To teach the Hebraic perspective of faith in and obedience to the One True Elohim (God). more..
Isaiah 56:6
QUESTIONS OF OUR DAY
In the days we live, information is increasing. With this increase is a shaking; one that is shaking of many people's faith. Some are even choosing to depart from their faith due to this shaking. It is our desire to provide answers to questions being asked today, not just turn our backs and tell people to "have more faith" when their faith may already be shaking.
Keep in mind: Faith has the ability to lead us to further understanding; Understanding may not necessarily lead us to further faith.

How can we know if the Gospel biographies on Yeshua’s life are accurate? When historians try to determine if a b
Did ancient historians also write about Yeshua?


What does it mean that Yeshua is the son of David?


Who wrote the New Testament? Why not accept the apocrypha, gnostic gospels, or the gospel of Thomas?

Isn’t the prophecy Isaiah gives in chapter 7 for King Ahaz only? After all, he had a son from his almah, his wife, which fulfills the prophecy, does it not?


Why did Yeshua from the cross call out and say “My God , My God why have you forsaken me?”


The Tanakh does not agree with the New Testament messiah, because the NT does away with Torah and sacrifices forever! (Heb 7:27 and Heb 10:10-14)

I am looking for the Talmudic references to the mystery of the scarlet cloth that was tied to the scapegoat and failed to turn white for 40 years after Yeshua died, until the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 AD. In the same story the Temple doors would open every night until the temple was destroyed.

In Luke 10:4 Yeshua is sending his disciples out to travel and he says to them, “greet no man along the way?” Why did he say this?

In Palms 22:6,  known as the Crucifixion Psalm  it says “But I am a worm and no man; a  reproach of men, and despised by the people.” Why did Yeshua call Himself a worm?

I wish to get some info directly biblical as to what occurs to us at death. The reason is that I have heard many people say that if we die at this time and we have Christ in our hearts we go directly to heaven and of course the opposite is true if we die without Him?  I read in the bible that we "rest from our labours". To me it appears, according to what I have read in the Bible is that we are awaiting the Resurrection. I always say that if everyone is already in heaven looking down and taking care of those who are still alive, then who is Jesus going to resurrect when he comes with his army as scripture says in revelations??

I have been reading your studies, and find them to be a blessing. What is your understanding of Michael and Jesus being the same person?

Can you tell me what the ‘Masoretic Text’ is and how is effects the bible I have today?

In James 1:12-15 it states that Hashem doesn’t tempt man, but it also says we are blessed to make it through the temptation. If we understand the Lord’s Prayer we are told to pray “lead us not into temptation but deliver us...”  Is he or isn’t He responsible for temptations?

Don’t you see that the New Testament has clearly said the Law has been done away with? I think anyone could see this doctrine in scripture!

Was the apostle Paul a Jew or was he an Israelite and accepted Judaism which made him a Jew? Judaism is something you are not born with. Isn't it some thing you accept and therefore because you do you become a Jew and embrace there belief.?

In John 1:9 and 5:18 the author uses the word “JEWS” to depict an almost anti-Semitic phrase when talking about them. What can you tell us about the use of this word since JEWS really didn’t come into being until much later?

In First Cor. 15:5 Paul is recounting the appearances of Yeshua and states “and He was seen by Cephas and then by the twelve.” Why does Paul have twelve when Judas was already dead by his own hands? Isn’t this a mistake in the New Testament?

What are the probabilities of the prophecies fulfilled by Yeshua?

What is the origin of Jewish people as a religion and/or a race? Where do Jewish people originate? Is there such thing as Jewish blood?

Did the disciples and others understand that Yeshua was God in the flesh? What title did they call him other than Yeshua?

In Psalms 22:16 it reads “…like a lion at my hands and feet…”. I understand this to be a Crucifixion Psalms. Can you make any sense of this for me?

Did the disciples and others understand that Yeshua was God in the flesh? What title did they call him other than Yeshua?

Are there scriptures that prophecy of Yeshua resurrection? Did Hashem  reveal anywhere in scripture that he would raise up His son after death?


Could you clear up a question my husband brought up in our Study Group last week. In Acts11:47-30 the prophets were said to send help to “Judea” from “Antioch” when there was famine in “ALL THE WORLD”? Would they not also be facing the same famine?

In Isaiah 7:14 the translated word for virgin in Hebrew is 'almah' and refers to a "young woman". Had
Isaiah meant 'virgin' he would have written 'b'tulah.' which literally means virgin in Hebrew. Why do so many
interpret this as a messianic prophecy of the so called 'virgin birth' of Yeshua'?

Why in Judaism is it forbidden to write the names of God?


How many son’s did Jesse, the father of king David have? In the First book of Samuel 16:10-11, it clearly implies that Jesse, the father of Israel's King David, had at least eight sons, of which David was the eighth. But if you look in 1 Chronicles 2:13-15 it indicates that Jesse had only seven sons, and that David was the youngest. Which text is correct? Is there a sensible solution to this contradictory statement?

With many of the popular movies today involving so much magic, do you think you could give some ‘easy to understand’ reasons why we should not allow our children to see them?


I would like to find a copy of the Masoretic Text in English. Is this possible?

I am searching for the reasoning of some writers that the story of Esther is "probably" mythological.  I am interested in the rationale for discounting the authenticity of the event.

Did the day Noah’s Ark come to rest have any prophetic meaning?

Did Yeshua’s followers really believe He was the Son of God?

How can Yeshua be the ‘ultimate’ blood sacrifice as the Torah teaches that human sacrifice is an abomination? Blood is blood and whether it is a lamb’s’ blood or not Yeshua died as a blood sacrifice!

I have friends in our Torah study that insist that the Hebrew Bible is the ultimate authority and should be #1 when it comes to translations. What do you think about the KJV and the Masoretic Text in that bible?

Does it say anything in the Tanakh about the Lake of Fire? Or burning in Hell forever? I know the Bible talks about Gehenna and in Isaiah 66:24 it says "And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh." I have different people saying that according to the Greek ‘forever, everlasting’ is not what that means, and I would like that to be so for the people who rejects Yeshua not to burn forever, but when it comes to spend forever, eternity with Him, I want it to mean eternity. I always thought that the Lake of fire was literal and meant forever, and I never thought that God (Yahveh) sent us there, but by the choice we made we sent ourselves. I never blamed Him. But I still can't imagine people burning forever, and when I think about it I can't imagine God preparing a place of torment forever.

Did the blood sacrifices of the Old Testament times really forgive the sins of the people?  If so, why are we going to continue to bring blood sacrifices in the Millennial Reign?  Didn’t Yeshua’s blood cover all sin forever?

Was the Apostle Saul  a Torah observant Jew who upheld the Torah or did he believe he was no longer "under the Law"?

What will the borders of Israel look like once she is fully restored and the covenant of Abraham is fulfilled?

Regarding the divinity of "Jesus", the Jewish concept of G-d is that he is a spiritual being and not flesh and blood. For a Jew it is an abomination that G-d should be a human. G-d is an indefinable, spiritual, being. "There shall no man see me and live." Exodus 33:20.

Do you believe that Hashem is the only true G-d, and that He is the G-d of Yeshua? Do you believe that Hashem sent Yeshua as the only begotten son, the firstborn of all creation? Jn1:14,1:18, Heb1:9, Col 1:15. If so can you expound on the following verse "If you love me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father: For the Father is great than I. Jn 14:28

With Hashem sending His Spirit to impregnate Mary He would of violated his own Torah with the mixing of seed, the Laws of kilayot or shatnetz. Hashem would of never allowed this as in Gen.6:1-7 He regrets making man as man mixed seed between the sons of Elohim or the fallen angels and human women. This forbidding of mixed seed is repeated in Lev.19:19. This sound adamant to me that Hashem would never have allowed the ‘divine child’ who was also suppose to be ‘man’ according to Christian belief.

After being in a bible study with some friends I left because they were quoting from books I had never heard of. They couldn’t tell me why  these books  were in their American Bible but not in my New King James. One of the books was called First Maccabee. Do you know about this book?

I have a professor in a liberal seminary who believes the Bible is full of contradictions.  Most of them I can rebut fairly easily, but this one has me stumped. Can you help me to answer him?  Compare the resurrection accounts in the four Gospels.  When did Mary Magdalene see Jesus?  How many times? There seem to be other discrepancies in when and where the disciples saw him, etc.  It really does seem to be confusing, but I never realized that before.  Thanks for your time.

In Acts Chapter Seven where Stephen is giving his speech, he gets the count wrong in the number of soul that left with Joseph to go to Egypt. Everyone knows there were seventy, not seventy-five! Any idea why this is?

TOP OF PAGE

Question: How can we know if the Gospel biographies on Yeshua’s life are accurate? When historians try to determine if a biography is reliable, they ask, "Do other numerous sources report the same details about this person?"
Answer:
Here is how this works. Imagine collecting biographies on former president Ronald Regan. You find many describing his family, his presidency, his handling of the Berlin Wall, and each of these biographies report many similar facts. But what if you came across one biography reporting that President Regan lived ten years as a monk in India? None of your other sources mentioned anything about a former career as a monk, or living ten years in India. Obviously, the credibility of this biography is out the window.
Regarding Yeshua of Nazareth, do we find multiple biographies reporting similar facts about his life? Yes. There are four New Testament books (called Gospels) that give lengthy details of his life. Who wrote the gospels? Two of the books were written by men who knew Yeshua personally and traveled with him for over three years (Matthew and John); the other two books were written by close associates of Yeshua apostles.
Each of the four authors recorded very in-depth narratives of Yeshua’s life. As you would expect from various writers covering the life of a real person, there is agreement in the facts, but also uniqueness and variations in the presentations. And each biography is presented without sensationalism or flowery creativity, but in a newspaper style of "this is how it was." The Gospels give specific geographical names and cultural details that have been confirmed by historians and archaeologists. The messages in the gospels also indicate authenticity.
Yeshua’s statements fit the culture and audience He was addressing, yet His statements are unlike what was currently taught in Judaism. In looking at the gospels, His teachings do not include many topics that the early church probably would have wished that Yeshua had addressed. This lends support that the biographers were accurate, not adding to Yeshua’s words from a later perspective. 
TOP OF PAGE

Question: Did ancient historians also write about Yeshua?

Answer:
Yes. Cornelius Tacitus (A.D. 55-120), an historian of first-century Rome, is considered one of the most accurate historians of the ancient world. An excerpt from Tacitus tells us that Nero "inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class...called Christians. ...Christus [Christ], from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus...." (In contrast, the Muslim Quran, written six centuries after Yeshua lived, reports that Yeshua was never crucified, though it is a fact confirmed by numerous secular historians.)
Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian (A.D. 38-100+), wrote about Yeshua in his Jewish Antiquities. From Josephus, "we learn that Jesus (Yeshua) was a wise man who did surprising feats, taught many, won over followers from among Jews and Greeks, was believed to be the Messiah, was accused by the Jewish leaders, was condemned to be crucified by Pilate, and was considered to be resurrected."
Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, and Thallus also wrote about Christian worship and persecution that is concurrent with New Testament accounts.
Even the Jewish Talmud, again not a favorable source regarding Yeshua, concurs about the major events of his life. From the Talmud, "we learn that Jesus was conceived out of wedlock, gathered disciples, made blasphemous claims about himself, and worked miracles, but these miracles are attributed to sorcery and not to God."
This is remarkable information considering that most ancient historians focused on political and military leaders. Yet ancient Jews, Greeks and Romans (who themselves were not ardent followers of Yeshua) substantiate the major events that are presented in the four Gospels. 
Top of Page
Question:  "What does it mean that Yeshua is the son of David?"
                                                                       
Answer: 
17 verses in the New Testament describe Yeshua as the "son of David".  What does this mean?  How could Yeshua be the son of David if David lived approximately 1000 years before Yeshua?  The answer is that our Moshiach was the fulfillment of the prophesy of the seed of David (2 Samuel 7:14-16). 
 
Yeshua was the promised Messiah, which was of the seed of David.  Matthew 1 gives the genealogical proof that Yeshua was a direct descendant of Abraham, and David through Joseph, Yeshua’s legal father.  The Jews would question the lineage and Yeshua’s right to the throne of David, although not fulfilled until the Millennial Kingdom.  So when Adonai was referred to as the Son of David it was meant to refer to His Messianic title as the Old Testament prophesied concerning Him.
Top of Page
Question:  "Did Yeshua have brothers and sisters (siblings)?"

Answer: 
The Bible never gives an exact count, but Yeshua’s siblings are mentioned in several Bible verses.  Matthew 12:46, Luke 8:19, and Mark 3:31 say that Yeshua’s mothers and brothers came to see Him.  Yeshua had four brothers: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matthew 13:55).  Yeshua also had sisters but they are not named or numbered (Matthew 13:55-56). In John 7:1-10, His brothers go on to the festival. In Acts 1:14, His brothers and mother prayed for Him. Later in Galatians 1:19, it mentions that James was Yeshua brother.  The most natural conclusion of these passages is to interpret that Yeshua had actual blood siblings. There is no Biblical reason to believe that these siblings are not the actual children of Mary and Joseph. They were obviously born after Yeshua, because Yeshua was born of a virgin (Isa 7:14; Luke 1:26-38).
Top of Page
Question: Who wrote the New Testament? Why not accept the apocrypha, gnostic gospels, or the gospel of Thomas?

Answer:
There are solid reasons for trusting in today's list of New Testament books. The Gospel writers Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were previously mentioned as credible sources, two of them having been Yeshua's closest followers. The other New Testament authors were considered trustworthy as well: James and Jude (half-brothers of Yeshua, who initially did not believe in him), Peter (one of the 12 apostles), and Saul (whom Yeshua made an apostle after his death and resurrection). The church knew about these men and their association with Yeshua. Moreover, what they wrote was consistent with what people had heard and seen themselves regarding Yeshua, and had passed on to their children.
When other books were written and appeared hundreds of years later (e.g., the Gospel of Peter, though Peter had long since died), it wasn't difficult for the church to spot them as phonies, as forgeries.
Another example is the Gospel of Thomas (which Mohammed references in the Quran). The Gospel of Thomas was written around 140 A.D., long after Thomas had died. Though it bore some similarities to the New Testament's authentic Gospel of Matthew, it also contained wildly different messages. The descriptions of Yeshua did not fit anything the early church knew to be true of Him.
Here is one example which shows the contrast between the New Testament Gospels and the Gospel of Thomas. Throughout the New Testament Gospels, Yeshua treated women with a dignity not typical of the Middle Eastern culture in His day. Yeshua taught women as well as men, spoke against divorce laws which were unfair to women, was kind toward women (even to those of questionable character), and appeared first to women after his resurrection, entrusting to them the message that he was alive. Yeshua’s respect toward women cut against cultural norms, and was one issue that angered the religious leaders of His day. Yet the Gospel of Thomas contains a completely contradictory statement attributed to Yeshua: "Let Mary go away from us, because women are not worthy of life." And: "For every woman who makes herself male will enter into the kingdom of heaven."
As books like the Gospel of Thomas were written and circulated among the early church, it was not difficult for people to discern the forgeries. False writings like these and the gnostic gospels countered the known teachings of Yeshua and the Old Testament, and often contained numerous historical and geographical errors.
Eventually an official list of New Testament books became necessary for the following reasons: 1) As Christians were being martyred books were being destroyed (so, which ones to protect?); 2) in translating the books into Syriac and Old Latin, a listing of authoritative books was important; 3) false books and false teachings were always challenging the church and leadership needed to be clear. In A.D. 367, Athanasius formerly listed the 27 New Testament books (the same list that we have today). Soon after, Jerome and Augustine circulated this same list.
 Top of Page
Question: Isn’t the prophecy Isaiah gives in chapter 7 for King Ahaz only? After all, he had a son from his almah, his wife, which fulfills the prophecy, does it not?
 
