think out loud, which is that they - and I think this actually came as a shock to me, I thought, “well, what about Shabbat? They didn’t stop for Shabbat.”

Jono: That’s right.

Nehemia: I’ll tell you why I thought about that - and this is a controversial thing I’m going to say - that I know in a lot of Jewish synagogues one of the big controversies…and what makes it so controversial to me is that it’s not even a controversy - one of the things they do that I find controversial is they’ll take up donations on Shabbat in Orthodox Jewish synagogues. Not in every one, but in many of them, what they’ll do is they’ll… because they don’t ask for the tithe like Christian churches do, they say, “the tithe goes to the Temple. So how are we going to fund our synagogue? Well, we’ve got to ask people for donations.” And the way that they’ll often do that is they’ll… the most common thing I’m aware of, at least, is that they’ll auction off different portions of the Torah, giving people the honor of essentially dedicating that portion of the Torah.

Jono: Wow.

Nehemia: So, they’ll read the Torah portion, just like we’re talking about here. They’ll read the Torah portion, they’ll break it up into seven sections, and in some places they’ll say, “Okay, can you either come up and read this yourself or have it done in your honor? If you don’t know how to read, or you don’t know how to read with the cantelation, or if you can’t carry a tune… like me.” So, they’ll auction that off, and people get all excited about it. They’ll be like, “Can I hear fifty shekel? Can I hear a hundred shekel?”

Jono: Oh, my goodness.

Nehemia: It doesn’t occur to anybody that this is not an appropriate thing to be done on Shabbat, and that’s why I say it’s controversial. But when I was reading this today, I started to think, “You know what? We’re definitely prohibited from engaging in commerce on Shabbat, we can see that in Nehemia 13 where Nehemia shut the gates so the merchants wouldn’t come in and sell on Shabbat…”

Jono: Okay.

Nehemia: “…but, you know, maybe we’re not forbidden from supporting the service of God.” In other words, you know, they didn’t say, okay, it’s Shabbat we’re not going to bring the donations here on Shabbat, we’re going continue to do that on Shabbat. I’m just thinking out loud. I don’t know.

Jono: Another thing that comes to mind…

Nehemia: I have mixed feelings about it.

Jono: When you highlight this, and I remember that you brought our attention to a particular verse, when the Tabernacle was completed and all the work that went into the Tabernacle, and how the rabbis take a particular verse that begins with the word ‘but’, or ‘surely’ depending on how it’s…

Nehemia: Right.

Jono: Anyhow, one of the things that you highlighted was…

Nehemia: Exodus 35.

Jono: And one of the prohibitions - Exodus 35 - one of the prohibitions was taking something from a private dwelling out into to the public. And now I’m reading this and I’m thinking…

Nehemia: Exodus 31:13.

Jono: Okay, 31:13. And so here we are, and they’ve definitely done this, right? They’ve walked out of their house with the golden bowl, or with whatever it is, and they’ve gone to take it to the Tabernacle.

Nehemia: Right.

Jono: Interesting. It’s just…

Nehemia: Even on Shabbat.

Jono: Even on Shabbat. Okay.

Keith: Amen.

Jono: It just makes me think, just makes me think, as well. Keith, would you please read for us verse 89?

Keith: “When Moses entered the Tent of Meeting to speak with the LORD, Yehovah, he heard the voice speaking to him from between the two cherubim above the atonement cover on the ark of the testimony. And he spoke with him.” And I mean to tell you what…

Nehemia: Whoo!

Keith: If we didn’t say anything else, if we didn’t talk about anything else, if we didn’t have any other verse… I mean this to me just… it’s the longest chapter in the Torah…

Jono: But it ends like that.

Keith: And it ends like that. I’m thinking, “Wow, good things come to those who wait.” This verse is one that I just - I love this verse.

Jono: So, as you read it, Keith, do you get the idea that Moses walks in and speaks to Yehovah and the sound of His voice, of our Creator’s voice, comes from between the cherubim above the ark and speaks to him?

Keith: When I read this, I just get this concept, this idea, that this is where they have their dialogue. I mean, he’s going in there and there’s a dialogue. Now, Moses hears the situation, now, okay, what about such and such, well, such and such. I mean, I’m like, whoa, how amazing, how powerful must it have been for Moses to just go in and to have these conversations. I say don’t “just go in,” but the idea of going in and having this conversation, it’s just amazing.

