Scroll to Scroll: Aharei Mot (#29)

ANSWERS TO STUDY QUESTIONS FROM PREVIOUS PORTION (Metzora)

1) I have heard in the past some teachers equate the leper or menstruating womans bed
that makes all who lay on it unclean to the bed of Jezebel in Revelation 2:22. Why
is this wrong?
Because in Aramaic the original word was ARSA did not mean bed in this
instance. AENT footnote explains:
14) Peshitto and Crawford Revelation reads, "Behold, I am throwing her into a bed,
and the ones committing adultery with her into great affliction, unless they repent of
the works of her" (Rev_2:22 The Greek-English Interlinear New Testament, UBS 4th
Edition, Nestle-Aland 26th Edition). Shaliach John is rebuking the congregation for
allowing this woman Jezabel to seduce righteous men who were previously above
reproach. In addition, this woman also made false claims of prophetic utterances and
went so far as to eat meat sacrificed to idols. It's rather pitiful, but when John is
finally alone with Jezebel, because her lovers are gone, Greek suggests he just
"throws her onto a bed"? Considering this lady's history, this hardly seems like
punishment, but business as usual! In order to avoid such a salacious reading, Greek
translators have added a word that does not appear in the text: "Behold I will throw
her onto a bed of sickness and those who commit adultery with her into great
tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds" (Rev_2:22 NASB). The use of italics in
the NASB is a way of bolstering bad readings arising from Greek. The editors of
NASB, while saying that italicized words are "implied" are really on very thin ice
from a scholarly perspective. There is no fact, hint or evidence that "bed of sickness"
is meant here. Greek simply puts "bed" and "bed" alone here. Once again Aramaic
comes to the rescue: "Behold I will throw her in to a coffin, and those who commit
adultery with her into a great affliction, unless they repent of their deeds"
(Rev_2:22).
The Aramaic word arsa means both "bed" and "coffin," with the latter meaning
obviously making far more sense! Furthermore, notice the use of the B proclitic at
the beginning of the word. As we saw earlier, beyt can mean on as in "on to a bed" or
into as in "into a coffin." The Greek redactor saw this word with its B proclitic in
Aramaic and picked the wrong meanings for both of them when translating the text.
But here is where things get rather odd: this reading is identical in both the Peshitto
Revelation and the Crawford Manuscript. In the case of the former, we know it was a
translation from Greek, yet this reading becomes very puzzling if Crawford was a
translation from Greek. Crawford as well, while looking "translational" in many
areas, nevertheless is holding on to the kind of Aramaic primacy that almost never
comes into a text from translation. So if both Crawford and Peshitto Revelation were
from Greek sources, the only logical conclusion is to assert that all three versions had
to come from a lost Hebrew/Aramaic original. The surviving texts are clearly not that
original, but they nevertheless testify, like the Septuagint, to that original's existence.
1|Page

2) In a broader sense, who do these lepers signify in our modern times?

I believe the lepers described in the Torah portion are meant to symbolize
outcasts in society, but not necessarily bad people or criminals, but rather
people who are isolated for being against social norms in other ways.
In this case, the lepers are not judged to be morally inferior but only ritually
unclean, and even the high priest can also become unclean for a time, so he
shouldnt be judging those who need treatment, isolation and the ancient
equivalent of frequent checkups with health insurance!
3) We saw the word RAQAQ discussed as spit and used that way by Yshua. But
this word in Aramaic has another interesting meaning that might also fit. What is
it?
In Matthew 5:22, the word RACA is used as I spit on you but it can also
mean to be a fool, or literally empty headed.
4) We saw the measured barley (SEORA) mentioned in this portionbut this word
has another interesting meaning that relates to something else we cut seasonally
(most of us). What is it and how does it lead to deeper meanings for us?
This same word can mean HAIRY, and it was applied to barley because it
was known as the bearded/hairy grain. This reminds me of Esau and also
that his territory is in MOUNT SEIRsame word and he is called hairy as
well. SEORIM is also the name of a priest in 1 Chronicles.
5) What are these images of clean and unclean meant to teach us about the spiritual
realm?
Basically ritual cleanliness or uncleanness comes from circumstances in life
that in many cases are unavoidable. But MORAL cleanliness or uncleanness
comes from CHOOSING to obey or disobey His instructions. That one
becomes unclean is not the problemit only becomes a problem when the
rules to get clean again are ignored.
AND NOW FOR THIS WEEKS PORTION
1) Meaning of this weeks Torah portion and summary of contents:
Aharei Mot means after the death, referring to the demise of Aarons sons Nadab
and Abihu who offered fire in a way not sanctioned by Abba YHWH. The portion
begins with the purification measures that Aaron and his remaining sons need to go
through to rectify the evil that was done in Abba YHWHs sight. Once done,
2|Page