Answer:
To answer this question I have to ask one. If the prophecy is fulfilled in King Ahaz wife and they believed at the time that Hezekiah or maybe even Yasheer-Yahshuv, Isiah’s son, was the one spoken of to fulfill the prophecy, then why did other prophets for hundreds of years to come continue to prophecy about the Messiah? Prophets like Malachi, Zechariah and Jeremiah, who wrote their books after Isaiah, continued to await and long for the coming of the Messiah. If Hezekiah was “Immanuel” then why write at all.
 
 Don’t lose track of the fact that the mother of the “Immanuel” in the prophecy had to be a virgin. And the “son” would always choose “good over evil” vs 15. This means the child would be sinless. Hezekiah was not that man as time goes on to tell. Only Yeshua continually throughout his life, ALWAYS choose “good over evil,” living a sinless life.
 
In the Isaiah prophecy starting in verse 13 and 14 you see the word “you” appearing three times. These words are mechem, lachem and lachem, all in plural form. That means that Hashem was not speaking alone to King Ahaz but to all the House of David, and the sign was to be for all of them! All Twelve Tribes would see the almah, meaning THE virgin will conceive and bear a Son and shall call him “Immanu-El”, a metaphor for Messiah, when Elohim walks with us!
Top of Page
Question:  Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14 where the Messiah is to be called Emmanuel. But in Luke 1:31 it says you shall name him Yeshua. Isn’t this proof that Yeshua is not the long awaited Messiah?
 
Answer:
Isaiah 7:14 reads as follows, “See the virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and call his name Immanu-El.”  This is a euphemism not a proper name.  The Hebrew nation was not awaiting a person named “Emmanuel Solomon” or “King Emmanuel” but a visitation from the Father in the person of their Redeemer; One that would be as “Elohim with us”.
 
Look at it this way, when I say “There is only one Gipper!’ who comes to mind? Ronald Regan of course. Or if your talking about the “Father of our Nation”, George Washington is the man you think of. These are titles given to these fine men. It is not their names, but what the name stands for and what you think of when you say “the Gipper!” It’s the same with Isaiah, when under the power of the Holy Spirit, told King Ahaz ,“and you shall call him Immanu-El” which by the way is two words, not one name.
 
Again, look at Isaiah 8:8 where Israel is entitled with the usage of “Immanu-El”. Does anyone think that the Land of Israel should be called Emmanuel? Of course not! This title again is being used as a euphemism for the Land itself.
Top of Page

Question: What makes the religion of the bible different from other world religions? 

Answer:
Let's take a brief look at some of the major aspects of Adonai Yeshua, which stand in stark contrast to what's in other world religions.

1. The Father pursues a relationship with us. Have you ever been in a relationship where you were always the one who was initiating? They are tiresome and usually don't last very long. Best friends are the ones who enjoy each other so much that they invest their time equally in pursuit of that relationship. Unlike religions that try to reach their God, with Yeshua you see the Father reaching out to us. Yeshua said why he came: "that you might have life, and have it more abundantly." He came to give us an eternal life with him, for those who will believe in him.

2. Yeshua claimed he was one with the Father. No world religion's key figure claimed to be God.

3. Yeshua lived a perfect life and showed his deity in the miracles he performed...healing the blind, quieting a violent storm at sea, raising people from the dead, instantly providing food for thousands of people. World religions have leaders who gave interesting messages, but none of them showed their miraculous power like Yeshua did. He said, "Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves."

4. In many world religions people whip themselves for their sins or perform extensive self-sacrificing rituals. Yeshua offers us forgiveness because He paid for our sin. "Elohim demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Yeshua died for us." On the cross, Yeshua carried all of our sins for us and paid for them.

5. Yeshua rose from the dead three days after he was crucified. Many religions talk about reincarnation. Yeshua, on a number of occasions, told others that he would be crucified and would then rise from the dead three days later. He wanted to publicly prove His deity beyond any doubt. The Roman authorities were aware of this, and so posted an 11-14 man Roman guard outside His tomb, and sealed it with a Roman insignia warning people to stand clear. Yet, three days later his body was gone from the tomb and Yeshua showed himself alive to more than 500 people. No world religion claims that their central figure physically rose from the dead or even said that they would.

6. The message of the Bible is unique. It is not a compilation of poetic, disjointed ideas. The Bible reveals the Father and His plan for our lives. It records for us that something in history went wrong and that the relationship we had with Him was broken. It tells us how to restore that relationship and what the benefits are of doing that. These are only a few of the differences concerning Yeshua and how the Father’s plan is the Only Plan.
Top of Page

Question: Does archaeology support the New Testament?

Answer:
Archaeology cannot prove that the Bible is HaShem’s written Word to us. However, archaeology can (and does) substantiate the Bible's historical accuracy. Archaeologists have consistently discovered the names of government officials, kings, cities, and festivals mentioned in the Bible--sometimes when historians didn't think such people or places existed. For example, the Gospel of John tells of Yeshua healing a cripple next to the Pool of Bethesda. The text even describes the five porticoes (walkways) leading to the pool. Scholars didn't think the pool even existed, until archaeologists found it forty feet below ground, complete with the five porticoes.

The Bible has a tremendous amount of historical detail, so not everything mentioned in it has been found through archaeology. However, not one archaeological find has conflicted with what the Bible records.

In contrast, news reporter Lee Strobel author of The Case of Christ and The Case for Faith, comments about the Book of Mormon: "Archaeology has repeatedly failed to substantiate its claims about events that supposedly occurred long ago in the Americas. I remember writing to the Smithsonian Institute to inquire about whether there was any evidence supporting the claims of Mormonism, only to be told in unequivocal terms that its archaeologists see 'no direct connection between the archaeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book.'" Archaeologists have never located cities, persons, names, or places mentioned in the Book of Mormon.

By comparison, many of the ancient locations mentioned by Luke, in the Book of Acts in the New Testament, have been identified through archaeology.  In the Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics Norman Geisler sites "In all, Luke names thirty-two countries, fifty-four cities and nine islands without an error."

Archaeology has also refuted many ill-founded theories about the Bible. For example, still taught in some colleges today, the JEPD Documentary Hypothesis suggests that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible), because writing was non-existent in his day. Then archaeologists discovered the Black Stele.  Josh McDowell, in his book Evidence That Demands a Verdict says "It had wedge-shaped characters on it and contained the detailed laws of Hammurrabi. Was it post-Moses? No! It was pre-Mosaic; not only that, but it was pre-Abraham (2,000 B.C.). It preceded Moses' writings by at least three centuries....The 'Documentary Hypothesis' is still taught, yet its original basis has been eradicated and shown to be false."
Another major archaeological find confirmed an early alphabet in the discovery of the Ebla Tablets in northern Syria in 1974. These 14,000 clay tablets are thought to be from about 2300 B.C., which is hundreds of years before Abraham. The tablets describe culture and life in similar ways to what is recorded in Genesis chapters 12-50.

Archaeology consistently and strongly confirms the historical accuracy of the Bible.
Top of Page
Question: Why did it take 30 or 40 years for the New Testament Gospels to be written?

Answer:
The main reason the Gospel accounts were not written immediately after Yeshua’s death and resurrection is that there was no apparent need for any such writings. Initially the gospel spread by word of mouth in Jerusalem. There was no need to compose a written account of His life, because those in the Jerusalem region were witnesses of Yeshua and well aware of his ministry.( Acts 2:22, 3:13, 4:13, 5:30, 5:42, 6:14)  

However, when the gospel spread beyond Jerusalem, and the eyewitnesses were no longer readily accessible, there was a need for written accounts to educate others in Yeshua’s' life and ministry. Many scholars date the Gospels as being written 17-32 years after Yeshua’s death.

Luke gives us a little more insight into this by stating, at the beginning of his Gospel, why he was writing it: "Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may have certainty of the things you have been taught. (Luke1:1-3)

John also gives the reason for writing his Gospel: "Many other signs therefore Yeshua also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written that you may believe that Yeshua is Adonia , the Son of the Living God; and that believing you may have life in His name."(20:30,31)
Top of Page
Question:  Where does the Old Testament mention Yeshua?
 
Answer: 
This is just a small sampling.  There are many, many more Old Testament prophecies about Yeshua Messiah.  Here are three prophecies concerning His birth:  Isaiah 7:14, “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.”  Isaiah 9:6, “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders.  And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”  Micah 5:2, “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."
 
            Here are some prophecies concerning Yeshua’s ministry and death:  Zechariah 9:9, “Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion!  Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem!  See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.”  Psalm 22:16-18, “Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet.  I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me.  They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing.”
 
Isaiah 53:3-7, “He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.  Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.  Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by Adonai smitten by him, and afflicted.  But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.  We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the YHWH has laid on him the iniquity of us all.  He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.”
 Top of Page
Question:  What does the Bible say about praying to Mary and/or saints?
 
Answer: 
For me there are the following issues to consider regarding this topic of praying to saints, angels, and Mary instead of to HaShem alone.

(1) We are told to pray to Elohim (Luke 11:1-2; Matthew 6:6-9; Philippians 4:6; Acts 8:22; Luke 10:2). (2) There is only the repeated example of two things in Scripture: a) Prayer is made to Adonai alone (by righteous people) (Romans 10:1; Romans 15:30; Acts 12:5; Acts 10:2; Acts 8:24; Acts 1:24; Zechariah 8:21-22; Jonah 2:7; 4:2) b) Requests for prayer are made only to the living (1Thessalonians 5:25; 2Thessalonians 3:1; Hebrews 13:18). (3) We are never told to communicate with the dead (even with prayer requests). When Saul tried to communicate with Samuel, it was deemed an evil thing, not a good thing (those who support praying to the saints may say it was only deemed evil because of the manner in which he sought to do it...through witchcraft). It is interesting to note that Samuel told Saul that if HaShem wasn't listening to him, there was nothing that he could do then either (1 Samuel 28:16).

(4) We are never told to pray to angels and when people had occasion to talk with any angel besides the Angel of the Lord and tried to worship them, they were told to stop and worship HaShem alone (Revelation 19:10; 22:9; Colossians 2:18). (5) We are never told that the dead know what is going on the earth (some think it is possible based on one interpretation of Hebrews 12:1). (6) YHWH alone is omniscient and omnipresent. He alone is able to hear a multitude of prayers simultaneously. He is the one who commands angels and sends them to do His bidding (Daniel 9:20-23). (7) Angels (Daniel 9:20-23) and the spirits of the dead remain finite (Luke 16:19f.), limited to one location at a time.

(8) The Catholics statement that they go to angels, saints, and Mary to ask for prayer is not consistent with the normal practice of asking for prayer. For example, in the saying of the Rosary the large majority of the time is spent in devotion to Mary and then they ask her to pray for them now and at the hour of their death (they pray this same prayer 50 times). Whereas, when I ask someone to pray for me, I don't ask them over and over and over again minute after minute. Rather, I ask them to pray and then should be spending my time on my knees before HaShem not before them. (9) HaShem promised to hear us when we ask anything according to His will (1 John 5:14-15; 1 Peter 3:12). He entreats us to come boldly unto the throne of grace (His throne) that we may find grace and help in time of need (Hebrews 4:14).

(10) HaShem promised us that the Holy Spirit makes intercession for us according to the will of Adonai with groaning that cannot be uttered (Romans 8:26). Considering such truths, why do we need to go through a saint, angel or Mary, especially considering the fact that neither the example of doing so, nor the command of doing so is ever given in Scripture? The Catholic Church cites the example of the wedding feast (John 2) as an example of Mary getting Yeshua to do something for others and uses that as a proof text for prayer to her, but to use this example to support such a doctrine that flies in the face of countless other admonitions and examples of praying to HaShem alone is ridiculous.

Therefore, not only is it contrary to Scriptural admonition to pray to HaShem and Scriptural example to do so, but it is illogical to substitute praying to an all-loving, omniscient, and omnipotent Father who invites us to come before His throne because He is completely acquainted with all of our doings (Psalm 139) to pray to some saint who can only listen to one conversation at a time (all the time not ever being sure if the saints in heaven know what is taking place in our lives here on earth). His Word says that there is one Almighty and one mediator between Him and man, Adonai Yeshua Messiah (1 Timothy 2:5). Let us then come to the Father through His work on the cross of Calvary, not only for salvation, but also for our needs as well (Hebrews 4:14).
Recommended Reading: Reasoning from the Scriptures with Catholics by Ron Rhodes.
Top of Page
Question: What is the immaculate conception?
 
Answer: 
Many people mistakenly believe that the immaculate conception refers to the conception of Yeshua Adonai. Yeshua’s conception was most assuredly immaculate…but this concept does not refer to Yeshua at all. The immaculate conception is a doctrine of the Romans Catholic Church in regards to Mary, Yeshua’s mother. An official statement of the doctrine reads, “…the blessed Virgin Mary to have been, from the first instant of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of Almighty God, in view of the merits of Adonai Yeshua the Savior of Mankind, preserved free from all stain of original sin.” Essentially the immaculate conception is the belief that Mary was protected from original sin, that Mary did not have a sin nature. Some go so far as to teach that Mary was, in fact, sinless.
 
            The problem with the doctrine of the immaculate conception is that it is not taught in the Bible. The Bible nowhere describes Mary as anything but an ordinary human female whom Hashem chose to be the mother of the Adonai Yeshua. Mary was undoubtedly a godly woman (Luke 1:28). Mary was surely a wonderful wife and mother. Yeshua definitely loved and cherished His mother (John 19:27). The Bible gives us no reason to believe that Mary was sinless. In fact, the Bible gives us every reason to believe that Yeshua is the only Person who never committed a sin (Ecclesiastes 7:20; Romans 3:23; 2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 2:22; 1 John 3:5).
 
            The doctrine of the immaculate conception originated out of confusion over how Yeshua could be born sinless if He was conceived inside of a sinful human female. The thought was that Yeshua would have inherited a sinful nature from Mary had she been a sinner. In contrast to the immaculate conception, the Biblical solution to this problem is understanding that Yeshua Himself was miraculously protected from being polluted by sin while He was inside Mary's womb. If HaShem was capable of protecting Mary from sin, would He not be able to protect Yeshua from sin? Therefore, Mary being sinless is neither necessary nor Biblical.
 
            So, the doctrine of the immaculate conception is neither Biblical or necessary. Yeshua was miraculously conceived inside Mary, who was a virgin at the time. That is the Biblical concept of the virgin birth. The Bible does not even hint that there was anything significant about Mary’s conception. If we examine this concept logically, Mary’s mother would have to be immaculately conceived as well. How could Mary be conceived without sin if her mother was sinful? The same would have to be said of Mary’s grandmother, great-grandmother, and so on. So, in conclusion, the immaculate conception is not a Biblical teaching. The Bible teaches the miraculous virgin conception of Yeshua, not the immaculate conception of Mary.
For more understanding of what the Catholics believe and teach, I would recommended   Reasoning from the Scriptures with Catholics by Ron Rhodes.
Top of Page
Question: Why are there no clearly visible miracles today that shout--without a shadow of a doubt--to everyone in the world: 'There is a God!'?