Nehemia: Wow. I got to point out a little - I think this is a Torah Pearl that I’ve never really noticed before…

Jono: Please.

Nehemia: …which is in Numbers. So here we got Numbers 7:89, and you’re reading from the NIV, Keith, I guess, and it says, “He heard the voice speaking to him.” But then you said something, Keith, just now, which I think is really profound. You said he had a dialogue.

Keith: Yes.

Nehemia: But that’s not what it says in the NIV. The voice was speaking to him and he was standing there passive and just receiving every word that was spoken; there was no dialogue. JPS, Jewish Publication Society, says he would hear the voice addressing him - again he’s passive, he’s just sitting there, hearing the words spoken; that’s what it implies at least. What have you got, Jono? You got the New King James, right?

Jono: Yeah, correct.

Nehemia: “He heard the voice of One speaking to him.” But what it says in Hebrew is, and I’m looking at my different translations here, and seeing if anybody got this. So, crash-course in Hebrew - Hebrew has seven binyanim, or conjugations, that every verb can theoretically fit into, and that changes the meaning and the connotation. The normal word for speaking would be “medaber,” which is with the shva in the mem and is what’s called pi-el, and that would be “speaking to him.”

But what it has here is “midaber elav,” which is the hitpael; it’s one of the other of the seven conjugations, and the hitpael here implies that there is a dialogue. So “midaber elav” is, he’s speaking back and forth with him, and that’s totally lost in the English. That subtle difference - and really in the Hebrew, here it’s…and if you don’t know Hebrew don’t worry about this, but the bottom line is that it’s a small difference of one of the tiny vowels. Instead of a shva, it’s a hirik, and that changes it from “he was speaking to him,” he’s talking at him, to “he’s speaking with him,” that there’s a dialogue of him speaking back and forth with him. And that’s pretty cool!

Keith: Well, let me… can I give a confession, ladies and gentlemen, and to Jono and to Nehemia?

Jono: Keith?

Nehemia: Yes.

Keith: The confession is, I know I’m supposed to be the Methodist with the NIV, but I actually took a little look at the Hebrew also of Numbers 7:89, and what caught me, Nehemia, beyond that was the actual end of the verse. Because in the NIV it says, “and above the atonement cover on the ark of the testimony.” Then it says, “And He spoke with him.” Now, I don’t know if your sentence starts with “and,” it’s a new sentence in my NIV, “And He spoke with him.” So Jono, real quick, what does yours say? And then I want to share one little thing, and then Nehemia you can wrap it up. But what does the end of the verse say for you?

Jono: I’m glad. Keith, I’m glad you’re highlighting this because I’ve actually underlined this, it says, “thus he spoke to him.” And I wonder how do we determine who is the ‘he’ and who is the ‘him’?

Keith: Well, here is the only thing I wanted to say - that what kind of excited me, and, again, I’m supposed to be the NIV guy, but I did peek. And when I looked at Numbers 7:89, the one really cool thing that I did when I was going through this study, and I’m almost on my ten-year anniversary of studying with Nehemia and back and forth. But one of the things I asked him when I opened up my Hebrew Bible, there were at least four different things that I looked at that I said I wanted to learn. I wanted to understand the consonants, I wanted to understand the vowels, I wanted to understand the accents, and I wanted to understand the Masoretic notes. So that if you open up your Hebrew Bible, those are the four things that jumped out at me: the consonants, the vowels, the accents, and then the Masoretic notes.

So, one of the little things here is a simple little thing in the Hebrew - there is a word that has a little accent under it, and then there are two words after it. And the accent, what the English translators determined was, that accent means we’re going to end the verse and then start… the NIV basically said, “we’re going end the verse there and then we’re going to say, “‘And He spoke to him’ as a new sentence.” Whereas in the Hebrew it’s just basically a - what do you call them? Can I use it this way? It’s kind of like the pause, the middle of the verse, it’s not really the middle of the verse, but it’s basically saying here’s a place where you’d have a pause.

Then it says, “And He spoke to him.” So we can look at that and do what Nehemia and I, which he taught me to do, is sort of break up the verse, try to find out where the middle of the verse is, find out where the connection is, and this is kind of the grammatical work that takes place in Hebrew. When I read that and I say, and it ends it, and it says here, “on the ark of the testimony.” And then, “And he spoke with him”? I’m saying to myself, that was the issue that made me say, well, they were having a dialogue.