additional purity regulations are given on how native Israelites are to slaughter and
handle blood. Abba YHWH then opens the last chapter in this portion by reminding
Israel that they are not to do the practices of the peoples either from where they came
from (Egypt) or where they are going (Canaan) but must remain a Set-Apart people.
In order to do this, the portion closes with additional regulations of proper and
improper sexual conduct.
Read Parsha (English-Leviticus 16:1-18:30). This week, we will read entire portion.
2) Play by Play commentary where appropriate.
3) Point out key Hebrew words/terms. Color Commentary:
VAYEDABER YAHWEH EL-MOSHE ACHAREY MOT SHNEY BENEY
AHARON (16:1 = and spoke Yahweh to Moshe after the death of Aarons two sons.
The deaths happened in Leviticus 10 and yet it is only now, in chapter 16, that the
narrative resumes forward from that point. This is because the death of Aarons sons,
though tragic, was also a key teaching moment for Israel, and Abba YHWH took
that opportunity to proclaim additional purity regulations for everyone so as to drive
the point home on what the price of disobedience actually is.
Special Note: Some of you may remember I have a theory called mapping out the
Torah that posits that every time the phrase, And YHWH spoke to Moshe and said,
speak to the children of Israel and tell them appears that these are instructions given
for an entire day. Based on that idea and recalling that Nadav and Avihu died on 8
Abib, I theorize the following instructions match the following dates in 1446 BCE:
Leviticus 11 (kosher instructions to both Moshe and Aaron)9 Abib (Sunday
morning, April 5th)
Leviticus 12 (niddah instructions)10 Abib (Monday morning, April 6th)
Leviticus 13 and 14 are only to Moshe and Aaron, not the nation, so I believe
this is the same day, 10 Abib, Monday morning, April 6th.
Leviticus 15 (instructions on discharges)11 Abib, Tuesday morning, April
7th. Leviticus 16 is also this same day, again because the instructions are only
to Moshe and Aaron.
AZAZEL (16:2) = as a proper name, may indicate a fallen angel who personifies sin.
As a term, scapegoat, refers to the goat sent into the wilderness taking our sins with
him. I think but cant prove there is relationship between Azazel and AZAL LEL
(go towards Elohim). In the first three Gospels, Yshua literally sends leprosy away.
In John he commands a leper to wash in a place where the waters are called
SHILOAM, also to send away. But by calling them to righteousness and having them
do Torah (go show yourselves to the priests) Yshua is sending the afflicted to
Elohim.

3|Page

VEHIKRIV AHARON ET-PAR HACHATAT (16:6) = Aaron will present his own
bull sin offering. Because Leviticus 16 begins with talking about Yom Kippur
regulations, some rabbis think the death of Aarons sons was on Yom Kippur.
However, the instructions for Yom Kippur obviously must precede the observance of
the feast, and as we saw earlier, Aarons sons really died 8 Abib, the week before
Pesach.
Therefore, the most logical chronology is that the Yom Kippur instructions are being
given sometime in the spring for full implementation in the fall. They have half a year
to practice, and given recent events it appears that is wise.
On an interesting side note, the death date of Nadav and Avihu is also the most
probable day for Herod the Greats death 1,442 years later. Josephus tells us that
Archelaus mourned his fathers death 7 days before killing a bunch of protestors at
Pesach.
PAROKET (16:12) = curtain or veil. I kind of like that the word is derived from
PARAKU, a verb meaning to habitually shut off thus reminding us that the default
position of these sacred objects is shut off from us but through righteousness unto
Abba YHWH we can have access to them and, by extension, to Him.
SERAPH (16:14) = burns can be personified into a being that burns with righteous
passion for Abba YHWHa SERAPH or kind of angel (Isaiah 6:2). But SERAPHS
can also be evil and just as passionate for the dark side (Isaiah 14:29) because that
burning is related to how serpents poison burns in the body, so passion alone
doesnt dictate righteousness. We can burn for the right or wrong cause. This idea
again brings us back to Aarons dead sons who offered the wrong kind of burning.
VECHIPER AL HA-KODESH MITUMOT BENEY YISRAEL UMIPISHEYHEM
LE-CHOL-CHATOTAM VE-CHEN YAASEH LE-OHEL MOED HA-SHOCHEN
ITAM BE-TOCH TUMOTAM (16:16) = he will then perform the exact same (thing)
in the Tent of Meeting which remains with them (the Israelites) even when they are
unclean. This is a critical point. There is atonement for Israelites, even when they
are ritually unclean. Therefore ritual defilement is not a moral failing but merely a
cause to be isolated or quarantined, depending on the defilement. It also may be a
hint that since they are away from the Ark, that there can be atonement in the Second
Temple even without the Ark.
ANAH (16:29) = humble or afflict or fast.(Saadia; Targum Yonathan; cf. Yoma 77a).
Not fasting alone, 'afflicting yourselves, also refers to avoiding washing, anointing,
wearing shoes and sex (Yad, Shevithath Assur 1:5); others say that these are forbidden
only by rabbinic law (Tosafoth, Yoma 7b).
BCHODESH HA-SHEVII BEASOR (16:29) = 10th day of the 7th month. The
original biblical calendar counts two ways, either from Fall to Fall or Spring to
Spring. If the former, the 10th day of Abib is when the lamb is set aside for Pesach. If
4|Page