 Answer:
Many of us want strong, even overwhelming reasons to believe in HaShem. Some people believe in His existence because of strong factual and philosophical reasons. Others believe in the Father because of answered prayer, direction he has given them in life, or ways that He has changed their life.
But why doesn't the Almighty just exhibit himself in such a blatant way that people would HAVE to believe he exists? A good answer is presented by Philip Yancey in his book, The Jesus I Never Knew (particularly pp. 74-80).
Yancey points out that HaShem has given us the freedom to believe in him or not. And he says, "My faith suffers from too much freedom, too many temptations to disbelieve. At times I want God to overwhelm me, to overcome my doubts with certainty, to give final proofs of his existence and his concern. I want a God without ambiguity, One to whom I can point for the sake of my doubting friends." But then he says, "The more I get to know Jesus, the more impressed I am by what [Dostoevsky] calls the miracle of restraint."
Yeshua could have performed such large, spectacular miracles that people would have to believe in him. He could have healed entire towns with one mass proclamation. He could have instantly set the entire present day Michigan Avenue of Chicago right before them. Or he could have done a number of other breath-taking miracles where people would be forced to believe in him. But the Father always upholds the free will he created us to have.
Yancey says, "More amazing is his refusal to perform and to overwhelm. God's terrible insistence on human freedom is so absolute that he granted us the power to live as though he did not exist, to spit in his face, to crucify him. I believe God insists on such restraint because no pyrotechnic displays of omnipotence will achieve the response he desires. Although power can force obedience, only love can summon a response of love, which is the one thing God wants from us and the reason he created us."
If the Father really displayed his power in an overwhelming manner, he could force us to believe in him. He could easily force us to obey him. He could command anything he wanted. But what He wants is for us to know him as our Father, Friend, Comforter, Counselor, Adonai -- willingly, not under compulsion.
He has given us more than ample reason to believe in him. He doesn't force us to know him. Even as Yeshua says, "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any one opens the door, I will come into him" (Revelation 3:20). He enters our lives at our permission. And if we sincerely want to find out if he's there and what he is like, he will allow us to find him and know him.
Top of Page
Question:  "What happens to people who never have a chance to hear about Yeshua?  Will HaShem condemn a person who has never heard about Him?"
 
Answer: 
All people are accountable to HaShem whether they have “heard about Him” or not.  The Bible tells us that He has clearly revealed Himself in nature (Romans 1:20) and in the hearts of people (Ecclesiastes 3:11).  The problem is that the human race is sinful; we all reject this knowledge of Adonai and rebel against Him (Romans 1:21-23).  Apart from His grace, He would give us over to the sinful desires of our hearts, allowing us to discover how useless and miserable life is apart from Him. This He does for those who reject Him (Romans 1:24-32).
 
In reality, it is not that some people have not heard about Yeshua.  Rather, the problem is that they have rejected what they have heard and what is readily seen in nature.  Deuteronomy 4:29 proclaims, “But if from there you seek Adonai Elohim, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul.”  This verse teaches an important principle: everyone who truly seeks after HaShem will find Him.  If a person truly desires to know HaShem, He will make Himself known.
 
The problem is, “there is no one who understands, no one who seeks Elohim” (Romans 3:11).  People reject the knowledge of the Almighty that is present in nature and in their own heart, and instead decide to worship a “god” of their own creation.  It is foolish to debate the fairness of HaShem sending someone to hell who never had the opportunity to hear the Gospel.  People are responsible to Adonai for what He has already revealed to them.  The Bible says that people reject this knowledge, and therefore HaShem is just in condemning them to hell.
 
Instead of debating the fate of those who have never heard, we should be doing our best to make sure that they hear.  We are called to spread the Gospel throughout the nations (Matthew 28:19-20; Acts 1:8).  The fact that we know people reject the knowledge of HaShem revealed in nature must motivate us to proclaim the good news of salvation through Yeshua Messiah.  Only through accepting the Gospel of His grace through Yeshua Adonai can people be saved from their sins and rescued from an eternity apart from Elohim in hell.
  Top of Page

Why did Yeshua from the cross call out and say “My God , My God why have you forsaken me?”

As Andrew Roth wrote in his second book Ruach Qadim, “My God, my God, why is this always mistranslated?” There is probably no verse in scripture that brings more emotion that the ‘cry from the cross” in Matthew 27:46.  However, is it probable that these dominant words have been misunderstood for two millennia? For almost 2 billion people, Yeshua's last utterance at the crucifixion was a despairing cry from Psalm 22:1 or, My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?
Now the Greek version of this text attempts to transliterate the Psalm from Hebrew as Eli, Eli lama sabacthani. However, both the Peshitta NT and Psalm read a little differently as:
Eli, Eli lama azbatani (Psalm)
Eli, Eli lemana shabakthani (Peshitta)
The Greek transliteration is reflecting the same Aramaic word that the Peshitta uses.  However, there is a key difference between azbatani, which only means "to forsake", and its Aramaic counterpart shabakthani which has multiple meanings that include the same concept.  Even so, does that mean Yeshua is quoting the Psalm?  To answer that question, we need to look at some other verses as well.
Read Matthew 17:22-23, 20:17-19,26:50-54 and you will see not only does Yeshua know his death is imminent but that if he does not die Scripture will not be fulfilled. So we know that Yeshua is laying down his life voluntary (John 10:11-18) and he can take it back any time. However if he were to choose life, that scripture would be broken. We also know that as a lamb, he would pour out his life as a key requirement of Messiah (Isaiah 53:7). With that in mind, why would he call out and feel “forsaken” on the cross?
Well he didn’t. What he actually said was "…why have you spared me", or rather, "I've been here for six hours and will die for the cause, but why has this taken so long to finish?" In response to this question, Scripture tells us that shortly afterwards Yeshua dies, thus validating this particular context.
 
The Hebrew words that have been mistranslated or misunderstood for so long is the Aramaic word shbakthani. The root of that word, shbak has the following meanings:
 1) reserve
2) keep
3) spare
4) forgive
This same word is used in Luke 23:34, when  Yeshua says "Father, forgive (shbak) them for they know not what they do." Here the meaning is plainly understood to mean ‘forgive’.  
No other meaning really fits. Would Yeshua have said ,”My God, My God why have you  reserved/kept me?.’ No, Yeshua knew why he was there so that meaning does not fit.

Finally, there is also a very good reason why tradition has been so strong on linking this utterance to the Psalm.  The fact is, while Yeshua himself is not quoting the Psalm, the rest of the narrative is clearly referencing it.  Or, to put it another way, this section of Matthew is a Midrash, or dramatic story rendering, of Psalm 22.
For example the very rebukes of the Psalm are put in the Pharisees' mouths taunting Messiah (Psalm 22:6-8; Matthew 27:39-40). Also there are references in the Psalm to having the hands and feet pierced, as well as having enemies gamble for the victim's clothing (Psalm 22:16, 18; Matthew 27:34).  Even the probable condition of Yeshua hanging on the cross is described with phrases like "I am poured out like water and all my bones are out of joint. My heart has turned to wax and has melted away within me.  My strength is dried up like a potsherd and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth.  You lay me in the dust of death."
With all this Psalmic imagery being put into story form, is it any wonder that many scholars would conclude with apparent logic that when Yeshua utters a statement that is almost identical to what 22:1 says that it must be a direct quote from that same source?
Then we must take into account other factors as well.  First and foremost, there is Yeshua's physical trauma which was known to cause many such victims to slur their speech.  Second, Yeshua also was speaking a different dialect that even under the best circumstances sometimes resulted in miscommunication.   In this case, the Hebrew speaking witnesses at the crucifixion mistakenly thought he was calling on Elijah (Eliyah) as opposed to "My God" followed by an exhalation of pain (Eli-ah). Taken together, all these aspects present a compelling case for seeing how two similar phrases got transposed.
Top of Page

Question: The Tanakh does not agree with the New Testament messiah, because the NT
does away with Torah and sacrifices forever! (Heb 7:27 and Heb 10:10-14)

Answer:
What the NT teaches is that sanctification for ritual purposes alone is not real. Look at Jeremiah 9. The strong pronouncement here is that sacrifices/rituals for their own sake are wrong. We can see as we read about Cain and Abel, that Cain’s sacrifice was fine but his focus was wrong.  If we follow the Tahahk we can see that Hashem Himself has a progressive revelation when it came to sacrifice and offerings. In Isaiah 1:11, "Bring me no more vain oblations," (Hosea 6:6) "I desire mercy not sacrifice". The people had been lulled into a false sense of security by bring daily and weekly sacrifices to the temple and Hashem said their hearts were wrong.
 
If you study Galatians, you will see the message is that Abraham believed Hashem through faith, and that was how justification came, not from ritual, that is Saul's point. Has sacrifices been ‘done away with’ for the remission of sin? Yes! The death of Yeshua (as you can read in last week’s question) fulfilled the need for the death of animals for the atonement for sin. Notice I did not say there would not be animal sacrifice in the future. Isaiah says there will be killing of animals again in the Millennial Reign. At that time the shedding of blood  will be like a remembrance or a memorial to the finished work Messiah has done.
 
There has been a false belief for years that the Torah is done away with. I assure you, nothing could be further from the truth.
Top of Page
Question: I am looking for the Talmudic references to the mystery of the scarlet cloth that was tied to the scapegoat and failed to turn white for 40 years after Yeshua died, until the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 AD. In the same story the Temple doors would open every night until the temple was destroyed.

Answer:
In the book of Leviticus chapter 15, Hashem instructed Moses and Aaron to select two goats every year for an offering. One was to be used as a sin offering to atone for the sins and transgressions of the people. Once killed, its blood was to be sprinkled on the mercy seat on the Ark of the Covenant. There Hashem would view the blood of the sin offering and have Mercy on the people and forgive their sins. The high priest would then lay hands on the second goat which was allowed to live and he would confess the sins of the people putting them on the head of the goat. The goat would then bear the blame of all the transgression of the people and would be set free into the wilderness, where Hashem would remember their sins no more. The goat became known as the scapegoat.
Jewish history records that it was common practice to tie a red strip of cloth to the scapegoat. The red strip represented the sin of the people which was atoned for by the red blood on the mercy seat. According to the Jewish Talmud this red strip would eventually turn white, signaling Hashem’s acceptance of the offering.
There is an amazing reference in the Talmud that verifies that after Yeshua was crucified, Hashem no longer accepted the sin offering and the scapegoat offered by the Jewish high priest. The Talmud states
       "Forty years before the Temple was destroyed (30 A.D.) the chosen lot was not picked with the right hand, nor did the crimson stripe turn white, nor did the westernmost light burn; and the doors of the Temple’s Holy Place swung open by themselves, until Rabbi Yochanon ben Zakkai spoke saying: 'O most Holy Place, why have you become disturbed? I know full well that your destiny will be destruction, for the prophet Zechariah ben Iddo has already spoken regarding you saying: 'Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour the cedars' (Zech. 11:1).'  Talmud Bavli, Yoma 39b
 
It is important to note that this event recorded in the Talmud occurred approx. 40 years before the destruction of the Temple which was destroyed in 70 AD. The date of this amazing event was approx.30 AD, the same time that Yeshua shed his blood as the final scapegoat offering.
 
But Adonai came as High Priest..not with the blood of goats and calves, but with the own blood he entered the Most Holy Place once and for all, setting people free forever.  …And according to the Torah almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is not remission…so Adonai offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation…For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goat could take away sins… By that while we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Yeshua once for all….this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God…For by one offering He was perfected for ever those who are being sanctified ..says the LORD: I will put My laws inot their hears, and in their minds I will write them,” then He adds, “Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.   Hebrew 9:11- 10:17 
Top of Page

In Luke 10:4 Yeshua is sending his disciples out to travel and he says to them, “greet no man along the way?” Why did he say this?
 
Luke 10:4 in most translations, (following the Greek) Yeshua sends His talmidim (disciples) out to travel around teaching and in doing so instructs them to "greet no man on the way"   Now this makes little sense.  Why would Yeshua instruct His talmidim not to greet people?  Can you just see them pass by someone on the road, the person says "shalom" in a friendly voice and the talmid just looks at him a minute, says nothing and keeps going. 
 
In David Stern's Jewish New Testament he wrote "don't stop to shmooze with people in the road."  This is his paraphrase. The word "shmooze" is Yiddish would have no relevance in the  first century. "Shmooze” litterly means "engage in gossipy chit-chat" (as Stern defines it).  There is no word in the Greek of Luke 10:4 that means "engage in gossipy chit-chat" or even "stop".  The Greek word in Luke 10:4 means "salute, greet". 
 
Another translation reads, “"and join no man on the way".  I understand this to be a better translation of what the Aramiac had meant. Yeshua of course would want his talmidim to greet the people on the road but not to ‘join with them’ or to ‘unify with them.’

Another way of looking at this may be to remember the job you have been given. You have limited time to accomplish this job. Do not waste time on idle speach.
Top of Page

In Palms 22:6,  known as the Crucifixion Psalm  it says “But I am a worm and no man; a  reproach of men, and despised by the people.” Why did Yeshua call Himself a worm?
 
The Hebrew word for "worm" in Psalm 22:6 is from the word ‘towla’, which refers to a particular type of worm. This worm is known as the ‘coccus ilicis’. It was the scarlet worm, and was commonly used in Israel to make scarlet dye.
 
Let’s look back now at Yeshua life and death. In being made sin and the accursed thing, He calls himself a worm and 'no man'. What a radical statement to make! He is calling Himself the lowest form of life, a worm!  And not just any worm but a particular kind of worm - a scarlet worm.  The scarlet worm is a beautiful type of the Adonai Yeshua in His death.  In order for this worm to bring forth life (replicate), it attaches itself to the trunk of a tree, lays its eggs and dies.  In dying it stains the tree scarlet.
 
In the scarlet worm we have a type shadow of life coming only out of death.  Just as the Yeshua was willing to lay down His life to bring forth many of us to glory, so too this worm lays aside the right to live to bring forth life.  In the process of dying the worm stained the tree scarlet which is a graphic picture of the shed blood on the cross. Yeshua was a man, but not any kind of man; Hashem manifested, conceived of the Holy Spirit, born without sin, the only perfect man who ever walked on earth in all that He said and did. When He came into the world He said, (Heb 10.5) “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire but a body you have prepared for me ...Then I said, Behold, I have come – In the volume of the book it is written of me to do your will O God”.
Top of Page
I wish to get some info directly biblical as to what occurs to us at death. The reason is that I have heard many people say that if we die at this time and we have Christ in our hearts we go directly to heaven and of course the opposite is true if we die without Him?  I read in the bible that we "rest from our labours". To me it appears, according to what I have read in the Bible is that we are awaiting the Resurrection. I always say that if everyone is already in heaven looking down and taking care of those who are still alive, then who is Jesus going to resurrect when he comes with his army as scripture says in revelations??
 
 
I did a question/answer on  the subject Hell in the Tanakh which is future on down in this Question Page and as you can read, there are scripture reference to a suffering for those who choose not to follow Hashem's instructions.
 
And your right Rev. 14:13 says " Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, "Write: 'Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.' “Yes," says the Spirit, "that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them.", which I believe will be in the Millennial Reign with Yeshua. I don't see any 'rest' until then. We know Yeshua said to one on the thieves who died next to him in Luke 23:43  "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise." So at that man’s death, he was to be with Yeshua in a 'heavenly realm.'  What that is or where that is continues to  left to the unknown.
 