Jono: So, do you…

Nehemia: And I think that actually fits, that’s…yeah. Sorry, go ahead, Jono.

Jono: So, I’m just trying to… let me just clarify…

Keith: I’m finally waxing on, and you guys are going to stop me again. Are you kidding me?

Jono: No, no, Keith, I want to know, so who is the ‘he’ and who is ‘him’? Is that, Yehovah spoke to Moses or?

Nehemia: So, the NRSV solves that; the New Revised Standard Version. It has, “he would hear the voice speaking to him from above the mercy seat that was on the ark of the covenant from between the two cherubim; thus, it spoke to him.” That is, the voice of the LORD. So, the NRSV doesn’t even allow your question, Jono, to be asked. In other words, the question you’re asking is, the NIV says, “And he spoke with him.” Who spoke with who? And the NIV that I have in front of me, at least on my computer, doesn’t have a big H for either of those. So, it’s up to you to decide, “And he spoke to him” And Yehovah spoke to Moses? Or, “And he spoke to him,” and Moses spoke back to Yehovah?

Jono: Yes. Yes.

Nehemia: The JPS has, “thus He,” capital H, “spoke to him,” small h, meaning Yehovah spoke to Moses. But contextually it makes a lot more sense, he heard the voice speaking with him back and forth from upon the kaporet, the mercy seat. And Moses spoke to him, meaning Moses responded…

Jono: Yes!

Nehemia: Moses spoke back…

Jono: Amen.

Nehemia: …that makes a lot more sense.

Jono: That’s what I thought, and so that’s why I highlighted it because…

Keith: That’s why… and Jono, listen…

Nehemia: That’s what Keith was saying, essentially.

Keith: I’m trying to get my little…

Jono: Keith.

Keith: …little thing on the wall. I’m supposed to be the dumb Methodist, but all I’m telling you is…

Jono: Keith.

Keith: No, no, I just want to say this - I think that just asking those questions… and some people get overwhelmed – “well you guys are talking about the vowels, and the consonants, and all this stuff.” But, you know what you can do, and I know Jono, you do this, and I think this is awesome that you do it, it’s something that Nehemia and I used to always have to do and it’s why we do it throughout Torah Pearls - he will say this, “Jono, what does your version say?” “Keith, what does your version say?” “But what does the other version say?” And even if you don’t know the Hebrew, it really gives you a chance to slow down.

So, for example, great verse, longest chapter in the Torah, and at the end we’ve got this thing and just three little words, or four little words, at the end of the chapter which we might have just skipped over, actually ends up being a huge pearl if we simply look at the different English versions.

So what I’ve continued to do is to try to do that same thing, but what I’ve also had the benefit of doing is looking at these four things: consonants, vowels, accents, and notes, and that’s where so many of these things sort of… you get to ask even more questions. I wish the answer was always clear, it’s not always clear. But one thing we can do through prayer, discernment and having the information is I think we can come to some pretty good conclusions, and this is just one example where I’d have to stand up against the NRSV that said they want to solve it for us and say I don’t think it’s quite that simple, let’s look at some other stuff, and that’s an example where, boom, you know.

Jono: That’s a Torah Pearl.

Keith: Context would say that this is the dialogue, which we have two witnesses in this verse, the midaber and the actual breaking up of the verse that would say, I think it’s pretty clear they’re having a dialogue.

Jono: Amen.

Keith: Okay.

Jono: Thank you for highlighting that because that was one of the questions that I asked, because in the New King James I’ve got a capital He, capital H, “He spoke to (lowercase) him.” And I thought, “I wonder if that’s the case and I wonder how that is identified in the Hebrew.” And I’m really glad that you highlighted that…

Keith: Awesome

Jono: …because it does make sense to say that “thus Moses spoke to Yehovah.” So that’s great.

Keith: Amen. Amen.

Jono: I appreciate it. And that is wrapping up the Torah Pearls for this week. Thank you, Keith Johnson and Nehemia Gordon. Believe it or not, Nehemia does have a book coming out very, very soon, another one…

Keith: Very soon.

Jono: …that you can look forward to, “Conspiracy of Silence,” looking forward to that. And not only that, but Keith has a video documentary that’s not too far down the track, either.

Keith: Oh, boy, don’t put that pressure on me.