the latter, its Yom Kippur. Either 10th day of 7th month is special! (10 and 7 are
special numbers.)
CHUKKAT OLAM (16:31) = eternal statutechukkat also carries the sense of a
prescription or requirement and the OLAM (eternal) means it doesnt matter if
the Temple is standing or not!
Note on 16:34: Bible.ort.org puts in parentheses that Aaron (did later) what was
commanded. This supports my contention that the instructions are given well before
they are carried out on Yom Kippur itself. Leviticus 16 is not recording a Yom
Kippur event; it is simply saying what must be done when Yom Kippur comes around
each year.
SAIR (17:7) = goat demon, very similar to the Greek word SATYR, describing a
demi-god that is half man and half goat. Also proves that Paul is thinking of Torah
when he says sacrificing to other gods is bowing down to demons (Deuteronomy
32:7, 1 Corinthians 10:20-21)! Some other authorities point out that if Azazel is a
kind of demon that the Torah needs to clarify that sending a goat to Azazel in no way
allows contact with evil forces. Even if the person is trying not worship demons but
gain occult power, it is still forbidden.
Also the CHUKKAT OLAM (eternal statute) that appears here in 17:7 implies to
some authorities that once the Temple is standing, sacrifices are not allowed
anywhere else. Therefore, without the Temple standing the rabbis explain this is why
no sacrifices are allowed anywhere else.
However, this is not as airtight an argument as it appears, since even with the
Tabernacle, Samuel and Saul continued sacrificing elsewhere.
ZANIM (17:7) = Literally, prostituted yourselves or played the harlot. This
proves that Abba YHWH compares Himself to a husband and unfaithfulness to Him
as adultery. It also means Abba YHWH does NOT tolerate plural marriage!
VENATATI PANEY (17:10) = I will set my face. This is a general idiom meaning
to decide. A face is usually turned to someone in favor or turned away in anger.
Yshua uses this idiom when he says, I will set my face towards Jerusalem,
meaning I have made up my mind to go there.
NEVEILAH (17:15) = died on its own, meaning not ritually slaughtered with the
blood drained. This is also referred to in Acts as strangled meat. When an animal
is slaughtered in a kosher manner, touching the carcass to do so will NOT defile the
butcher. It is only when the carcass is encountered after the animal died on its own
and is subsequently touched that defilement comes.
Note on 18:19- The command to not expose the womans menstrual flow by having
sex with her during her period is a separate commandment from the NIDDAH rules
5|Page

given in the previous Torah portions. Those NIDDAH rules may be relaxed now
because the reason given for them was so that they might not defile my Tabernacle
which is in their midst. However, this command, given in a completely different
place, is not attached to that series, so even if the other NIDDAH dont apply because
there is no Temple or Tabernacle now, this commandment is independent and does
apply regardless.
KHALAL (18:21) = profane. From Theological Workbook of the Old Testament:
Unhallowed, profaned, dishonored. This adjective occurs four times. In each case the
emphasis is on real or symbolic breaking of the sexual laws. In Lev (Leviticus 21:7,
14) it is used of women associated with (perhaps synonymous with) women who are
harlots. In the list of persons a Levite may not marry it follows a widow or divorcee
(here also possibly synonyms). It similarly describes Israel as the "unhallowed,
wicked one" (RSV; cf. KJV "profoundly dishonored one"; RV "deadly wounded".
Other meanings include CHOLI (sick, leprous) which is sometimes used to describe
the Suffering Messiah. But also from a root that means to untie, as in loosen
through impurity. It reminds me also as the opposite of HALEL = praise El. When we
profane Him we make His covenant common but when we obey Him we give Him
praise that is acceptable unto Him!
Torah Question of the Week:
How does this Torah portion relate to the real reason Yochanan the Immerser was
executed?
END PART 1

6|Page

PART 2: THE HAFTORAH

Torah Question of the Week:
How does this Torah portion relate to the real reason Yochanan the Immerser was
executed?
In this Torah portion, we saw the direct prohibition against marrying the wife of a brother
while that brother still lives. This was the sin of Herod Antipas who took the wife of his
brother Phillip, a lady of royal blood named Herodias. It was this sin that drew the fire of
Yochanan the Immerser and the Gospels are clear that Antipas did not want to execute
him but was provoked by his wife.
Her motivation though for doing this was not just because she was embarrassed by
Yochanans preaching. The real reason was because if Antipas did the right thing and
sent her packing, Torah said Phillip, her first husband, could not take her back! As a
result, she would have been ruined not just socially but financially as well. And so she
decided to lend her daughter Salome out for a bit of exotic dancing
However Josephus tells us that Herodias ended up being Antipas downfall anyway, or at
least the cause of great hardship:
250

Now Gaius greeted Herod, for he first met with him, and then looked upon the
letters which Agrippa had sent him, and which were written in order to accuse
Herod; wherein he accused him, that he had been in confederacy with Sejanus,
against Tiberius' government and that he was now confederate with Artabanus,
the king of Parthia, in opposition to the government of Gaius; 251 as a
demonstration of which, he alleged that he had armour sufficient for seventy
thousand men, ready in his armoury. Gaius was moved at this information, and
asked Herod whether what was said about the armour was true; 252 and when he
confessed there was such armour there, for he could not deny the same, the truth
of it being too notorious, Gaius took that to be a sufficient proof of the accusation
that he intended to revolt.
So he took away from him his tetrarchy, and gave it by way of addition to
Agrippa's kingdom; he also gave Herod's money to Agrippa, and, by way of
punishment, awarded him a perpetual banishment, and appointed Lyons, a city of
Gaul, to be his place of habitation. 253 But when he was informed that Herodias
was Agrippa's sister, he made her a present of what money was her own, and told
her that it was her brother who prevented her being put under the same calamity
with her husband.
254

But she made this reply:--``You, indeed, O emperor! do act after a

magnificent manner, and as becomes yourself in what you do offer me; but the
kindness which I have for my husband hinders me from partaking of the favour of
your gift: for it is not just that I, who have been made a partner in his prosperity,
should forsake him in his misfortunes.''
7|Page

255

Hereupon Gaius was angry at her, and sent her with Herod into banishment,
and gave her estate to Agrippa. And thus did God punish Herodias for her envy at
her brother, and Herod also for giving ear to the vain discourses of a woman.
(Antiquities 18:250-255)
1) Haftorah portion (English- Ezekiel 22:1-19) and discuss common themes with the
Torah portion.