Many believe in soul sleep; where after you die your spirit stays with the body and you 'know' nothing until the resurrection. I have not found biblical reference for that belief. Instead we see activity in the Heavenly Realm. Saul speaks of a cloud of witnesses watching and cheering us on; Elijah saw a busy crowd praiseing Hashem around the throne. There are those souls beheaded in Rev. calling out to Hashem to revenge them. Where did they come from if everyone is in soul sleep?
 
But as far as the resurrection, our bodies that are buried will be resurrected to meet with our spirits that have been in "Paradise" and then together that body and spirit, will become the renewed, glorified body to be with Yeshua and rule and reign with him until we all face the Great White Throne Judgment. Rev. 20:11 "And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.(12)And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is [the book] of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works(13)And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. (14) And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (15)And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
 
So you can see death and hell have to give up 'their dead'. What dead do they have? I feel that verse is saying the dead spirits that choose not be obey and live by faith are now, and until the second resurrection, in Hell.
 
Now when the first resurrection takes place, what many call the Rapture, I'm not sure. I use to think it was at the beginning of the seven years of Tribulation that Yeshua speaks of in Matt. 24. But I don't think the 'church' will be raptured out of the earth. Yeshua spoke in Rev 2:25,26  "But hold fast what you have till I come. And he who overcomes, and keeps my works until the end, to him I will give power over the nations."
 
 I believe we too will endure the persecution. Unless we die first, I believe we will be here till Yeshua calls us up in the  'first resurrection!'
Top of Page
I have been reading your studies, and find them to be a blessing. What is your understanding of Michael and Jesus being the same person?
 
We do not recognize ( from the Scriptures) that Michael the Arc angel, and Yeshua are the same being. Michael is a Created being, a Messenger (angel) of Hashem’s. Yeshua is the only begotten Son of YHWH, the Redeemer and King of Israel. Both “Michael” and “Yeshua” are proper names (not titles), and these names belong to separate beings.
Top of Page
Can you tell me what the ‘Masoretic Text’ is and how is effects the bible I have today?

Five years ago you didn’t hear or see the term ‘masoretic text’ thrown around like it is today. The reason being there is a flood of Jewish speakers out there who make a living standing up and tearing apart the New Testament (Apostolic Writings). So in retribution you have an equal flood of websites and authors writing books standing up and explaining away these false accusations and to do that you have to know the terminology of the day. One being, the “Masoretic Text”, not be too confused with “Hebrew Text”. I will explain both.
 
In the 6th to 9th centuries mostly in Babylonia, Palestine, and Tiberias, there were a group of scribes called the Masoretes (meaning tradition) who set about to preserve the Hebrew text that had be handed down through time from Moses on. The Masoretes went on to develop the dots and dashes, or vowels pointings of the Hebrew language that you see in print today. Without these, the consonants of most Hebrew words could be pronounced in several ways and given several meaning. Usually from the content you could tell what the word was to be, but not always.  They also went on to develop a codified system of punctuation, used in chanting at synagogues.
 
In giving each word its vowel sounds there were decisions that had to be made by the Masoretes. It’s complicated but for the most part scholars agree that the alterations are slim and that the Masoretic Text is the closest text we have to the original Hebrew. What do I mean by that?
 
Let me explain. There are NO original scrolls, manuscripts, documents, or stone tablets that have remained intact since Moses. None! Therefore the Masoretes had to decide which scroll in front of them was CLOSEST to the original.  I just finished a book by Emanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, a lengthy work and not recommend for bedside reading. Mr. Tov is a Professor of Bible at the Hebrew University. He also has several other books of the same line with many accredited honors.  Below I have a quote of his from page 28.
 
“Although at one time an attempt was made not to insert any changes in the Masoretic Text, at the time the texts within the group of Masoretic text already differed internally one from another. In other words, although there indeed existed the express wish not to insert any changes in the Masoretic Texts, the reality was in fact paradoxically different, since the texts group themselves already differed one from the other. “
 
So here you have Mr. Tov telling us there were many scrolls that were in the possession of the Masoretes that had variation. Even though the variations were slight, there had to be judgments made as to which manuscript was the one they would choose to be handled down from them. The time period the author is speaking of is the Second Temple period! This is a fact! Now let’s look at another well known fact. 
 
Among the Dead Sea Scrolls was found a complete book of Isaiah in Hebrew. It’s on exhibit at the Shrine of the Book in Israel today.  Now, in the gospels where Matthew, Mark and the others quote Isaiah, it’s the same translation that is in the DDS Isaiah, but NOT the book of Isaiah that is in most of your bibles today! Now why is that!
Not only does the quotes in the NT match the  manuscript of Isaiah found in the DSS, the NT also quotes over and over again  from the Septuagint (the Greek bible of today) which dates back to 235 BCE -200 AD, much early than the Masoretic Text, that which  we call the Old Testament today.  If you look in the front of your bible, the pages we all skip over, you can read what manuscript or version your bible follows most truly. I use several but turn to my Spirit Filled Life Bible NKJ, because in has center column notes that tell me if a selected verse has a different rendition than what they printed. The Spirit-Filled Life Bible used the Hebrew Text of the DDS, the Greek Septuagint, and the Latin Vulgate many times where wording had a significant change of meaning. Now in the mouth of two witnesses, is what the Lord says (Deut. 19:15). You can research for yourselves how the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures came to be on any web search engine. But what is really fascinating to me is that quote after quote in the New Testament made by Matthew, Luke, Saul and the rest, are word for word in the Septuagint! Were the disciples quoting from the Greek Bible of the day? I think not! They knew, word for word, quotes from the unchanged, unaltered Hebrew text of their day. THEY had the originals!  Very close to what the Masoretes declared to be the ‘received text’ that is in our bibles today, but with slight differences. We need to know the differences!
 
If you have a good study bible with center column notes, most of them will tell you the alternate rendition of any verse that are in the Septuagint (LXX) or the Latin Vulgate(Vg)or the Dead Sea Scrolls (DDS). If you don’t, find one. You won’t be sorry you did!
Top of Page
In James 1:12-15 it states that Hashem doesn’t tempt man, but it also says we are blessed to make it through the temptation. If we understand the Lord’s Prayer we are told to pray “lead us not into temptation but deliver us...”  Is he or isn’t He responsible for temptations?

Do the passages in James 1:12-15, and Matt. 6:13 contradict each other? Let’s look at the Greek language of the New Covenant to find the correct rendering.

Matt. 6:13 - "And do not lead us into trial (a situation where we are put to the test), but deliver us from the wicked one..."
James 1:12-15 - "Blessed is the man who does endure trial, for when he has been proved, he shall receive the crown of life which the Master has promised to those who love Him. Let no one say when he is enticed, “I am enticed by Elohim,” for Elohim is not enticed by evil matters, and He entices no one. But each one is enticed when he is drawn away by his own desires and trapped. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin. And sin, when it has been accomplished, brings forth death."

Hashem does not directly tempt or entice. He does bring about the conditions or situations that puts us to the proof (testing)? Yes, He does! He did this in the story of Job, when He permitted the adversary to inflict Job's family with evil (bad things). And, also with Yashua, the first born son, who was tested by the adversary (Matt. 4:1). And, many times Hashem allows evil (the bad) to accomplish His purpose.  But ultimately, the evil Hashem allows is used to accomplish His good will, and is for our own good.
Top of Page
Don’t you see that the New Testament has clearly said the Law has been done away with? I think anyone could see this doctrine in scripture!
 
Let’s look at a few scripture and see if your assumption is true.
According to Romans 7:12 , it calls the Torah "holy, perfect and good". 
Romans 3:31 says that we do not nullify the Torah through faith, but we ESTABLISH the Torah.  Ephesians 2 teaches that all Gentiles become part of the commonwealth of Israel, and are therefore subject to Torah.  Romans 11 says that if YHWH did not spare Israel when they sinned, He will not spare the Gentiles either, they do not support the root but the root supports them.
Put simply, you are responding to doctrinal lies, not the real message of the NT. Finally, if you REALLY read Galatians, you will see that the message is that Abraham believed YH-WH through faith, and that was how justification came,
not from ritual, and that is Shaul's point.  The truth has been twisted into a monstrous lie, that Torah is done away with.
There are resources available from our web site to further clarify the place of Torah on our lives. First is a teaching series by Mike called "Living Torah".
Top of Page
Was the apostle Paul a Jew or was he an Israelite and accepted Judaism which made him a Jew? Judaism is something you are not born with. Isn't it some thing you accept and therefore because you do you become a Jew and embrace there belief.?

Judaism is a religious system, and as such can be accepted or rejected. One can become a Jew either by being born to a Jewish parent (or at least a Jewish mother) or by accepting the Jewish faith. A person born Jewish is still "Jewish" in the national sense, even if he does not accept Judaism. On the other hand, a Gentile would not be regarded by the community as a "Jew by Choice" other than by embracing Judaism.

Judaism is the traditional religion of the Jewish people, based on the ancient covenant God made with the nation of Israel, but not all the members of the Jewish nation necessarily follow the Jewish religion.   

Jewish descent is sufficient to make one a Jew, at least (according to current Jewish law) if one's mother is a Jew. Conversion to Judaism also makes one a Jew, according to Judaism. Full conversion is the same as becoming a part of the Jewish people.  In fact, if one converts he is given a new name ending in "ben Avraham" which means "son of Abraham," because he is considered to be adopted into that lineage.

Of course being born a Jew does not automatically make one an adherent of Judaism, but he is still called a Jew.  Perhaps the reason people get so confused about this is that the only word we have for a person who accepts the Jewish religion is the word "Jew" which already means a descendant of Israel.

Yeshua and Saul were both Jews by natural descent, Yeshua from the tribe of Judah and Saul of the tribe of Benjamin. The Jewish lineage of Yeshua is presented in the Gospel of Matthew, and Saul mentions his descent in 2 Corinthians 11:22 and Romans 11:1. Both accepted the Jewish Scriptures, which in Christianity became the Old Testament. The religion commonly known as Judaism today, however, is based on the interpretations of rabbis, who do not necessarily interpret the Jewish Scriptures the way Yeshua did.

A Nazarene is a person from the town of Nazareth in the Galilee, which is a region of Northern Israel. Although born in Bethlehem of Judea, Yeshua grew up in Nazareth and that is why he is associated with that town and called a "Nazarene.¨ It has nothing to do with his religious views.

As far as the terms Jew and Israelite, they are seen as synonymous. "Israelite" literally means descendant of Israel, which is another name for Jacob, who was the father of the twelve tribes which make of the nation of Israel.
Top of Page
In John 1:9 and 5:18 the author uses the word “JEWS” to depict an almost anti-Semitic phrase when talking about them. What can you tell us about the use of this word since JEWS really didn’t come into being until much later?
 
Answer:
This is a subject that is brought up again and again asserting that John’s Gospel can not be reliable because of the negative depiction of the Jewish people through out the gospel, which John, being a Hebrew, would have never written.. Look in John 5:16 where is reads “did persecute Yeshua” and 5:18 “sought the more to kill him”, and  6:41 “murmured at him” and many, many more. So lets look at the word JEWS as it was translated.
 
In the Hebrew this word was most likely referring to the people of the Land of Judah or the people of the religion of that area. There were only the Jewish people or the Gentiles in the land of that day other than the Samaritans who were of Samaria. 
 
In the Greek this word is translated IOUDAIOI. (ee-oo-dah’-yos) and is used the first time in John1:9. The Strong’s concordance numbers this Hebrew word as: 3064-Judaean, belonging to Jehudah, the land.
 
So you can see John is referring to the people of the Land. It’s important to note that the word JEW or JEWS appear in the Tanakh 73 times and also refer to the people of that certain region of Judea or the religion of God. To make the jump in accusation that John is make a racial slur in his book is to put on the prejudicial mind-set of today. I hardly think that is the case!
Top of Page
In First Cor. 15:5 Paul is recounting the appearances of Yeshua and states “and He was seen by Cephas and then by the twelve.” Why does Paul have twelve when Judas was already dead by his own hands? Isn’t this a mistake in the New Testament?
 
Answer:
It would appear that it is a miscount of the disciples, but let’s look at a few other places where the twelve are mention and see if there isn’t another answer.
 
In Mark 3:14 we see where Yeshua ordained the disciples as we read “He appointed twelve to be with him, to be sent out to preach,” CJB
 
So Yeshua appointed the disciples into this office.  Don’t overlook the importance of this act. This is the Son of Hashem, calling twelve men to walk with him, to learn from him, and to be his examples to neighboring towns. So now let’s look at several places where the Twelve are mentioned.
 
Luke 22:47  “While he was still speaking, a crowd of people arrived, with the man called Y’hudah (one of the Twelve!) leading them. He came up to Yeshua to kiss him,”   Here you can plainly see they are referring to Judas but described him as one of the Twelve. They could easily have said “Judas” but they referred to his office ‘the Twelve’.
 
John 20:24 “Now T’oma, (the name means ‘twin’), one of the Twelve, was not with them when Yeshua came”.  In this verse you have Thomas, separated from the others, after Yeshua’s death, plainly after Judas had hung himself, but in the scripture he is referred to as ‘one of the Twelve”.
 
Mark 14:13-17 “He sent two of his talmidim with these instructions: “Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him; and whichever house he enters, tell him that the Rabbi says, ‘Where is the guest room for me, where I am to eat the Pesach meal with my talmidim?’ He will show you a large room upstairs, furnished and ready. Make the preparations there.” The talmidim went off, came to the city and found things just as he had told them they would be; and they prepared the Seder. When evening came, Yeshua arrived with the Twelve.”  In this passage you have Yeshua sending away two of the disciples, to find the room to make the Passover. These few would have obviously stayed in the room or at least near the room while Yeshua and the other disciples came along. But the scripture refers to the ones with Yeshua as ‘the Twelve”. But there was not twelve with Him.
 
Acts 6:1-2 “Around this time, when the number of the talmidim was growing, the Greek-speaking Jews began complaining against those who spoke Hebrew that their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution. So the Twelve call a general meeting…”.  Here you have the number of disciples multiplying! This is after Yeshua’s death and it is widely known the number of the men were no longer twelve but eleven.  But a small group of them called ‘the Twelve’ got together to solve a problem.
 
 
In six different places after Yeshua’s death the disciples are mentioned in scripture as ‘the eleven.’ In those places they are making a point as to the number of the disciples and not referring to the office. There is no mistake that at first the men were twelve in number, then eleven. And even though other disciples were added to the group, the twelve  specific man that were ordained by Yeshua were always given the title ‘the Twelve.’
Top of Page
What are the probabilities of the prophecies fulfilled by Yeshua?
 
Answer:

Yeshua fulfilled over three hundered prophecies. Here are the odds of just seven.
1. Yeshua being a descent of David - 10 to the 4th power (1 in 10,000)
2. Yeshua would be born in Bethlehem -10 to the 5th power (1 in 100,000)
3. Yeshua would be a miracle worker -10tp the 5th power(1 in 100,000)
4. Yeshua would enter Jerusalem riding on a donkey - 10 to the 6th power (1 in 1,000,000)
5. Yeshua would be betrayed by Judas for 30 pieces of Silver- 10 to the 6th power (1 in 1,000,000)
6. Yeshua would be crucified 10 to the 6th power (1 in 1,000,000)
7. Yeshua would present himself as King 173,800 days from the decree of Artaxerxes to rebuild Jerusalem- 10 to the 6th power (1 in 1,000,000)

Total Probability    10 to the 38th power (1 in a 100 billion, billion, billion, billion)

The fulfillment of Messianic prophecy is the phenomenal evidence that sets the Bible apart from the other "holy books", such as the Koran or Book of Mormon. Take the time to read the Old Testament prophecies and the New Testament fulfillment. It’s  real faith builder!
Top of Page
Question: What is the origin of Jewish people as a religion and/or a race? Where do Jewish people originate? Is there such thing as Jewish blood?