Jono: Hey, you’ve been talking about it for so… “I was over at the Vatican and I was visiting the Pope.” So, we’re looking forward to that, as well. And so, we appreciate you guys and we look forward to that. And these programs are available free to download on the Torah Pearls page, Beha’alotecha. Excellent. Numbers 8:1 to 12:16. And until then, dear listeners, be blessed and be set apart by the truth of our Father’s word. Shalom.

You have been listening to The Original Torah Pearls with Nehemia Gordon, Keith Johnson and Jono Vandor. Thank you for supporting Nehemia Gordon’s Makor Hebrew Foundation. Learn more at NehemiasWall.com.

We hope the above transcript has proven to be a helpful resource in your study. While much effort has been taken to provide you with this transcript, it should be noted that the text has not been reviewed by the speakers and its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. If you would like to support our efforts to transcribe the teachings on NehemiasWall.com, please visit our support page. All donations are tax-deductible (501c3) and help us empower people around the world with the Hebrew sources of their faith!

SUPPORT NEHEMIA'S RESEARCH AND TEACHINGS!
Makor Hebrew Foundation is a 501c3 tax-deductible not for profit organization.

Subscribe to "Nehemia Gordon" on your favorite podcast app!
Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | 
Amazon Music
 | TuneIn
Pocket Casts | Podcast Addict | CastBox | iHeartRadio | Podchaser
 | Pandora

Share this Teaching on Social Media
Related Posts: Prophet Pearls - Naso (Judges 13:2-25) Torah and Prophet Pearls
  • donald murphy says:

    isn’t “grace” a name of goddess??

  • donald murphy says:

    learn not the way of the heathen.

  • donald murphy says:

    r u 3 sure your not christians hiding in Jewish clothing??

  • Jael Turner says:

    Nazarene = The Branch

  • Jael Turner says:

    Holy water has to be specially blessed by a priest or minister.

  • donald murphy says:

    grace is also a name of a goddess.

  • donald murphy says:

    so JC existed? where ‘s the proof?? no j in the Hebrew, so that can’t be his name.

  • Marisa Kennedy says:

    Regarding what Nehemia said about 20 min in, about Christians not representing Christ, this was prophesied. At 2 Peter 2: 2 it says, “…there will also be false teachers amoung you. These will …even disown the owner who bought them… and because of them the way of the truth will be spoken of abusively.”

  • Cindy Vaughan says:

    Thanks, so much for making your teaching available. Are you sure that naztre, meaning Isaias branch was not this word.

  • donald murphy says:

    gr___ is a name of a goddess. not suppose to their names r we???

  • donald murphy says:

    my desire is that we would all stay away from christainty, islam, and all other false religions please.

    • Renee says:

      Dear Donald… the Israelites were commissioned by Yah to be a light to the gentiles, so they too would come to know our awesome Creator. My experience from a gentile background, is that we are vehemently despised by many Jews… just for existing! That is contrary to your Yah given purpose.

      Interestingly, many gentiles are “awakening” to an “I don’t know why, but it is imperative to learn ‘Hebrew roots’ of christianity” and are zealous in studying the tenach, leaving pagan holidays, keeping shabbat and the mo’edin… in whatever limited capacity we know at the time. Many are still in major learning stages which changes as we learn new info. We cannot learn tenach overnight!

      But over the years, Yah has given us more discernment and we have eliminated those preachers which are off track. Nehemia’s great knowledge of scripture, refreshing insight, patience and ability to teach ‘newbies’ and not only his acceptance of us gentiles but his desire to share his understandings and have us learn these wonderful teachings from a hebraic perspective so we too can grow in our walk with Yah… are tremendously appreciated! And many of us are also learning of our hebrew ancestry, thanks to dna research.

      Just the fact that we continue to listen to these podcasts to learn TRUTH should be something y’all should celebrate, because that is what was in Yah’s heart to happen!

      Your attitude, which I have noted consistently, is that you want no part of gentiles learning and being united with Yah’s people. If so, then please take that to Him in prayer, because it is not appropriate and is against the purpose of this program. Shalom.