Vayehi devar-YAHWEH elay lemor.

Ve'atah ven-adam hatishpot hatishpot et-ir hadamim vehodatah et kolto'avoteyha.
Ve'amarta koh amar YAHWEH Elohim ir shofechet dam betochah
lavo itah ve'astah gilulim aleyha letom'ah.
2) Our linguistic commentary
LESIGIM (22:19) = dross, waste products removed from metal in the refining
process. SIG/SOG also means FENCE, and is the Aramaic term for fences in the
Talmud. But Yshua says in his Aramaic dialectas does Paul in Galatiansthat
he is the DOOR to open the fences and leave those fences aside. This is the sense
of Matthew 23, Woe to you Pharisees, for you hold the keys to knowledge of the
kingdom and you do not enter yourselves, nor do you allow others to enter. The
hindrance is clearly the Oral Law.
3) Renewed Covenant portion: (English) Acts 15:1-21 (all the way through with
applicable footnotes.)
Acts 15:1
165) This is the teaching of those who later became known as the Ebionites, or
Messianic Pharisees (see footnote on Tit_3:9). Also note that the life being
mentioned by these proto-Ebionites is, in fact, Eternal Life; hence a very serious
allegation! Torah is often confused with the religion of Judaism or the Pharisees or
Orthodox Jews yet throughout Yshuas ministry he showed how Torah is being grossly
misinterpreted. Yshua teaches, Why also do you transgress against the
Commandments of Elohim because of your traditions? Distinctly oral law, the Talmud,
and the religious traditions of the Pharisees is making the Torah void. Just before
Stephen was stoned to death he cried out, You have received Torah by way of the
command of Messengers and you have not kept it! (Act_7:53) Apostle Paul teaches
both Jews and Christians, Do, we then nullify Torah by faith? May it never be! On the
contrary, we establish Torah. (Rom_3:31). It is vitally important that we do not view
Torah through the religious eyes of Judaism or Christianity, but through Mashiyach.
8|Page

Acts 15:5
166) "Guard" in this case refers to putting up of fences (Pirkei Avot 1:1) around Torah,
not simply obeying the written Word. Part of this "fence" known as religious halakha,
minhagim or tradition, requires a person to be circumcised before learning about having a
relationship with YHWH, and why Torah must be applied to our lives. This tradition
overturns the peshat (plain) meaning of many Torah requirements. The context is clearly
shown earlier in the passage where it reads, "those who believed from the teachings of the
Pharisees," as opposed to the teachings of Torah. In other cases, however, "guarding" is
considered a noble endeavor, provided it neither contradicts, adds, nor takes away from
Torah in favor of man made traditions.
Acts 15:10
167) This yoke is clearly referring to the Oral Law, not the Written Torah of Moshe. The
Oral Torah (Talmud) has put many additional burdens on Jews, and greatly limited the
ability of Gentiles to join with Israel. See Judaizers in Appendix.
Acts 15:20
168) That which is "sacrificed" unto other gods according to YHWH's Word in
D'varim/Deu_32:17 is sacrificed unto devils. Vayikra/Lev_17:12-16 commands that Jew
and Ger (foreigner) NOT eat blood, or any animals that die of themselves. The
prohibition against fornication is wide spectrum, against all manner of physical
perversion and spiritual whoredom. These Torah directives are eternally binding on all
who follow Y'shua Mashiyach and who seek the Malchut (Kingdom) of Elohim. Also,
Khabouris has an isolated qoph here, between the words "we" and "send."
Acts 15:21
169) A very clear fulfillment of Isa_56:1-9. Gentile converts are observing Shabbat and
learning Torah as one body along with Jews. Shortly thereafter, Marcion, whom
Polycarp referred to as "the firstborn of the devil" built the first all-Gentile church to
promote Christo-Paganism. Marcion held his services on Sunday which blended with
Zeus (the sun god) culture and projected a hybrid Je-Zeus identity in opposition to the
Jewish Mashiyach. The modern theologies of Je-zeus Christos are based more on
Hellenism than on original fundamental Hebraic values. Marcion coined the words "Old
- New Testament" and did his very best to warn Gentiles away from Torah and "the God
of the Old Testament." Marcion invented theologies known as replacement,
dispensational, supercessionism, etc., which are very popular among Christianity today.
See Y'shua to Zeus in Appendix.

9|Page

4) Highlight common themes in Aramaic: These are addressed in extensive

footnotes. We will actually read footnotes that are a little before and after the
portion (#137-144, AENT p. 349-351)
5) Apply these themes/issues to modern issues in the Netzari faith. (What was
binding then is binding now!)
6) Relate to all or part of an Appendix portion of AENT or footnotes from a portion
(Circumcision p. 753-756).
NOTE: BECAUSE THIS IS A DOUBLE PORTION, THERE ARE NO STUDY
QUESTIONS OR TORAH THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK SECTIONS FOR
AHAREI MOT. PLEASE SEE KEDOSHIM FOR THESE FEATURES.