Answer:
Let’s take a good look at this question as many are trying to fit into one group or the other. On the one hand, the Jewish people are a nation in the same sense as the Greeks or the Italians or the Japanese.  The Jewish history goes back some 4,000 years to Abraham, who moved to the land of Canaan (what is now Israel) from Ur (believed to have been the early city of Ur in Mesopotamia, in what is now Iraq.) Abraham had two sons, Ishmael and Isaac. Isaac had two sons named Jacob and Esau. Abraham was first called a Hebrew as stated in Gen. 14:13. After the Northern Kingdom separated from the Southern Kingdom, the tribes staying in the south were the Tribe of Judah, along with the Tribe of Benjamin and the Tribe of Simeon. The Jewish people are ultimately the descendants of Jacob, also called Israel. Since these are actual people, there is such a thing as "Jewish blood" if by that you mean is there such a thing as being biologically Jewish. It is the Jewish faith and its traditions, rather than pedigree that hold the people together.

The faith of Abraham in One God in a time when almost the entire world believed in multiple gods, is the basis of the Jewish faith. About 400 years after Abraham, the Torah was given to Moses (the Torah is the first five books of the Bible).  The Torah contains the accounts of the Jewish people up to that time, as well as the instructions and code of conduct for what became known as the Jewish religion. The Torah has provision written into it for foreigners to become a part of Israel, so it is possible to be "Jewish" and not have any sort of physical ancestry at all. In Bible times, religion and ethnicity were tightly linked. The Egyptians had their religion, the Assyrians had a different religion, as did the Philistines, the Greeks, the Hittites, etc. Because Christianity and later Islam (both of them monotheistic faiths) supplanted almost all of the ancient ethnic religions of Europe and the Middle East, the Jewish people may stand out as unusual for having their own "ethnic" religion. Today, Judaism, unlike Christianity, is both an ethnicity and a religion. It is possible to be ethnically Jewish and reject the Jewish religion, but such a person is still considered Jewish. On the other hand, it is possible for someone who has no "Jewish blood" at all to become a convert to the Jewish religion. Such a person is also considered "Jewish".  For centuries now, the rule has been that if at least the mother is Jewish, so are the children.

In the year 70 AD, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and drove the Jewish people out of the land. The exiled peoples formed communities in various parts of the world, and over the centuries were alternately accepted and rejected in various places. At one time there was a thriving community of Jews in Spain, but Spain expelled them in 1492. Many of the exiles fled to northern Africa, the Middle East or the Netherlands, since the Netherlands was very open and tolerant at that time. Jews with this ancestry are called Sephardim, from the Hebrew name for Spain. Another large Jewish community was scattered across central and eastern Europe. These are called Ashkenazi Jews, and millions of them were still in Europe in the middle of the 20th century.  Most of the Jews who fled to America, Palestine and other countries just before, during and after World War II are of this extraction.  Many of them spoke Yiddish, a variant of High German written with Hebrew letters.

The modern Zionist movement to create a New Jewish homeland, got its start in the 1800's, but the Holocaust of the 20th century made the need to form a Jewish state appear even more urgent not only to Jews but to many other nations of the world. As a result, the modern state of Israel was established in the land then called Palestine (from the name the Romans had given it after attempting to drive out the Jewish people). Jews from all over the world were granted immediate citizenship upon arrival, and Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews arrived from all over the world, creating the mosaic of faces to be found in Israel today.
Top of Page
QUESTION: Did the disciples and others understand that Yeshua was God in the flesh? What title did they call him other than Yeshua?
 
ANSWER:
The word MarYah was one of the names of God used in the biblical days. ‘Mar’ meaning Lord or Master and ‘Yah’ meaning singular God. YHWH is the plural while Yah is singular. First century Jews used MarYah outside of the synagogues to keep from using the Holy Name of God, YHWH. The Jews in Babylon also call YHWH "MarYah"--because when they translated the Tanakh from Hebrew into Aramaic, they had MarYah replace YHWH almost 7000 times.  Therefore, the usage is
proper. If I had an Aramaic font available on this website you could go back to the original manuscripts and see it for yourself all over the Tanakh where it is used.
So now that you have had some time to comprehend that ‘the LORD’ and ‘the Lord’ are the same being, let’s look at some verses that call Yeshua ‘MarYah’ a name undisputedly used ONLY for God.
 
Now into the Peshitta (Aramaic) Gospels the title for Yeshua was also MarYah! In the verse below you can read word for word as transcribed, the description of the Son of God, the son of YHWH, called by the Name reserved for the Almighty. It’s a little hard to read so take your time.
 
Luke 2:11,12  “is born to you for today the Saviour who is MarYah the Messiah in the city of David (12) and this is to you a sign, will find you an infant who is wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger.”
 
Now you see MarYah is lying in a manger! A baby! The writers of the Apostolic Books and the transcribers all knew WHO and WHAT they were writing about! HaShem, The Holy One, as the baby, Yeshua!
 
Matt. 22:43-45 He said to them, “Then how David in the spirit calls him ‘MarYah’, saying: (44) ‘for that said MarYah to my Mar “sit you at my right hand until I place your enemies under your feet”’?  (45) If therefore David calls him MarYah how his son is he?”
 
You can continue your study of the word MarYah by reading the Peshitta in full at the following web address: www.peshitta.org , but let’s finish with the last verse.
 
Acts 10:36  For MarYah sent the word to the children of Israel preaching peace and tranquility by Yeshua; he is the MarYah of all.  Amen!
Top of Page
QUESTION:  In Psalms 22:16 it reads “…like a lion at my hands and feet…”. I understand this to be a Crucifixion Psalms. Can you make any sense of this for me?
 
ANSWER:
To look at the meaning behind Psalms 22:16 as a Crucifixion Psalm we have to look at other versions of this verse. Below I have three. First is the Greek Septuagint (LXX), translated from 235BC to 100BC. The second is the Dead Sea Scrolls Psalms-(DDS) which is dated anywhere from 200 BC to 125 BC and the third is the Hebrew Bible (HB) from the Jewish Publication Society 1917 printing.
 
DDS “… they pierced my hands and feet…”
LXX “..piercing my hands and feet.”
HB – “like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet.”
 
As you can see the earlier version all follow the rendering “piercing” and not ‘lion”.  The Greek Septuagint was complied century before Yeshua was crucified. It is also interesting to note that crucifixion was not used as a source of death during the time of the writings of the Psalmist. So how can one word be so different?
 
The Hebrew the phrase “they have pierced” is KAARU and “lion” is KAARI.  The words are identical with the exception that “pierced” ends with the Hebrew letter VAV where “lion” ends with YOD.  VAV and YOD are comparable in form and a scribe might have straightforwardly changed the lettering by inscribing a YOD and failed to attach the vertical downward line so that it would become a VAV.
 
Just recently the bible scholars have asked NASA to help in reading the DDS. By utilizing NASA 's high technology they have been able to ascertain that the lettering is inded a Vav and not a Yod.in this verse. Mike was in attendance while Dr. Bean from the Center for the Study of Biblical Research was speaking and he affirmed these findings.
 
Our intent in these answers is not to lay blame or make accusations. We are simply here to inform and help with the understanding of how scriptures have been given different meaning by numerous version of the bible. 
Top of Page
QUESTION: Did the disciples and others understand that Yeshua was God in the flesh? What title did they call him other than Yeshua?
 
ANSWER:
The word MarYah was one of the names of God used in the biblical days. ‘Mar’ meaning Lord or Master and ‘Yah’ meaning singular God. YHWH is the plural while Yah is singular. First century Jews used MarYah outside of the synagogues to keep from using the Holy Name of God, YHWH. The Jews in Babylon also call YHWH "MarYah"--because when they translated the Tanakh from Hebrew into Aramaic, they had MarYah replace YHWH almost 7000 times.  Therefore, the usage is
proper. If I had an Aramaic font available on this website you could go back to the original manuscripts and see it for yourself all over the Tanakh where it is used.
So now that you have had some time to comprehend that ‘the LORD’ and ‘the Lord’ are the same being, let’s look at some verses that call Yeshua ‘MarYah’ a name undisputedly used ONLY for God.
 
Now into the Peshitta (Aramaic) Gospels the title for Yeshua was also MarYah! In the verse below you can read word for word as transcribed, the description of the Son of God, the son of YHWH, called by the Name reserved for the Almighty. It’s a little hard to read so take your time.
 
Luke 2:11,12  “is born to you for today the Saviour who is MarYah the Messiah in the city of David (12) and this is to you a sign, will find you an infant who is wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger.”
 
Now you see MarYah is lying in a manger! A baby! The writers of the Apostolic Books and the transcribers all knew WHO and WHAT they were writing about! HaShem, The Holy One, as the baby, Yeshua!
 
Matt. 22:43-45 He said to them, “Then how David in the spirit calls him ‘MarYah’, saying: (44) ‘for that said MarYah to my Mar “sit you at my right hand until I place your enemies under your feet”’?  (45) If therefore David calls him MarYah how his son is he?”
 
You can continue your study of the word MarYah by reading the Peshitta in full at the following web address: www.peshitta.org , but let’s finish with the last verse.
 
Acts 10:36  For MarYah sent the word to the children of Israel preaching peace and tranquility by Yeshua; he is the MarYah of all.  Amen!
Top of Page
QUESTION: Are there scriptures that prophecy of Yeshua resurrection? Did Hashem  reveal anywhere in scripture that he would raise up His son after death?
 
ANSWER:
Yes, there are scriptures to support the prophecy of the resurrection of Yeshua. We will start in Isaiah 53:11. As I have taught in several other questions, the majority of bibles today follow the Masoretic Text. The King James, the New King James, the Revised Standard and many others follow almost exclusively the wording as it appears in the Masoretic Text. If you look in the front pages of your own bible you will see which translation your bible used to construct their books. In this age we live in new discoveries are being unearthed to help us understand the process which transpired to give us the bibles we have today. We have discussed in previous questions the validity of the Dead Sea Scrolls, what they have shown us and also the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the scriptures, translated some 200 plus years before Yeshua was born and how they have effected the many of the translations we now have available to us. Now let me show you the wording of Isaiah 53:10,11 in the  Septuagint (LXX), the Dead Sea Scrolls (DDS), the Apostolic Bible(AB),and the New King James (NKJ).
 
LXX- “The Lord also is pleased to take away from the travail of his soul, to shew him light, and to form him with understanding; to justify the just one who serves many well; and he shall bear their sins
DDS  “and the pleasure of YHWH  in his hand will advance. Of the toil of his soul he shall see light and he shall be satisfied and by his knowledge shall he make righteous.”
AB- “And the Lord willed by his Hand to remove from the misery his soul, to show him light, and to shape him with understanding.”
NKJ  “ The pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand. He shall see the labor of his soul and be satisfied. By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many.”
 
In the LXX and the DDS, both transcribed before Yeshua was born, you can see the word “light” is there. But the NKJ translation which follows the Masoretic Text does not. This translation was formatted around the years 400-500 CE. There is clear reference here to Yeshua experiencing death and then seeing “light”. The only light one can see after death is thru a resurrection. I’ve added the Apostolic Bible, a 1708 translation from the Greek to English by Charles Vanderpool. Why does the word “LIGHT” in the Great Isaiah Scroll, found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, appear in this verse but was not translated by the Masoretes when they formatted and translated their text? We don’t know. This difference in translation is also documented in Dr. Emanuel Tov’s book Textual Criticisms of the Hebrew Bible. If you would like to see The Great Isaiah Scroll in it entirety go to the following web address:  www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qumdir.htm
 
Now let’s look at another scripture that speaks to the resurrection.
 
Psalm 16:10,11 “For you will not leave my soul in Sheol. Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption. You will show me the path of life” (NKJ)
 
Here we see the One and Only One who did not have His corpse corrupt in the grave but would see the light of resurrection life by receiving the ‘path of life’ according to verse11. This new resurrected life is said to be found at the right hand of Hashem as confirmed in Psalm 110:1 and 5. This verse is one of the most quoted in all of the inspired words of David.  We know King David could not have been speaking matter-of-factly about himself or prophetically as he died and was buried and his bones are still in the ground. 
 
One more point; it needs to be noted the Hebrew word for “Your Holy One” is kedoshecha, but the Masoretes translated the wording here to chasdecha meaning “Your kind or Merciful One,” leaving it to applied to anyone. However when the Greeks translated verse 10 back in 230BCE they used the word “hosios” Strong’s # 3741, that means “undefiled by sin, free from wickedness religiously observing every moral obligation, pure holy”. This again could not have meant David, by his own words, as he wrote in Psalm 51.
 
I’ve shown you scriptures in the Tanahk that speak of the resurrection of Yeshua. I have not gone into the many New Testament verses where he spoke of his own bodily reappearance. We’ll save that for another day!  
Top of Page
QUESTION: Could you clear up a question my husband brought up in our Study Group last week. In Acts11:47-30 the prophets were said to send help to “Judea” from “Antioch” when there was famine in “ALL THE WORLD”? Would they not also be facing the same famine?
 
ANSWER: 
Good question. The answer lies in the translation of the word ‘world’ from the Aramaic to Greek. The Aramaic word world ‘ara, (Strong’s #772)  and the Aramaic form of the Hebrew word ‘erets (Strong’s #776) can also mean ‘earth’ (Lev. 26:19) or ‘land’ (Dan.9:15) and is often used as a euphemism for “The Land of Israel”(Ex.16:1). But certainly the word here in Acts is not meant to be ‘world’ but ‘Land of Israel’. It was not a good translation from the Aramaic to the Greek.
 
These, less than perfect, mis-translations are quite numerable in the Apostolic Writings. Let me show you a few more.
 
In Acts 8:27 the description of this man that Phillip put through the mikva is a eunuch, thought to be a castrated man, a proselyte to Judaism, going to worship in Jerusalem. According to the Torah is it forbidden for a eunuch from become a proselyte and second to worship at the Temple (Deut. 23:1). One easy explanation is that the spelling in Aramaic, M’HAIMNA, for this passages can mean “believer” or “faithful one”.
 
Another example you might be more familiar with is in Mk 10:25  ‘it is easier for a camel to pass thru the eye of a needle..’ In this passage the word camel has been mis-translated from the Aramaic word which  correctly should be ‘rope’. Reading the passage with ‘rope’ in place of ‘camel’ makes a lot more sense. You can research these translational errors in the book Teach Yourself Aramaic by Dr. Mar Aprem.
Top of Page
Question: In Isaiah 7:14 the translated word for virgin in Hebrew is 'almah' and refers to a "young woman". Had
Isaiah meant 'virgin' he would have written 'b'tulah.' which literally means virgin in Hebrew. Why do so many
interpret this as a messianic prophecy of the so called 'virgin birth' of Yeshua'?

Answer: Let's take this deduction slowly. The word virgin" appears 33 times in the King James Version and 41 times in the New International Version. The Hebrew words thus translated are "bethuwlah" and "almah" . The Greek word meaning virgin is "parthenos."
'Almah' appears seven times in the Old Testament and in each place it either explicitly means a virgin or implies it, because in the bible 'almah' always speaks of an unmarried woman of good reputation.