  • Avril says:

    I’ve listened to Torah Pearls several times and I just finished this one for probably the 5th time and heard Jono ask about the two turtle doves in chapter 6 and it’s relation to The 12 days of Christmas. Wanted to add this “Just in case someone cares” comment and say the 12 days of Christmas is from Christians believing it took that long for the magi to travel to Bethlehem to visit Jesus. Also, the 2 turtle doves represent the Old & New Testament. Leave it to us to manipulate words from the Bible to fit Christmas….with our trees, candy canes and such. 🙂
    I love Torah and Prophet Pearls as well as Hebrew Voices. I’m learning so much.
    Shalom

  • Donald McGrew says:

    I enjoyed and received, listening to the entire broadcast. The last verse was very good.

  • Miri Burgin says:

    Oh, man, Nehemia when you sent the shout out to me, even though it was some time ago, it touched my heart! You’re the best! shalom from Atlanta~

  • ginsbiz1 says:

    The “crimes done in Yeshua’s name” were done by the catholic church, not by all Christians.

    • The Puritans and other Protestant traditions did their share of oppression as well.

    • Robert Moore says:

      Think about it, they were done in Iesous’ (Yesus) name, if they had been using Yeshua’s name they would still be acknowledging the Hebrew Root of their Faith – something they divorced themselves from and so creating a new religion…. And today unfortunately most ‘denominations’ remain children of Rome. As for me and my house….

  • kaylened says:

    Thank you for these teachings, I have learned so much and I appreciate all your efforts to divide our man-made traditions from Yahovah’s Perfect Truth.

    Regarding your comment about a women’s head covering. There is more evidence than Numbers 5:18, although it is not a command, women covered their hair for more reasons than you presented.

    It is a form of modesty and sets a married woman’s glory (which is her hair) apart for her husband, 1 Corinthians 11:7-15.

    I personally know that it is pleasing to Yahovah, and it appears to have been the practice of the 1st century Assembly of Israel, so who changed?

    • kaylened says:

      Numbers 5:18 the verb to uncover is Para #6544, also meaning to make naked.

      • Anonymous says:

        Nehemia made the point that since Yehovah was so concerned about not exposing nakedness (Exo 20:26), he would not expose a woman’s nakedness either. Also, Shaul talks about keeping the traditions (not commandments) in 1 Cor 11:2.

        • kaylened says:

          Yes, I don’t see head covering as a commandment but an outer sign of a modest and humble women who was Set-apart for her husband.

          • Anonymous says:

            Nehemia states at 34:10 that the tradition started in Judaism so the gentiles wouldn’t kidnap a married woman, not as a modest or humble sign.

  • walksbyf8h says:

    Torah Pearls #35 – Naso:

    The “Jesus” presented in pictures is, from my research, a representation of the Egyptian god, Sarapis (Secrets of Golgotha by Ernest L. Martin, pp. 354-356). Yeshua, looked no different from any other 1 Century Jewish man. No long hair, goatee, or Roman robes. And, sorry Mel Gibson – He was not handsome (Isaiah 53:2). Yeshua was not a Nazarite – Yochanan the Immerser most likely was a Nazarite (Matthew 11:18-19, Luke 1:13-15).

  • Alex says:

    It’s every woman’s worst nightmare – cellulite and a puffy shapeless belly.

  • Sandra Young says:

    I believe that this passage in Numbers/Bamidbar 5 about the wife that goes astray is a prophecy of the redemptive work of the Messiah taking on the curses that are resting on Israel. YHVH is the jealous husband (Is 54:5, Ex 20:5), Israel (and Judah) are the unfaithful wife (Hos 4:15; 5:3,5; 6:10; 9:1).
    I also believe there is a significance representing the Messiah when alef-tav precedes a word, attached with a maqquev. Alef-tav [AT] (the Greek equivalent would be alpha-omega) is attached to the word ‘his wife’ x2 in 5:14, to ‘wife’ and to ‘her offering’ in v15. In v18 it reads, “The Kohen shall stand ‘AT-the woman’ before YHVH and he shall uncover ‘AT-the head’ of the woman (Yahushua’s head was uncovered and they pulled His hair out) and he shall put upon her palms AT (as a stand alone untranslated word) the meal offering of remembrance…” This meal offering is a picture of the Messiah as firstfruits. v25 says “The Kohen shall take from the hand of the woman ‘AT-the meal offering’ of jealousies; he shall wave AT [stand alone] the meal-offering before YHVH, and he shall bring it near to the Altar. V26 reads “The Kohen shall take a handful from the meal-offering—’AT-its remembrance’—and burn [it] on the Altar; after that he shall cause ‘AT-the woman’ to drink the ‘AT-water’. He shall cause her to drink ‘AT-the water’…”
    The cup of bitter waters is the cup that Yahushua prayed that the Father would let pass from Him See Mt 20:22, 26:39 and 26:42.
    This ordeal at His crucifixion is what made his thighs waste away and his belly to swell (blood pooling in his belly).
    v31 says the man (YHVH) will be free from guilt, but that the woman (Israel) shall bear her guilt.
    (There is one place where my analogy does not work. That is in v20 where it reads “…and if you have become defiled and consorted has a man with you AT-[through] his lying [with you] other than your husband…” I have taken that to mean that AT was there and saw what she was doing. It does matter what we do behind closed doors.)
    I do not read Hebrew yet. I used the Schottenstein interlinear translation from Artscroll.