10 | P a g e

Scroll to Scroll:
Todays Parsha #30: Kedoshim (You shall be Set-Apart)
PART 1: THE LAST AND CURRENT TORAH PORTIONS
BECAUSE THIS IS A DOUBLE PORTION, THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS
FROM THE PREVIOUS PARSHA (AHAREI MOT) TO ANSWER HERE.
Meaning of this weeks Torah portion and summary of contents:
Kedoshim means you shall be Set-Apart. This is a kind of Cliff Notes style
discussion of some of the main themes of the overall Torah. It includes some of the
Ten Words (Commandments) but not all of them, and wraps around the ones it does
include with either brief application advice or other commands that the text didnt
have the chance to get to yet.
Read Parsha (English-Leviticus 19:1-20:27). This week, we will read the entire
portion together.
1) Play by Play commentary where appropriate.
2) Point out key Hebrew words/terms. Color Commentary:

Vayedaber Yahweh el-Moshe lemor.

Daber el-kol-adat beney-Yisra'el ve'amarta alehem kedoshim tiheyu ki
kadosh ani Yahweh Eloheychem.
Ish imo ve'aviv tira'u ve'et-Shabtotay tishmoru ani Yahweh
Eloheychem.
ISH IMO VEAVIV TIRAU VE-ET SHABOTAY TISHMORU ANI YAHWEH
ELOHEYCHEM (19:3) = each of you must respect their mother and father and keep
my Shabbats. I am Yahweh. Here we see we are to FEAR or HOLD IN AWE our
parents, rather than the way it is in Exodus 20 honor, give weight to. One concept
seems to give way to the other, as it does in the worship of Abba YHWH, in that first
we behold His Glory (KAVOD) and THEN we fear Him. It is also interesting that
Yevamoth 5b states that if the two commands come into conflict, i.e. the parent says
not to keep Shabbat, you must disobey that parent and keep it, unless doing so is a
matter of life and death.
It is also interesting to note that the order from Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 is
reversed here, where it is Honor your mother and your father and not father and
mother as it is in the other places.
11 | P a g e

AL-TIFNU EL HA-ELIM VEELOHEY MASECHAH LO TAASU LACHEM ANI

YAHWEH ELOHEYCHEM (19:4) = and do not turn aside towards false gods and do
not make for yourselves gods out of cast metal. I am Yahweh your Elohim. I find it
interesting that the verb to turn aside is PANAH which usually is in a negative
turn to either decline, pass away or banish. One of its most intriguing places it is
used for me is in Jeremiah 6:4 where it describes ki panah ha-yom, for the day
declines. I believe this is an important time-code clue for it describes a time late in the
day, after the sun is directly overhead, or noon, after which the shadows of ereb
lengthen, meaning the start of between the evenings, the last three hours of the day.
In this case however, I am even more intrigued by the linking here of idolatry to that
of a day that is about to expire or die. For surely that is what Abba YHWH intends,
that the sun sets on idolatry.
VECHI TIZBECHU ZEVACH SHLAMIM LYAHWEH LIRTSONCHEM
TIZBACHHUHU (19:5) = when you offer a peace offering unto Yahweh, it must be
of your own free will. The peace offering is optional and shows gratitude on the part
of the one doing the offering. Therefore to force someone to do this sacrifice misses
the point of it. The word here is derived from SHALOM, peace, but also
completeness which suggests contentment on the part of the one bringing the
sacrifice.
MACHARAT (19:6) = tomorrow. We need to bear in mind that the next day is not
the next morning unless we are counting from the morning. Since the Hebrew day
runs first at night and then in the day, a morning is attached to the current Hebrew
day, the sunrise after it began the previous evening. So if it is night and the start of
the 14th, for example, MACHARAT will not be referring to the morning coming up
that next sunrise, but the morning AFTER that, on the 15th day.
LO TA-ASHOK ET-REACHA VE-LO TIGZOL LO-TALIN PEULAT SACHIR
ITCHA AD-BOKER (19:13) = do not let a workers wage remain with you until
morning. Compare this language to that of Deuteronomy 24:15: BE-YOMO TITEN
SCHARO VE-LO TAVO ALAV HA-SHEMESH or you must pay him that day,
before the sun sets. These two references together absolutely prove that the Hebrew
day did begin at sunset because the morning here counts as the next day, and this is
considered cruel.
RAKIL =slanderer (19:16), or more precisely teller of false tales. The Aramaic
Tanakh clarifies this as you shall not bear false witness/falsely accuse your
neighbor or a restatement of the ninth commandment.
TA AMOD AL-DAM (19:16b) =stand/act upon the blood but means profit from
the death of your fellow.
LO TISNA ET ACHICHA BILVAVECHA HOCHEACH TOCHIACH ETAMITECHA VELO TISA ALAV CHET (19:17) = do not hate your brother in your
12 | P a g e