Starting in Genesis 24:43 the word almah is applied to Rebecca, Isaac's future bride. In just a few verses earlier in the same chapter, verse 16 specifies b'tulah, a virgin, when referring to Rebecca. So we see that she is labeled 'a virgin'.

Later in Exodus 2:8 we see almah as it describes the infant Moses' older sister Miryam, at age nine and surely a virgin. The other references are to young maidens playing on tumbrels in Psalm 68:25, maidens being courted in Proverbs 30:19 and virgins of the royal court in Song of Songs 1:3,6:8. In each case the context requires a young unmarried woman of good reputation, i.e., a virgin.

Next we need to look at the Septuagint, the Greek bible, as it was translated more than two centuries before Yeshua was born. In Isaiah 7:14 the word for virgin, or 'untouched young virgin' in Greek is parthenos. As the Jewish scribes were translating the book of Isaiah for the Alexandrian King and his massive and historical library, they had only one word to correctly translate 'virgin' and that was the word parthenos. So there is no misunderstanding here! They knew what they were saying! So when we jump to the book of Matthew 1:23 where he is quoting from Isaiah, he understood he was making the point that Yeshua was conceived of a virgin. This was long before the New Testament made the matter controversial.

In David Stern's commentary he deducts one possible reason Isaiah through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit did not use the word 'b'tulah' is because it does not always unambiguously mean 'virgin' as we see in Joel 1:8 "Lament like a b'tulah girded with sackcloth for the husband of her youth." And in Deuteronomy 22:19 a woman after her wedding night is referred to as a b'tulah.

There are many other reasons we could go into showing that these verses in Isaiah are messianic in nature. Maybe we'll save that for another time.
Top of Page

Question: Why in Judaism is it forbidden to write the names of God?

Answer:
It is not actually prohibited to write the name of God, but many religious Jewish people shun lettering it out in ordinary exchanges where it might be unintentionally dropped on the floor to be stepped on, or taken into the toilet or otherwise subjected to disregard.
This is why you often see forms such as "G-d" in Jewish papers. The full form of the Hebrew is used in Torah scrolls.
You may already be aware that the original Hebrew is written without vowels. This is true of both Torah scrolls and modern Israeli books and newspaper. There is a system for representing vowels called 'pointing's' by means of small marks above and below the consonantal letters, but the books of the Bible as originally written did not contain these, they were added much later. Long before this Jews had ceased to pronounce the personal name of God in order to be certain they did not abuse it. When they encountered it in the text when reading aloud, they substituted the word "Adonai" which means Lord.
There are about 133 places in the Tanahk where the Masoretes exchanged the correct spelling of YHVH for "Adonai". When they added vowel points to the Hebrew Bible, they wrote the vowel points for "Adonai" in the margin wherever the name YHVH was found. The name "Jehovah" is the result of erroneously combining the original consonants with the substitute vowels and spelling it out in Latin letters.
We could learn much from the way many Jewish People have such great respect for their Bibles.
Top of Page
QUESTION: How many son’s did Jesse, the father of king David have? In the First book of Samuel 16:10-11, it clearly implies that Jesse, the father of Israel's King David, had at least eight sons, of which David was the eighth. But if you look in 1 Chronicles 2:13-15 it indicates that Jesse had only seven sons, and that David was the youngest. Which text is correct? Is there a sensible solution to this contradictory statement?
 
ANSWER:
Yes, both texts are no doubt correct. It is most likely that one of Jesse's sons died before making any major impact during David's reign -- hence being of no report to the chronicler.
 
If you note 1 Chronicles 2:13-15  does not state that Jesse had only seven sons. It simply names seven sons (including David) and two of his daughters.
If one of Jesse's sons had died before being married, and did not have any children of his own, or if that son did not do anything particularly noteworthy, it would not be abnormal for his name to be absent from the written record in 1 Chronicles. Even today it is often common practice (except in formal genealogical registers) to refer to only the surviving children.
 
The two texts in question here do not constitute a basic inconsistency. Therefore, this difficulty is resolvable and cannot be legitimately used to cast doubt on the dependability of Scripture.
 
A noteworthy number of Bible texts really do seem (at least initially) to pose a challenge to the claim that the bible is 100% reliable. But every one of those "problem" texts has long since been uncovered, carefully considered, and resolved in an intellectual and sensible manner. No new Bible difficulties are about to be revealed.
 
Here are a few main beliefs to keep in mind as one approaches Bible texts that appear problematic:
1. You have a choice where you stand in reviewing the matter of Bible difficulties. One may choose to assume that the Bible is without error, which in turn acknowledges that it contains some very hard-to-explain texts. Or one can presuppose that the Bible is full of error, although it may also still contain many truths.  The road you choose often prove determinative.
2. The Scriptures presents itself as being inspired and authoritative. 2 Timothy 3:16-17.
3. Yeshua consistently recognized all Scripture as being both reliable and authoritative. Luke 16:17, Matthew 5:18, and John 10:35.
4. Looking at the verse context and historic word usage are both necessary to unraveling many so-called Bible contradictions.
5. Copyist and transmissional errors do not imply Bible errancy. A extensive range of scribal errors have been identified, categorized, and explained in ways that allow one to continue to reasonably insist on an inerrant original autograph (Bible).
Top of Page
Question: With many of the popular movies today involving so much magic, do you think you could give some ‘easy to understand’ reasons why we should not allow our children to see them?
 
Answer:
Our generation is not the first to be attracted to magic. As we can read in the Tanakh men such as Micah in the book of Judges, chapters 17 and 18, made idols of gold, silver and wood using them as objects of worship. We also see teraphim or hold house idols used to seek out direction (Ezek.19-22) and to know the future.  This kind of magic was also practiced by the Egyptians as we see in Gen. 44:5 that a cup was used for divining in the story of Joseph.  King Saul wanted to speak to the dead. And the examples go on and on!
You can read of many types of magic that was forbidden by HaShem. 
USING STARS TO TELL THE FUTURE – Deut.4:19, 2Kings 17:6; 21:3, Jer. 19:13
SPEAKING TO THE DEAD 1 Sam 28:7
CURSING OR CASTING SPELLS- LEV.19:14; Job 2:9,10 , Num.22:17-24:25
CONSULTING A WITCH- 1 Sam 28:3-20
Here is a list of scriptures that tell us to obey HaShem and not practise these things.
Lev 19:31, Lev 19:28, Lev 19:26, Lev 19:4
Then the Father tells us what He will do if we do not obey Him.
Lev 20:6, Lev 20:2, Lev 20:9
Finally, the good news; take time to read the Promise of Blessing that HaShem gives to those who obey Him by turning away from magic. Lev 26:1-13
Use these scripture with your children. They will have many questions. This is a great time to open up conversation. In the days we live in where these behaviors seen in movies and TV are glorified, it’s time we take the defense where our children are concerned and teach them what the Torah says about these ungodly behaviors.   
Top of Page
Question: I would like to find a copy of the Masoretic Text in English. Is this possible?

Answer:
Most English Bibles on the market today are based mainly on the Masoretic Text, though some are more eclectic than others, that is to say they are made up of elements from a mixture of sources. If you want to try a purely Masoretic translation, you might try the Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures" from the Jewish Publication Society. You can find them on the web. Beware, however, that any translation is inescapably interpretative, and no translation is necessarily the last word.
Top of Page
Question: I am searching for the reasoning of some writers that the story of Esther is "probably" mythological.  I am interested in the rationale for discounting the authenticity of the event

Answer:
 After reading a dozen articles on this subject I have come to the conclusion….no one is for certain that Ester is an actual historical figure or if the book itself was an allegory or teaching story. We will give some fact for and against each thesis.
For discussion purposes here are some conclusion brought up in several articles showing that the book has historical errors.

A. There has been speculation as to which Persian king the Book of Esther was talking about. There are no dates to steer us in either the Book of Esther or history, to guide us. However, judging by the approximate time the events were suppose to have occurred, some scholars have guessed this Persian king might have been Xerxes I, with the spelling of AHASUERUS being Hebrew. I have even read some modern translations of The Book of Ester where the name of Xerxes was put in.  However all the known history of Xerxes' reign does not lend proof that the events of the Book of Esther took place during his years.

B. In the story the kings men are asked to give the advice and guide him after the Queen would not appear. There isn't a Persian name among all these nobles. They are all basically Babylonian names.

C. When the king was having all the most beautiful virgins brought into his harem, Esther, or Hadassah, was among them. She was kept there for a year before she was able to see the king. According to the book, during this time, although this was an oriental country with oriental customs, Mordecai was able to go into the harem every day to talk with Esther. This was not the custom of the day.

D.  The following is the most sited argument brought up. The Book of Esther tells us the kingdom was divided into 127 provinces. All the historical records show there were 20 provinces and no more.  However we must add, we do not know for sure which king is ruling In Ester’s book.  In the Septuagint the spelling of King Ahasuerus is Artaxerxes.  Most students are agreed that this king must be a monarch of the Achaemenian dynasty, earlier that Artaxerxes. So the problem remains.  

E.  According to the story Mordecai was well known as a Jew. Esther was known to have been reared as his daughter. Every day during the year she was in the king's harem this Jew, supposedly her father but actually her uncle, called there to talk with her yet nobody suspected she was a Jewess. 

F. Another curious thing about this book, of all the people mentioned, not one is ever mentioned in any known historical record. The  name King Ahasuerus is written in Ezra 4:6 and also in Daniel 9:1  but it is not clear if it is the same person as the time frame  would have made Mordecai 155 years old at the reign of  King Ahasuerus and that is not likely.
And lastly..

G. The Book of Esther says the Jews were scattered and dispersed throughout all the provinces of the kingdom. That means from “…India unto Ethiopia…”  This wasn't true during the period of the Persian Empire. Alexander the Great, on his great world conquering expedition across western Asia, overthrew the Persian Empire. Alexander started in 331 B.C. and this whole period, from then on to the end of his life, was eleven or twelve years.
When the Greek period started, with Persia and Babylon governed by this Macedonian-Greek general and his descendants during this time, there was some scattering of the remaining Jews who had not returned from the Babylonian captivity, back to Palestine.
About 536 B.C. was when the Medo-Persian Empire overthrew Babylon. The Persian Empire lasted from about 535 B.C. to about 320 B.C., a little over 200 years. In that entire period, it isn't true that the Jews were scattered throughout the provinces. The Macedonian-Grecian period of rule lasted until Rome took over. What must be remembered; we can't trace the first appearance of the Book of Esther any earlier than 160 B.C.

Now on the side that the Book of Ester did actually take place:

A. The Book of Esther first was accepted into the canon of accepted books through Jerome and the Catholic Church, about 400 A.D. It then became part of the Latin Bible and continued in it down to the time when the Protestant churches also took in as canonical.  The Jewish rabbis were still discussing the status of the Hebrew Ester in the 1st century A.D., but the book has now become very popular with the Jews.
B. As someone has said, however, the past is what actually happened, whereas history is merely what somebody wrote down. At one time it was a popular view among scholars that the Hittites were a fictitious people, since classical history never mentioned them. In the past century, however, plentiful evidence of these people has come to light through archeology, and today no one doubts the historicity of the Hittites. Eventually similar evidence may come to light for Esther. In the meantime, we have the Bible itself, which should be evidence enough.
Top of Page
Question: Did the day Noah’s Ark come to rest have any prophetic meaning?

Answer:
There are many accounts in the scriptures that point specifically to Yeshua’s redemption of mankind. Let's go back to Genesis and look at Noah. It is generally held that the ark is a “type” of Yeshua. The ark saved Noah and his family from the wrath of HaShem’s judgment upon the evil world. Yeshua offers salvation to all those who trust in Him, sparing them from judgment for their sins.

The ark rested, or finished the work of saving Noah's family on a significant day.

Then the ark rested in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat. (Gen. 8:4)
HaShem instituted a calendar change (Ex. 12:2) in Exodus, and the seventh month became the first month. It turns out that the same day the ark rested on the mountain is the 17th day of Nisan, which just happens to be three days and three nights after the 14th of Nisan (the future Passover feast). So that would mean that in prophetic illustration, Hashem caused the ark to rest from the flood (His wrath on an evil world) on the same day that Yeshua would rise from the dead to save mankind from the future wrath of HaShem.  Coincidence? Highly unlikely.
Top of Page

Question: Did Yeshua’s followers really believe He was the Son of God?
 
Answer:
There’s nothing like putting scripture all in one place to get the just of what the people of that day, the people that saw Yeshua, walked with Yeshua and heard Yeshua, thought of Him? Here is a compilation.
Simon Peter:
“You are the Messiah, The Son of the Living God!” Matt. 16:16
“..everyone who puts his trust in Him receives forgivness of sins.” Acts 10:43
Mark:
The beginning of the gospel of Yeshua the Messiah, the Son of God. Mark 1:1   
Thomas:
“My Lord and My God!” John 20:28
Martha:
“Yes, Lord, I believe that you are the Messiah, the Son of God, the one coming into the world” John 11:27
Centurion:
“Truly this was the Son of God.” Matt. 27:54
Unclean Man:
“I know who you are – the Holy One of God!” Mark 1:24
Unclean Spirit:
“You are the Son Of God!” Mark 3:11
John the Baptist:
“Look, God’s Lamb!” John 1:29
“I have seen and bore witness that this is the Son Of God!” John 1:34
 “Whoever trusts in the Son has eternal life.” John 3:36
Andrew:
“We have found the Messiah!” John 1:41       
Philip
:“We have found the one that Moshe wrote abut in the Torah, also the Prophets – it’s Yeshua Ben-Yosef form Natzeret!” John 1:45
Natan’el:
“Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Isra’el” John 1:49
Saul:
“This Son is the radiance of the Sh’khinah, the very expression of God’s essence, upholding all that exists…”  Heb.1:3
“…in rasing up Yeshua, as indeed it is written in the second Psalm, 'You are my Son, and today I have become your Father.'Acts 13:33  
Top of Page

Question: How can Yeshua be the ‘ultimate’ blood sacrifice as the Torah teaches that human sacrifice is an abomination? Blood is blood and whether it is a lamb’s’ blood or not Yeshua died as a blood sacrifice!
 
 Answer
: Let's take this question and statement in parts. First, let's look at the statement that human sacrifice goes against Torah and Hashem would never allow it.
 
Go to 2 Samuel chapter 21 and read the story. We see the King of Giv'on wanting a payment because of Saul's killing of the people of Giv’on. King David wants to make it right and asked the King of  Giv'on what can he do? (2 Sam 21:3 “Wherefore David said unto the Gibeonites, What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make the atonement, that ye may bless the inheritance of the LORD?”
 
On in the chapter you see seven of Saul’s son's were given over to the King of Giv'on to make ATONEMENT for the wrong doing.  What is going on here? Hashem laid down a principle in Numbers 35:33 “So you shall not pollute the land where you are; for blood defiles the land, and no atonement can be made for the land, for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it”
 
The principle that the blood from a murder not given justice pollutes the Land and Hashem can not bless it. The whole nation is suffering from this pollution perpetrated by Israeli’s leaders. King David’s prayers are not being answered and there has not been rain for three years and the crops are failing.
 