  • don murphy says:

    why would you believe that jc actually existed…he would not be in the torah, as it would be adding to, in my opinion….no monuments or any books about him other then the council of nicea and catholics from there on…
    don murphy.

  • Mr. Johnson, I heard your “wow” about 50 being the age of ‘that’s all she wrote!,” for Levitical service. Am I processing this correctly — Numbers 8:25 “from the age of fifty years they shall cease waiting on the service thereof . . . BUT SHALL MINISTER WITH THEIR BRETHREN IN THE TABERNACLE OF THE CONGREGATION, to keep the charge, and shall do no service.” (KJV).
    Enlighten us as to what reonsibility(ies) of ministry this entails, even tho they’re, at 50, not to do Levitical service any longer?

    • daniel says:

      The Levites were the ‘Lift & Carry Specialists’ in the Temple – not the Priests (Cohenim). The Levite’s ‘service’ was the heavy, dirty work associated with slaughtering, skinning, eviscerating sacrifice animals, carrying wood and water, and the cleanup afterwards (among all the other things). I can imagine most of them were big, muscular and quite capable – but were given a break at age 50, and relegated to supervisory roles assuring the next generation would be just as efficient as they were. From the age of 50 they could be considered the efficiency experts, but still got their orders from the Cohenim.

  • Janice says:

    Sometimes with the Torah we need to step back as it were from the specific words of the text to looking at who the players are and what are the actions. The wife can be singular as well as national Israel. TanKa tells us the HaShem watchers over, sees or overseas Israel from year to year. This is an allusion to the Sabbath and Feast Days, our appointments with HaShem. There was a time when Israel was not showing up for these appointments, that is she was hidden from His view, and a spirit of Jealousy arose? Where’s my wife and what is she up to? And there was evidence, as reported by the prophets, that she was having relations with other gods/husbands. What to do can only come from the Heavenly court Himself. So from the earth and water which HaShem made, He places the ketubah, DT. into the spirit. We read how the Cohens were to place HaShem’s name upon His people. The Covenant into the water erases His name; the wife no longer carries His name Israel, adopts the names of the nations; the Ba’al’s of the nations. He’s not responsible for her anymore, so all the curses come upon her. We’ve seen picutes of women in Africa who’ve been subject to sever drought and famine. They have swollen bellies due to infestation from eating rotten food or mostly impure water, and their thights have dropped, there’s no meat on them – one wonders how they can stand.They are unable to bear children, still born, or infants dies shortly after birth.
    If a man divorces his wife, and she goes and marries another, and then decides she was better off with the first husband, and they remarry, they both die, as both commited adultry.

    Yeshua, comes to reverse the curse, how? He the innocent party dies for her sins,takes on all the penalties for breaking covenant and if we beleive in Him, we partake of his death, and when He rises from the dead, we also rise with HIm – and are once again betrothed, legally married. We are returning to Him learning to walk in HIs Covenant, not yet living together. Bridal preparation. Marriage at will happen in the fall feasts, when the FAther says, all is ready and Go get your bride. First His crowning at Yom Teruah, then at the Great Wedding Yom Kippur; and then all Israel shall be saved at Tabernacles.

  • Miri~ says:

    Keith! wil you pls stop with the OJ stuote!?

  • Miri~ says:

    yep, hineni, thx for the shout out! Love and shalom to you and all y’all, and praying for traveling mercies and covering for you for “re-entry”!

  • Beth says:

    When Yeshua had His last passover He said: Matt 26:29 I tell you, I will not drink from this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”
    Also He has conquered/overcome death, He is a far away from death as is possible.