own heart and admonish your neighbor and do not bear sin because of him. If we can
only stop hating our brother in our hearts, none of these other bad things can result!
We also admonish our neighbor in love, so he doesnt fall into greater difficulty later
but also because we cannot cover for him or her by either not dealing with the
problem or telling them the consequences. Notice this is a bit different than
snitching per se because you are telling on them by going to their face, not
behind their back. Although, if you see a crime Torah does elsewhere tell you to
report it and not cover up blood.
LO TIKOM VE-LO TITOR ET BENEY AMECHA VEAHAVTA LEREACHA
KAMOCHA. ANI YAHWEH (19:18) = you shall not take vengeance or bear a
grudge against the sons of your people but you will love your neighbor as you love
yourself. So if even bearing a grudge is forbidden as is vengeance, it goes a long way
to explaining why eye for and eye is not about revenge. This is true either because
justice cannot be vengeance or because monetary values and other restitutions for
injuries have been prescribed in the Torah text. To bring someone to justice is a
righteous act, but we cannot take the law into our own hands, Torah forbids it.
Also this sheds light on why Yshua was asked Who is my neighbor? because the
implication is if the offender is a foreigner then maybe I can get vengeance on him
but must forgive my family, my next door neighbors and my countrymen, my fellow
Israelites. Yshuas answer is basically that everyone is your neighbor, so that was
pretty much that as far as he was concerned!
Note on 19:19-20: This commandment to not cross-breed livestock or plant your field
with different types of seeds may indicate that Abba YHWH has also forbidden
genetically modified produce (GMO), genetic engineering and cloning as well. Crossbreeding could conceivably apply to altering DNA as much as it would to having
certain animals mate.
UVASHANAH HA-REVIIT YIHEYEH KOL PRIYO KODESH HIULIM
LYAHWEH (19:24) = and in the fourth year all the fruit shall be Set-Apart and it
shall be something for which Yahweh is praised. This is why Hebrews bless food
before they eat, because it went through this four year process (the fruits did) and it
was taken from the earth and made Set-Apart, for which we give thanks for bread that
comes from the earth.
Note on 19:27-28: These must be read as a complete thought combined:
LO TAKIFU PEAT ROSHCHEM VE-LO TASHCHIT ET-PEAT ZEKANECHA
VESERET LA-NEFESH LO TITNU BIVESARCHEM UCHTOVET KAKA
TITNU BACHEM ANI YAHWEH = Do not shave off the edges of your beard
AND/EVEN AS you dont make gashes in your skin for the dead.
These two lines are talking about two things in combination: Cutting the corners of
your beard AND doing this ritual for the dead as you do so. This is NOT a prohibition
13 | P a g e

against shaving but against cutting ones face and doing these tattoos. Such is proven
in Genesis 41:44 where Joseph shaves before seeing Pharaoh and is not criticized or
rationalized by his biographer Moshe. Clearly Levites and especially priests were
expected to have beards, but it was not required for all Israelites.
OB = medium (19:31), but literally bottle referencing a container made from
animal skin, as if to suggest the medium has bottled or trapped the spirits.
YIDDEONI (19:31) = familiar spirits. Derived from YADA/YADEA, or to know,
denoting specifically forbidden knowledge like when Adam and Eve first knew they
had sinned
MOZNEY TZEDEK AVNEY TZEDEK EYFAT TZEDEK VE-HIN TZEDEK
YIHEYEH LACHEM ANI YAHWEH ELOHEYCHEM ASHER HOTSETI
ETCHEM ME-ERETZ MITZRAYIM (19:36) = you must have honest scales, honest
weights, honest dry measures and honest liquid measures! I am Yahweh your Elohim
Who took you out of the land of Egypt. This may be one of the main reasons Yshua
overturned the moneychangers tables. It was not that they were changing money that
was the problembut that they were extorting huge and unfair profits while doing so.
Yshua remembered this Torah command and rebuked them through the combined
words of Isaiah and Jeremiah: My Fathers house was supposed to be a House of
prayer for all nations, but you have made it a den of thieves. I love it that honest is
actually the word for righteous (tzedek) here, for to be honest is to lead to being
righteous, since the ends do NOT justify the means!
VEEL BENEY YISRAEL TOMAR ISH ISH MIBENEY YISRAELUMIN HAGER
BE-YISRAEL ASHER YITEN MIZARO LA-MOLECH MOT YUMAT AM HAARETS YIRGEMUHU VAAVEN (20:2) = If any person, whether a born Israelite or
a proselyte who joins Israel gives his children to Molech, he must be put to death.
The local people will pelt him to death with stones.
Rabbinic tradition is very intriguing here. As Bible.ort.org correctly states, there had
to be a finding of fact by the elders that such an act had occurred, and then execution.
The tradition also says that without a working Sanhedrin, the death penalty cannot be
applied. This becomes very interesting for our purposes because it seems the
Bible.ort.org commentary may be out of date. It has a copyright from the year 2000,
which is just before the NEW Sanhedrin was established in Israel! Either thatthey
didnt update the commentary to reflect this fact OR they dont view the current
Sanhedrin as valid, and many Orthodox Jews do NOT view it as valid.
But for my money, what is particularly interesting is that if this new Sanhedrin is
valid, they would in theory be able to put people to death for these offenses, even
though in Yshuas time they couldnt do this without Roman permission.
KILEL DAMAV BO (20:9) = Literally, His blood shall be in him (to cause his
death). This means that he is to be killed in a way that induces internal bleeding as the
14 | P a g e

cause of death, i.e. to be stoned. This formula is repeated throughout this chapter to
indicate stoning as the punishment of choice.
VEISH ASHER YINAF ET-ESHET ISH ASHER YINAF ET ESHET REEHU
MOT YUMAT HANOEF VE-HANO AFET (20:10) = if a man commits adultery
with a married woman and she is the wife of a fellow Israelite, both the adulterer and
the adulteress shall be put to death. The betrayal of married Israelites with other
partners was considered especially heinous in the eyes of the Torah. If this was what
the Pharisees accused on woman of in John 8and I doubt this happened but thats
another storythis rule would have reminded Yshua that both parties had to be
brought for judgment and only the woman was brought. Adultery assumes also the
woman did not cry out and was engaged in consensual sex.
VELO TELCHU BE CHUKOT HA GOY ANI MESHALEACH MIPANEYCHEM
KI ET CHOL ELEH ASU VAAKUTS BAM (20:23) = do not follow after the
customs of the nation that I am driving out before you, since they did these
(perversions) and I was disgusted with them. Although the word GOY is singular
here, it is understood clearly to be a prohibition against Israel following any Gentile
nations pagan rituals or customs. There were, for example 7 nations in Canaan who
were driven out and elsewhere the practices of places like Egypt, Babylon and
Assyria and many others were forbidden. So this proves that Jeremiah is not just
speaking on his own opinion about the X-mas trees in 10:1-6he is clearly following
this Torah command and applying to those trees.
Note of 20:27: Here we see how their blood on their heads execution is understood
finally with the description of MOT YUMATU BAEVEN YIRGEMU OTAM
DIMEYHEM BAM, they will be pelted to death with stones and thus stoned to death.
Torah Question of the Week:
How is one character flaw mentioned in this portion turned into a place name that
Yshua visits in the NT?
END PART 1