So Hashem puts into the heart of the King of Giv’on to ask for seven sons of Saul, seven meaning completeness, and they are put to death, I have added a commentary by Matthew Henry which gives insight into this action.
Here we have, Saul’s sons not only hanged, but hanged in chains, their dead bodies left hanging, and exposed, till the judgment ceased, which their death was to turn away, by the sending of rain upon the land. They died as sacrifices, and thus they were, in a manner, offered up, not consumed all at once by fire, but gradually by the air. They died as anathemas, and by this ignominious usage they were represented as execrable, because iniquity was laid upon them. When our blessed Saviour was made sin for us he was made a curse for us. But how shall we reconcile this with the law which expressly required that those who were hanged should be buried on the same day? Deu. 21:23. One of the Jewish rabbin wishes this passage of story expunged, that the name of God might be sanctified, which, he thinks, is dishonored by his acceptance of that which was a violation of his law: but this was an extraordinary case, and did not fall within that law; nay, the very reason for that law is a reason for this exception. He that is thus left hanged is accursed; therefore ordinary malefactors must not be so abused; but therefore these must, because they were sacrificed, not to the justice of the nation, but for the crime of the nation (no less a crime than the violation of the public faith) and for the deliverance of the nation from no less a judgment than a general famine. Being thus made as the off-scouring of all things, they were made a spectacle to the world (1 Co. 4:9, 13), God appointing, or at least allowing it.
The Hebrew word ‘atonement’ used here is the same word used 102 times in 92 verses in the Tanakh.  This same act of hanging is also demanded from Hashem in Numbers chapter 25:4. The Lord said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the Lord, against the sun”
 
Israelite criminals, who were capitally punished, were first stoned or slain, and then hanged. The persons ordered here for execution were the principal delinquents in the Baal-peor outrage--the subordinate officers, rulers of tens or hundreds. They were hung before HaShem vindicating the honor of the true God and against the sun as a public mark of disgrace.If you spend time reading these accounts you can not say that human sacrifice was not allowed in the Tanakh in certain circumstance. Hashem did allow this as only unto Himself.
 
Now, I must address the thought of Yeshua being a human sacrifice. I have heard this repeated many times by those who do not accept the death of Hashem's only Son on the Cross. According to numerous New Testament scriptures, Hashem never did and never will see the death of His Son as a 'human sacrifice’. Hashem's true eternal viewpoint is found in such places as   1Peter 1:19-20, where He is said to have seen His Son as The LAMB, and not a human.
 
 But Yeshua was allowed to ‘appear’ as human in the end-times for the sake of humanity. Let’s look at some accounts in the Torah where supernatural beings were seen as human. In Chapter 18 of Genesis, three angels visited Abraham. They ate, talked and prophesied with him. They appeared human but we know that they were not.  For those of you who say “but they were just angels, sent by Hashem” I ask you, can angels forgive sin? For in Chapter 18:25 Abraham says “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” Abraham knew he was addressing Hashem, not angels. Later in the same book we read about the struggling of Jacob with the 'Angel of the Lord' in Chapter 23.  I'm sure that Angel felt 'real' and 'human' but we know that is not the case here either.
 
For Hashem to enter into man's world for whatever the reason at the time, He must prepare a 'body' for lack of a better term, for humans to see and interact with. As Yashua said, if a man is not born from above, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven, and neither can he grasp its eternal views and perspectives.  It is our call as children of the King to see our Lord in the eternal view and perspective, not from an earthly, greek mindset.  We must see Yeshua as Hashem saw him, as "THE LAMB", as a “prepared body”.
 
As Psalms 49:7 speaks that one man can not die for another, you can see that Yeshua, in Hashem's eyes, was not a 'man'. Yeshua carried the essence of Hashem, in a ‘fleshly’ state, not a mere man, never JUST a man. A man can not die as the “perfect atonement” for all time. It had to be Yeshua Himself, as a man, to pay the price for the continuing sins of the people that He  Himself made. NO sacrifice however prefect, could atone for the people. Only Hashem himself could wipe the slate clean.
 Top of Page
Question: I have friends in our Torah study that insist that the Hebrew Bible is the ultimate authority and should be #1 when it comes to translations. What do you think about the KJV and the Masoretic Text in that bible?
 
Answer:
This is a question we get asked again and again. What bible is right? Which bible should I take as the leading or MOST correct version? My answer to that question – it depends on what you’re looking for! Let me explain.
 
If you are a mathematical person and  want  the text which is most correct ‘percentage wise’, that is, how many verses, chapters, and words translate most correctly and  is used in bibles worldwide, by in large it has to be the Masoretic Text, or what we have today as the foundation for the KJB and many, many others.
 
The Masoretes were studious in preserving the manuscripts of the very earliest Hebrew and Aramaic and brought it down to what we have today as the Hebrew Bible and then on into our King James Bibles . Remember thought, the Hebrew bible only contains The Old Testament. So if you want to read Genesis thru the Prophets, and the Writings, you can read the Hebrew Bible and know you are getting an overall accurate translation.
 
However, (and you knew there was a however) if you are a Believer in Messiah Yeshua you would not want to ONLY read the Hebrew Bible as it has been shown through multiple articles and exhaustive studies that Messianic verses which prophecy Yeshua is our Redeemer and Savior have been altered or taken out all together.
 
Why would such a thing be done? To understand this logic we have to look back at what was taking place in 35CE to 80CE.  In the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds and the Tosefta (ancient writing of the Rabbis, Shabbat 13:5; b Shab 116a 15C) we read the Rabbinic Jews talking over among themselves how they were to handle the destruction of manuscripts of New Testament books. Specifically mentioned is how to destroy them as they contain the sacred name of God.  Now this tells us they either had in their possession or had seen manuscript written in Hebrew because we know the Greek translation of the Bible, written by the Seventy scribes in 235BCE, The Septuagint, used “God’ and “Lord” as substitutes, not writing the true Name of Hashem. I use this example only to point out that each era of history had it’s own agenda! We must always keep this in the back of our minds as we study.
 
Now I must go on to point out The Septuagint also has its problems. First let me say that where the author’s of the New Testament books quote the Old Testament are for the most part, some 93 percent of the time, match the Septuagint Bible. Does this mean John, Saul and Peter read from Greek scrolls? Absolutely not!  But the scrolls they did have were passed down from 100’s of years before and are NOT the same readings that you have today in your Old Testament, the Masoretic Text. Let me give you an example.
 
Let’s look at Matthew 12:21, where Matthew quotes Isaiah 42:4. We will first quote it from the NT of today, then from the Old Testament of today and then from the Septuagint.
 
NT - “and in his name will the Gentiles hope.”
OT - “and the coastlands wait for his Law.( Isaiah 42:2).
S - “and in his name will the Gentiles hope.”
 
Another verse in Romans 15:12,
NT - “the root of Jesse shall come, he who rises to rule the Gentiles; on him the Gentiles hope.”
OT- “the root of Jesse shall stand as an ensign to the people; him shall the nations seek.”  (Isaiah 11:10)
 S - “the root of Jesse shall come, he who rises to rule the Gentiles; on him the Gentiles hope.”
 
“We have found Him of whom Moses in the Law, and also the prophets, wrote – Yeshua of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” John1:45. Phillip had it right! The Torah was filled with specific prophecies that were fulfilled by Yeshua as he walked with them. But after the fall of the 2nd temple the rabbis of that day departed from Jerusalem, making there way to other cities where they began the system of Judaism that we have today.
 
I could go on and show 100’s of verses that agree totally with the Septuagint bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls but do not follow the wording of the Old Testament as we have it today. We have to ask ourselves why? Well, men more talented than I have already done this and hold to the fact that the team of seventy that translated the Hebrew scrolls into the Greek translation in Alexandria, Egypt in 235 BCE, with the full approval and authority of the High Priest, before Yashua was ever born and completed the Greek translation before the so-called Christian era, did a superb job of translation.  Meaning was preserved. There was no agenda to cover up the Messianic prophecies that are throughout the scriptures. They didn’t know that the Messiah would be on the scene just some 200 years later!
 
As decades continued to roll on discoveries were made. A Hebrew manuscript of Matthew, found in Rome in 1553 by Jean Dutillet amoung copies of the Talmud confiscated from Jews by petition of Pietro, Cardinal Caraffa and Pope Julius 111. This manuscript was found to underlie the Greek Matthew quite well and even brings understanding to certain verses that are mistakes.
 
One error brought up again and again that found it way from the Greek translation into the English translation is the genealogy of Yeshua as given in Matthew 1. This is a big blunder as it claims to give three groups of fourteen names (1:17) but the last group only contains 13 names. Well in the DuTillet Hebrew manuscript of Matthew the name “Abner” occurs between Abiud and Eliakim in vs 13, fulfilling all fourteen names. An easy mistake as the ‘r’ and‘d’ in Hebrew look similar.
Another inaccuracy in the Greek New Testament can be found in Matthew 27:9 which quotes Zech. 11:12-13 but incorrectly credits the quote to the book of Jeremiah.   This mistake is cleared up in another manuscript version, The Shem Tob Hebrew, where it correctly attributes the quote to Zechariah.  The Shem Tob Hebrew manuscript was written around the 14th century by Shem-Tob ben-Isaac ben-Shaprut Ibn Shaprut, a Castilian Jewish physician.
With the findings of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which even to this day are lending truth to seemingly mistakes in our New Testament, we can but continue to read, study, learn and accept that we DON’T know it all, we DON’T have it all and until Messiah comes we can’t proclaim it all!
Anyone who boosts to have the ONLY correct translation is in error. What we must hold on to is that the message given by Hashem - that life is to be lived by the Torah, that He is our Father and that one day Messiah will return, is a message that has remained true for over 6000 years.
Top of Page
Question: Does it say anything in the Tanakh about the Lake of Fire? Or burning in Hell forever? I know the Bible talks about Gehenna and in Isaiah 66:24 it says "And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh." I have different people saying that according to the Greek ‘forever, everlasting’ is not what that means, and I would like that to be so for the people who rejects Yeshua not to burn forever, but when it comes to spend forever, eternity with Him, I want it to mean eternity. I always thought that the Lake of fire was literal and meant forever, and I never thought that God (Yahveh) sent us there, but by the choice we made we sent ourselves. I never blamed Him. But I still can't imagine people burning forever, and when I think about it I can't imagine God preparing a place of torment forever.

Answer:
Gehenna in English or Gey-Hinnom, brought over into Greek mentioned in Matt. 5:22 was translated as Hell.  In the Tanakh it is called Sh’ol.  In the NT Gehenna was used as a metaphor for hell, as the ‘valley of Himmom’, a real place then and now, just south of the Old City where rubbish fires were always burning. There is much in Hebrew Scripture explicitly mentioning a place of torment, of burning fire and the likely hood of people going there. Let’s look at some scripture in the Torah and in the Tanakh about this.

Deuteronomy 32.22 talks about a burning hell Hashem himself will make. His anger at those that disobeyed him brought forth this place. 2 Sam. 22:6 says the sorrow of Sheol (hell) surrounded me and also in Psalm 18:5 and 116:3 David speaks of the sorrow so Sheol surrounding him. Psalms 9:17 says the wicked will go there. And looking at Job 26:6 we see hell is a place of destruction.  The great prophets knew of Sh’ol. When liberal teachers declare that Judaism teaches there is no hell, they are implying a later doctrine of their own not based on the Tanakh.

They teach reward and punishment in the Tanakh is usually focused on the nation of Israel as a whole, rather than on the destiny of individual souls. When Israel was obedient, the nation would possess the land and prosper in it. If not, they would be removed from it for a time, and eventually be restored. This policy is somewhat true, laid down in Deuteronomy 28 and played out in the prophets and historical books. Some seek to teach the idea of eternal punishment is at the very least off-putting, and go on to soften it by proposing that the final judgment is total annihilation, in which nothing is experienced, neither good nor bad. But we can see from the fomentation verses, death and torment will come to those that are judged to go there. And as Yeshua states three times in the chapter nine of the book of Mark, “their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched”. Whenever scripture repeats itself, it’s telling us “Hey, don’t miss this! It’s important!”

Instead be like Job who wrote, "I know that my Redeemer lives, and I will see him in the last day." (Job 19:25)
It may be that a human soul, fashioned as it is in the likeness of God (Genesis 1:27), can never be destroyed. A soul without Yeshua is dead, (John 15:6, John 6:53)) but cannot decay or be disposed of. It can be put away in a sort of spiritual cemetery, but this "death" (separation from God, the source of life) will not result in annihilation, only torment. Could that place be our "Hell"?

So how long  will the unrepentant soul be tormented? Is a thousand years enough? Or a million? This may seem to be a long time, but it is nothing against the backdrop of eternity. What's more, Hell is the just reward of sin, not the cure. No amount of time spent there will make anyone more fit for Heaven. People don't go to Hell to get better. They go because they refuse to get better. The only way to be made fit for Heaven is to accept God's gracious gift in Yeshua. (John 14:6, John 3:18, Acts 4:12, Romans 3:23,-24, Revelation 21:27) Then we can be received into his presence forever. Not just until the end of this world, or the end of the next, but forever.(1 Thessalonians 4:17, John 6:40, John 11:25, and many others).
Top of Page
Question: Did the blood sacrifices of the Old Testament times really forgive the sins of the people?  If so, why are we going to continue to bring blood sacrifices in the Millennial Reign?  Didn’t Yeshua’s blood cover all sin forever?
 
Answer:
First, lets look at one verse, Leviticus 19:22 where Hashem forgives ONE particular sin (see vs 20) with an animal sacrifice. There are also hundreds of verses showing other sacrifices and offering that did not require the blood sacrifice that also forgave the sins of the Hebrews. However, a close look at Lev. 19:22 will reveal that the blood will not cover ALL the sins and it does not say the sin will be TAKEN AWAY, only atoned for! The Hebrew word there is kophar, meaning covering not removal. So then we go to Heb.10:4 and we see Saul is in agreement that the blood of bulls and goats will not REMOVE sin, just cover it. The sins of the Children of Israel were forgiven, never removed, never paid for in full! That was taken care of by the spilling of Yeshua’s blood at the crucifixion. And yes, the death of Yeshua and the giving of His life has paid the price for all sins, for all eternity.
 
As far as blood sacrifices in the Messianic Age, we can read Zech. 14:16-21, Zeph. 3:8-10, Isaiah 56:5-7 and see that WE will bring blood sacrifices but they will be as a memorial or reminders of the spilled blood and victory of Yeshua’s death over sin! Just as we celebrate to remember our wedding anniversary or have a special night out, we will come before Hashem for all eternity to celebrate the victory of Yeshua’s resurrection and sacrifice of the execution stake.
Top of Page
Question: Was the Apostle Saul  a Torah observant Jew who upheld the Torah or did he believe he was no longer "under the Law"?

Answer:
The Apostolic Writings (New Testament) shows that Saul remained an observant Jew even after coming to faith in Messiah:
• Acts 21:20- Having been accused of teaching Jews to abandon the Torah, James and the others tell  Saul to takes some other men with him to the temple, to observe purification rites, in order to prove that he is “living in obedience to the Torah.”
• Acts 24:17-18 – Saul testifies that his intent was to present offerings, and that he was ceremonially clean (in accordance with the Torah)  1 Cor 9:18-23 -- Saul became as one under the law (Torah) to win those under the law. Saul repeatedly made it clear, however, that Torah-observance is not a means of salvation.
•  Acts 24:14 Saul said he served God the way his “forefathers did,” and that he “believed everything that is in accordance with the Torah and the Prophets.”
• Acts 20:16 Saul wanted to keep the Feasts. Here he was hurrying and sailed past Ephesus so he could be in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost.
• Galatians – (The whole book!)  Romans 3:20 – No one will be declared righteous by observing the law.
• Acts 16: 1-3 Saul has Timothy circumcised so he can travel and not offend the Jews they will be teaching.
• The bottom line is that keeping the Torah is not wrong, but thinking it can buy salvation is wrong. There are many benefits in keeping oneself to the Torah even after embracing the Grace of God through Messiah. It should probably also be pointed out the Torah Saul kept is not the same as Rabbinic Judaism today. Rabbinic Judaism is Torah plus endless “traditions of men,” and Saul taught against these.
Saul also continued to keep the Temple rites which God had prescribed through Moses and had not specifically said to stop. Since the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, however, it has not been possible for even the strictest Jew to keep these observances.
Top of Page
Question: What will the borders of Israel look like once she is fully restored and the covenant of Abraham is fulfilled?
 