    I think Yeshua is fulfilling the Nazarite vow now. Because He’s the Messiah and Nazarites are prophetic of the Messiah at this time.

    • I wonder if you are confusing Nazarite (Nazir) and Nazarene (Notzri)?

      • Kevin George says:

        The prophecy is Isaiah 11:1, which says a branch (netzer) shall come from the root of Jesse. Appropriately, Yeshua was born in Netzeret or Nazereth.

        • JoJo G. says:

          you nailed it!
          Is NO VOW to began with
          Remeber HE touch the dead young boy who HE resurrect and the girl and drank wine as is record many time in the ReNewT. Yeshua is the Netzer the line from King David.

  • Janet Kurczek Dietrich says:

    I just finished listening to this weeks portion study and all I can say is WOW!!! There was sooooo much “meat”. I always thought the part about the wife being given the water, the dust and words was a symbol of when they were at the mountain after the golden calf situation – after they drank and their bellies swelled. That has always resembled a picture of Israel as being set apart as the “Bride” (Kings and Princes) of יהוה and the “instructions” were considered the Katuba (unsure of the spelling). Hope you (Nehemia) comment if it is or isn’t. Tks in advance.

  • Florence Avalos says:

    Thank you for sharing…
    The spirit of jealousy (kinah)comes because the possibility of his wife beings unfaithful. Now, Yehova is jealous (kinah) for his wife/People if we say we embrace Torah (Spirit of shavuot). Dt 29,20 Ps 78.58.
    Ez. 8.3 says something that might connect it with the passage in Nasso. He (Ezequiel) is taken by the hair and taken to Jerusalem to see the idol of jealousy that provokes jealousy (kinah). So God is jealous for His wife and giving her the opportunity to confess.
    Now following Nasso it comes the nazarite vow that a person wants to Dedicate to God Yehova. That is a Great contrast. Toda raba. Florence from Guatenala.

  • Dolf says:

    What is the spirit of jealousy? and how does it “come upon man” Num 5:14? shabbat sholam

  • Nicholas Mansfield says:

    This portion contains too much for one episode! My wife’s reaction to being sent outside the camp for a miscarriage, “Oh, wonderful.” I quickly said it doesn’t mean your family can’t come with you, but is that how it was? The RC Pope, who cares? Unless it’s relevant. Actually some of my best friends are ex-Roman-Catholic. Two received the fullness of the Aaronic Blessing on a number of different occasions, although it was not pronounced. It was ministered from on high. In Eastern religion it is called Bliss. The phenomenon is first alluded to in Exodus when Moses appears with an aura of light.
    Nehemia’s comments about head covering are a little bewildering. The word phro (Num.5:18-bible), what does it really mean vs. how are you interpreting this as messing up the hair? In terms of the Temple symbolism it would make sense that she is made naked (head naked!) before YHWH. How could her hair be messed up with her head covering on? Good work on the Lev./Num./Matt. discussion.
    Regarding the head covering controversy in other faiths-
    1Cor.11:4-10 raises further questions about head covering yet seems to firmly imply that women need to have some form of head covering. Writings attributed to Paul seem to contain some Rabbinical content not apparent in other New Testament works.
    Surah24:30 men must avert their gaze, from becomes swiftly apparent in the next verse. The implication is given in 30:30 where people are commanded to preserve their birthright fitrah; the purity of a child.
    Surah24:31 women are commanded to modesty including head cover.
    If women were not supposed to cover their bodies for modesty in the Israelite then Messianic periods it was certainly commanded by the Qur’an. However, that may not be one of the 613 Commandments Of Moses.
    It is inappropriate to say we should celebrate women’s beauty. Our Western Civilisation is overwhelmed by symbolism and behaviour that encourages relations outside of marriage. God does not want us to pursue this path.

    • walksbyf8h says:

      Be very careful equating the quran with the Bible. Just as a quote from Hindu texts have no value in this context, nor do those from the quran. Yehovah is not allah. Not.

      The Bible, in its entirety was written by the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit) through men. It’s content was not written by Moses, Zechariah, Micah, John, Paul, or Yeshua (John 12:49 / 2 Peter 1:20-21) although each individual’s personhood shines through the text.

      Secondly, 1Corinthians 11:4-10 is specific to a woman who is praying or prophesying – not everyday living whether she is married or unmarried.

      • donald murphy says:

        so true on this. stay away from all pagan religions. been saying that for quite some time, but nobody takes heed.