15 | P a g e

PART 2: THE HAFTORAH

Torah Question of the Week:
How is one character flaw mentioned in this portion turned into a place name that
Yshua visits in the NT?
SHAKAR = deal falsely (19:11). It is interesting to note that Yshua talked about
deception in a place called Sychar in Greek but is this word in Hebrew/Aramaic. It
means to lie or to be intoxicated.
1) Haftorah portion (English- Amos 9:7-15) and discuss common themes with the
Torah portion.

Vayehi devar-YAHWEH elay lemor.

Ve'atah ven-adam hatishpot hatishpot et-ir hadamim vehodatah et kolto'avoteyha.
Ve'amarta koh amar YAHWEH Elohim ir shofechet dam betochah
lavo itah ve'astah gilulim aleyha letom'ah.
2) Our linguistic commentary
AYIN (9:8) = eyes. Pretty straight forward except that in mystical thought the letter
AYIN represents nothingness and the next sentence talks about total obliteration of a
sinful kingdom. This is a gentle remez or hint.
KEBARAH (9:9) = sieve. Refers to a course sieve used for cleansing grain from
straw and stones or from sand of pebbles and shells. It was a net-like implement.
VECHOL HA GOYIM ASHER NIKRA SHEMI ALEYHEM (9:12) = all the nations
once attached to My Name = all the nations David used to rule over.
3) Renewed Covenant portion: (English) Romans 3:19-28; 9:30-10:13 (all the way
through with applicable footnotes.)
Romans 3:20
26) Torah sets YHWH's boundaries as to what is good or evil behavior; therefore, this
cannot and does not make Torah a bad thing, but a very good thing! Rav Shaul
returns to this precise point again in the seventh chapter.
Romans 3:21

16 | P a g e

27) Y'shua qualified as Mashiyach because he fulfilled all Torah and Prophetic
requirements, and he became Torah. Torah is written upon the heart by the Ruach
haKodesh; the Spirit of Mashiyach is Torah which is the Spirit of Mashiyach, or the
Manifestation (Word) of YHWH which became flesh and dwelt among us.
Therefore, if we live "in" Y'shua we also become Torah. It is evil to posture that Rav
Shaul brought Torah down, when in fact Y'shua and Paul restored and elevated Torah
to be the foundation of a spiritual dialogue with Heaven.
Romans 3:28
28) The terms "works of Torah" and "under Torah" predate Paul by hundreds of
years. These terms were discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls (A Sectarian Manifesto
4QMMT:4Q394-399); while originally referring to the ultra religious halakha of the
Essenes, the same principles apply to the Pharisees' halakha. These two phrases are
also mentioned in Rom_6:14-15; Rom_9:32; 1Co_9:20-21; Gal_2:16; Gal_3:2;
Gal_3:5; Gal_3:10; Gal_3:23; Gal_4:4-5; Gal_4:21; Gal_5:18. "Under Torah" refers
to the orthodox/traditional interpretation and observance of Torah. Religious halakha
is clearly NOT what Y'shua or Paul followed in their observance of Torah. The
Renewed Covenant promise in Jer_31:33 is to write the Torah of YHWH upon the
hearts of His people, not the "Torah of men." The idiomatic expression "works of
Torah" provides insight to those of a "traditional" Jewish upbringing. Paul references
Jews at the beginning of this chapter; in Rom_3:19 he states "Now we know" referring
to those who understand Torah and halakha.
Romans 9:32
55) When the Israelites followed Moshe and were obedient to YHWH by faith, they
won their battles, but when they rebelled they lost and suffered great casualties. In
our day when Jews seek YHWH by faith, they find Mashiyach, but they stumble
when they focus not on faith but "works of Torah" according to religious authorities
and traditions. Mashiyach is the greatest "stumbling stone" to man's religions but
let's not pick on Jews only, because this applies equally to every other soul who
regards their own religious traditions as more authoritative than YHWH and His
Mashiyach.
Romans 10:8
58) Rom_10:6-8 is a wonderful Midrash on Deu_30:11-14 which reads: For this
Torah which I am laying down for you today is neither obscure for you nor beyond
your reach. It is not in heaven, so that you need to wonder, Who will go up to
heaven for us and bring it down to us, so that we can hear and practice it? Nor is it
beyond the seas, so that you need to wonder, Who will cross the seas for us and
bring it back to us, so that we can hear and do it? No, the word is very near to you,
it is in your mouth and in your heart for you to put into practice. A common
traditional saying among rabbis is derived from this verse, haTorah lo baShamayim hi
(the Torah is not in heaven) which is used as their justification to twist the written
17 | P a g e