Answer:
Let’s look at Ezekiel 47:15-20 for the answer to this question. There you can see a detailed description of the future boundaries of Israel. In today’s term or landmarks it would be describes as follows:
 
The Land will include all the area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, and extend north of the Jordan’s headwaters all the way to the Euphrates and south to ‘the river of Egypt”, obviously a undersized river in the Sinai which marked the Egyptian boundary in early times.
 
We read in Gen. 15:18 Hashem promised Abraham all the land from the River of Egypt to the Euphrates. Again in Deut. 11:24 the Israelites were in inherit all the land from the desert to Lebanon, from the Euphrates to the Western Sea.
 
On in 2 Chron. 9:26 we read the Kingdom of Solomon extends from the Euphrates to the Land of the Philistine (Mediterranean coast) down to the border of Egypt.
Top of Page
Question: Regarding the divinity of "Jesus", the Jewish concept of G-d is that he is a spiritual being and not flesh and blood. For a Jew it is an abomination that G-d should be a human. G-d is an indefinable, spiritual, being. "There shall no man see me and live." Exodus 33:20.

Answer: If G-d is indefinable, how can we define him as exclusively spiritual? Does he not have the power and the authority to enter the Human Race if it suits him to do so? Humanity only limits G-d if the human form is all that he has. The concept of Yeshua as a man but also deity avoids this limitation by viewing G-d as existing both as the omnipresent spiritual Father and as the Son,  who was born into the human race at the appointed time. Indeed, Hashem has said in the Torah "There shall no man see me and live," yet repeatedly in the Torah and the Prophets people do see G-d and live. This makes sense if we do not limit G-d to what we think He should or should not be.
Top of Page
Question: Do you believe that Hashem is the only true G-d, and that He is the G-d of Yeshua? Do you believe that Hashem sent Yeshua as the only begotten son, the firstborn of all creation? Jn1:14,1:18, Heb1:9, Col 1:15. If so can you expound on the following verse "If you love me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father: For the Father is great than I. Jn 14:28

Answer: Verses such as these noted in your question are used by many to prove their point that Yeshua is not divine but a created being.

Col 1:15 must not be misunderstood as saying that Yeshua is himself a created being, since verse 16 identifies him as the Creator of all things. Likewise Jn 1:1 and many others passages identify him unequivocally as divine and the Creator of the Universe. "Firstborn of all creation" (or 'every creature") mean that he has the right of the "firstborn," in ancient Middle Eastern culture, as is born out of the following verses. The author is not talking about the Son's origin, but about his role as the Head of Creation.

The Son is not the Father but they are both the same G-d. The Son has existed in thought or in part with G-d from eternity (Jn1:1) but became a man (was begotten) when born of the flesh some 2000 years ago. G-d for the first time took part of his substance, put it in another place, called it the Word, then renamed it Yeshua, His Son. Born in flesh as we are He was uniquely G-d and Man all at once, in the same body/spirit. As a man, he was in a position to demonstrate what the perfect man would be like, and to provide an example of how we also as believers are to relate to the Father. As a Man he had voluntarily set aside for a time the privileges of Godhood (Phil. 2:6,7) and could logically say things such as "the Father is greater than I" (Jn. 14:28)

It is difficult to understand exactly what the nature is between G-d and Yeshua, but Hebrews 1:3 provides a hint. When you look into the night sky, the lights you see, that we call stars are not really the stars but the light that is emitting from them. Technically we could say it is the light we see, but is that a fair distinction, since it is only by virtue of its
light that we see the star (or anything else, for that matter)? The star is in one sense distinct from the light, but at the same time the light is part of the star. You might even say it is an essential aspect of its "Starriness," at least in the traditional sense. It certainly doesn't mean that there are two stars. The Son can be thought of as the light emanating from the Father (Heb. 1:3), making him visible to us. You can not separate the two, and one without the other is not possible. When you see one, you see the other. That is how Yeshua describes His relationship with the Father in many verses.

There is only one G-d, and that is the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Hashem is uniquely indescribable for as soon as you put words to what or who He is you have limited what and who He is. The Jewish rabbis use the concept- Ain Sof- "without end, border, or termination"- a Divine Power infinite and immeasurable. That says it all!
Top of Page

QUESTION:With Hashem sending His Spirit to impregnate Mary He would of violated his own Torah with the mixing of seed, the Laws of kilayot or shatnetz. Hashem would of never allowed this as in Gen.6:1-7 He regrets making man as man mixed seed between the sons of Elohim or the fallen angels and human women. This forbidding of mixed seed is repeated in Lev.19:19. This sound adamant to me that Hashem would never have allowed the ‘divine child’ who was also suppose to be ‘man’ according to Christian belief.
 
ANSWER:This question is full of false assumptions. First, nowhere is it taught that Hashem had relations with Mary. No one I know teaches this! Hashem did the same thing for Mary’s womb as He did with Sarah, who was old with age and no longer able to conceive. He made it alive or quickened it to bear children. Because no strange seed was mixed and NO intercourse took place, between Sarah and Hashem, He did not violate any of His Laws. Sending the Set-Apart Spirit, Abraham’s sperm was quickened with divine intervention. In Mary’s case it was quicken with the same divine intervention, without the human sperm, no mixing took place so there was no Torah violation of “Law of Mixed Seed’ or the “Ritual Law of purity.”
 
As for Yeshua being divine, that did not violate any laws either as many places in the past Hashem manifested himself in many different ways. The ultimate, yet limited human manifestation in Messiah was not Hashem’s first or last state. It lasted but a mere 33.5 years and then He rose with a body with no blood, human or otherwise. This temporary Tabernacle was made into a glorified being. No laws of Hashem’s was ever violated! Not in the virgin birth or in His sinless life or in the final resurrection.
Top of Page
Question: After being in a bible study with some friends I left because they were quoting from books I had never heard of. They couldn’t tell me why  these books  were in their American Bible but not in my New King James. One of the books was called First Maccabee. Do you know about this book?
 
Answer:
The bible you’re referring to is the well known Catholic Bible. This bible contains most of the Apocrypha, meaning hidden, spurious.
In modern times, many have deceptively referred to these books as "the Lost Books of the Bible." But in actuality they have not been lost. Christians and Jews have always known about them. This name was given to certain ancient books which found a place in the LXX. and Latin Vulgate versions of the Old Testament used by Catholics today. They are not accepted as Scripture by  most Protestants or Jews. They were appended to all the great Bible translations made from those documents in the sixteenth century. However, they should not be regarded in any sense as parts of the inspired Word.
Why?They are not once quoted by the New Testament writers, who frequently quote from the LXX. Yeshua and his disciples confirmed by their authority the canon, which was the same as we have today. These books were written not in Hebrew but in Greek, and during the "period of silence," from the time of Malachi, after which direct revelations from God ceased till the Christian era. The contents of the books themselves show that they are not part of Scripture.
In the Old Testament Apocrypha you will find fourteen books. Thy are the following: the Books of the Maccabees, the Books of Esdras, the Book of Wisdom, the Book of Baruch, the Book of Esther, Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Judith, etc. Others include: Bel and the Dragon (addition to Daniel), Daniel and Susanna (addition to Daniel), Additions to Esther, Letter of Jeremiah, Prayer of Azariah (addition to Daniel), The Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, Sirach, Tobit, and The Wisdom of Solomon. Ancient Jewish writers and rabbis did not accept them as Scripture.
Remember, there were over 300 books for the early church fathers to pick from when they were canonizing the bible we have today. Many of those books are not in this list and must be understood to be read with interest, but not taken as from Hashem.
Top of Page
Question:I have a professor in a liberal seminary who believes the Bible is full of contradictions.  Most of them I can rebut fairly easily, but this one has me stumped. Can you help me to answer him?  Compare the resurrection accounts in the four Gospels.  When did Mary Magdalene see Jesus?  How many times? There seem to be other discrepancies in when and where the disciples saw him, etc.  It really does seem to be confusing, but I never realized that before.  Thanks for your time.

Answer:
Thank you for sending us your question. Let me give you a few things to think about.

It seems your friend has been reading Michael Martin. The debate he brings up is almost verbatim from this philosopher.  As a philosopher, Martin would look at the apparent inconsistencies of  the story and say " We must throw this out!" However a historian would look at the same accounts and say " I see some inconsistencies, but I notice something: they're all in the secondary details."
 
The core of the tale is the same: Joseph of Arimathea takes a body of Yeshua, puts it in a tomb, the tomb is visited by a small group of women early in the morning following the crucifixion, and they find the tomb is empty. They see a vision of angels saying that Yeshua has risen. Here you have a historical core that is reliable and can be depended on.
 
In actually the small discrepancies make the story MORE reliable for if they were exactly alike you can bet an historian would say, "This was a tale,  a legend, made up and repeated!"
 
To quote Michael Grant, a Trinity College professor in his book Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels, "True the discovery of the empty tomb is differently described by the various gospels, but if we apply the same sort of criteria that we would apply today in other ancient literary sources, then the evidence is firm and plausible enough to necessitate the conclusion that the tomb was, indeed, found empty."
 
Let's look at an example in history. We have two narratives of Hannibal crossing the Alps to attack Rome. They are both incompatible and irreconcilable. Yet not one classical historian doubts the fact that Hannibal did mount this campaign. This is a nonbiblical illustration of discrepancies in secondary details that fail to undermine the historical core of this historical story.
 
And now for the icing on the cake let's look at a detail in the gospels that solidifies the story. In biblical days women were on a very low rung of the social ladder.  The testimony of a woman was agreed as so worthless that they weren't even allowed to serve as legal witnesses in a Jewish court of law. In light of this it is absolutely remarkable that the CHIEF witnesses to the empty tomb are women who were friends of Yeshua. Any legendary account, who ever was telling the story, would certainly  of portrayed MALE disciples as discovering the tomb, like Peter or John. The fact that women are the first witnesses to the empty tomb is most plausibly explained by the reality that - like it or not- they were the discoverers of the empty tomb! This shows that the writers of the gospels were faithful to the truth of what really happened, even if it were embarrassing.
 
Lastly we can see that the disciples thought and taught profoundly on the resurrection. In Peter’s speech in Acts 2 verse 24 he says 'God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the suffering..." and later he goes on to quote David's psalm how God would not allow his Holy One to undergo decay and that "..we were all witnesses of the fact."  On in the book of Act, Chapter 13 Saul says, "When they had carried out all that was written about him, they took him down from the tree and laid him in a tomb. But God raised him from the dead, and for many days he was seen by those who had traveled with him from Galilee to Jerusalem." Certainly Saul believed and taught that the tomb was empty! 
Top of Page
QUESTION: In Acts Chapter Seven where Stephen is giving his speech, he gets the count wrong in the number of soul that left with Joseph to go to Egypt. Everyone knows there were seventy, not seventy-five! Any idea why this is?
 

ANSWER: I must say this is one of the first chapters that I began my research on and I also found myself a little wobbly in my Spirit. But let me show you what I found.
 
 We have discussed in an earlier question the version of the Greek bible, the Septuagint. Here is the book of Genesis, Chapter 46 in that bible.Chapter 46:23 And the sons of Dan; Asom. 24 And the sons of Nephthalim; Asiel, and Goni, and Issaar, and Sollem. 25 These are the sons of Balla, whom Laban gave to his daughter Rachel, who bore these to Jacob; all the souls, seven. 26 And all the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt, who came out of his loins, besides the wives of the sons of Jacob, even all the souls were sixty-six. 27 And the sons of Joseph, who were born to him in the land of Egypt, were nine souls; all the souls of the house of Jacob who came with Joseph into Egypt, were seventy-five souls.
 
Why does this version count nine souls born to Joseph in Egypt while the OT does not?!? Our Old Testament today (the Masoretic Text) in vs27 only counts two souls born to Joseph in Egypt. How interesting! Let’s go on.
 
The discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls have shed light on tidbits just like this one. Below you will see where the Exodus Dead Sea Scrolls list the count of souls coming out with Joseph as seventy-five in Exodus 1:5! I have given you the Qumran fragment number in the second column, and which cave (4) that it was found in. The MT stand for Masoretic Text, our Old Testament today.
 
Ex 1.5    4Q Exodb     And all the souls born of Jacob were seventy-five. MT And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventysouls.
 
Now that is two witnesses. Both in the Septuagint and in the DDS the count is 75. Next is a quote from The Works of Philo Judaeus by Charles Duke Youge, available on the web for all to read. --for it is said, that all the souls which came out of Jacob were Seventy and Five ;"{92}{#ge 46:27.
 
Remember, the DDS are carbon dated to 235-100 BCE to 100 AD. The Septuagint Bible we have today quotes the same as the DDS. Philo lived in the same decades as Josephus reporting on the day’s events with a more poetic language than Josephus.
 
So now that you know your Old Testament also has variations, quotes that don’t ‘match up’ with other OLDER translations, you have to ask yourselves why? Why does the Masoretic Text of today not agree with the Dead Sea Scrolls, dating further back than the Christian era? Why are there quotes in the NT (Apostolic Writing) that match the DSS manuscripts of Isaiah but are left out of the Book of Isaiah in our bible today? Who decided, and when did they decide that my Old Testament needed to be changed?
 
These are questions we plan on diving into in the next weeks and months. The Word says ‘in the mouth of two or more witnesses.’ You decided! You study for yourselves and think about the material.
 
You know, I love the Fox New Channel. When I want news, fair and balanced, that’s where I go. I love it when they say, “We report, you decided” Well, that’s what I am saying today. Look at the evidence in front of you and then you come to some conclusion in your own mind.
Top of Page
 

Question:
How can the Bible be correct in The Gospel According to Luke 2:2 claiming that the great census decreed by Rome's Caesar Augustus about the time of Yeshua's birth circa 4-5 B.C. occurred "when Quirinius was governor" if Quirinius (or sometimes spelled Cyrenius) didn't even become governor until the year 6 A.D.?! Isn't this a clear case of the Bible being in error on matters of history?

Answer:
No so fast. Many have used this chapter and verse for years to make a case for the Bible being unreliable. But no more! Today, there are a number of reasons for giving Luke the benefit of the doubt. Thought out his book Luke sites 32 countries, 54 cities, and 9 islands, and shows himself to be a reliable historian, as demonstrated by famed scholar and archaeologist, Sir William Ramsey.
To date, the only census documented outside the Bible near this time under Quirinius is the one referred to by the historian Josephus (Antiquities XVIII, 26 [ii.1], and Tacitus, a famed writer in the same era, which says took place in 6 A.D This decree for the taxing referred to the whole Roman world, and not to Judea alone. His full name Publius Sulpicius Quirinius, as history shows, was to be governor of Cilicia, which annexed Syria at the same time of Yeshuaís birth. Some ten years later he was appointed governor of Syria for the second time.
But
HOME PAGE

Information & Content Copyright Joined To HaShem 2014