Torah into subjugation under their oral traditions. Instead Rav Shaul teaches, who
will ascend to heaven and bring Mashiyach down? and who will go down and raise
Mashiyach from the dead? Paul is elegantly expressing Yshua as the Living Torah
through the very power of Torah itself. He purposefully and literally interchanges
Yshua with Torah in this quote and on very good authority. Yshua said, I am the
Living Bread who has descended from Heaven Joh_6:51.
Romans 10:12
60) The first time in this epistle where YHWH (MarYah) is used instead of
Elohim/Eloah. This verse indicates the ONENESS of the Malchut Elohim. ONE
YHWH, One Kingship and One People. This is a continuum; NOT a drastic change
in Covenant, but a renewal of YHWH's people unto Himself.
Romans 10:13
61) MarYah, as opposed to the Greek kurios, can only refer to YHWH, giving
Aramaic a huge interpretive advantage. It is a critical fact, as is pointed out here, that
Rav Shaul specifically tells believers to call on the name of YHWH, which is
certainly not at all represented by the name "Jesus." Joh_17:11 tells us that the name
of Y'shua is of the name YHWH. Before Rav Shaul came to believe, Y'shua had
already ascended to the Right Hand of YHWH (Rev_19:13). Prayer was being
offered unto YHWH in the name of Y'shua. Y'shua stated that his mission was to
bring glory to His Father YHWH. Y'shua's name (YHWH is salvation) is
accomplishing the salvation of YHWH. It was also prophetic that the Gentiles would
come to know the Name of YHWH, according to Jer_16:19-21 : "O YHWH, my
strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall
come unto you from the ends of the earth and shall say, Surely our fathers have
inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. Shall a man make gods
unto himself, and they are no gods? Therefore, behold, I will this once cause them to
know, I will cause them to know mine hand and my might; and they shall know that
my name is YHWH." And, of course, this is to be done according to the Perfect work
of Mashiyach!

4) Highlight common themes in Aramaic:

5) Apply these themes/issues to modern issues in the Netzari faith. (What was
binding then is binding now!)
6) Relate to all or part of an Appendix portion of AENT or footnotes from a portion
(Circumcision p. 753-756).
STUDY QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED NEXT WEEK FOR THIS
PORTION:

18 | P a g e

1) What is the other meaning of sukkah or tabernacle, as in that of Davids that has
fallen and will be restored?
2) How does that extra meaning relate to both Yaakov the patriarch and Yshua?
3) When Abba YHWH says, You are Mine/you are My possession how does this
contrast with the first time someone was called a possession in the Tanakh by
another person?
4) How does translating the word kadosh as Set-Apart differ from the more
expected English term holy?
5) When Yshua overturned the moneychangers tables it was not simply a
rebellious act but that of zealous observance of what Torah principle?
Torah Thought for the Week:
The Egyptian Record of the Exodus!
In previous weeks we looked at solid evidence that the Hebrews were in fact slaves in
Egypt during the time the Scripture says, the time has now come to address a longstanding accusation from the skeptics. They argue, with great gusto I might add, that
there is not a trace of Exodus in any Egyptian sources.
However, as I hope to show you, this is simply not true. There are in fact Egyptian
sources that mention Moshe, the Hebrew slaves, and even fill in missing areas of
Moshes life in Egypt that the Torah doesnt record. Not only that, this same source is
used by scholars as a critical resource today!
If this sounds surprising to you, trust me, you are not alone. As we saw in part 1, our
churches, synagogues and Hebrew Roots assemblies have not done a good job teaching
their flocks about this. And the skeptics are certainly not going to admit the weak parts of
their argument, at least, not without a fight!
But the evidence is out thereif you know where to look and have the courage to see it
for what it really is. Not only did the Egyptians know of Exodus, they passed it down in
great detailalbeit from their own perspectivefor many centuries. But they also tried
covering it up for all but an elite few. Lets see why withWho Was Manetho?
We begin our journey with what seems to be a perfect storm of irony, inconsistency and
bad academic politics. Manetho is a Greek-Egyptian historian whom many believe was
active in the reigns of the first two Ptolemaic rulers, from 323 to 246 BCE.
His Egyptian name lost (Beloved of Neth??) we know little of his life, but the little bit
that we do know of him has a huge impact in the world of Egyptology. Somewhere
around 450 BCE, the Greek historian Herodotus wrote an account of Egyptian history.

19 | P a g e

Herodotus is often a polarizing figure, with some ancient writers calling him The Father
of History while others refer to him as The Father of Lies.
Manetho seemed to have been in latter grouphe read Herodotus and hated his view of
Egypt. Like Manethos only chronicler Josephus who countered racial slurs against his
people in Against Apion, Manetho also took pen to paper to vindicate his Egyptian
people, in a highly critical response called Against Herodotus.
After that, Manetho then wrote the book he is most famous for, Egyptian History, and it
is one the very best sources Egyptologists have on matters of kings lists and how long
each Pharaoh reigned. In fact, Manetho is one of only about half a dozen sourcesthats
itthat Egyptologists draw their kings list from!
These sources arejust to give a quick idea1) The Palermo Stone (for the Old
Kingdom), 2) The Temple at Karnak, 3) The Turin Canon , 4) The Abydos Listfrom
Seti I and his son Rameses II that exclude significant numbers of kings in favor of their
preferred list and 5) Manetho, as recorded by Josephus. Thats about it!
But to be fair, our 6th source is when Egyptologists find new tombs like that of King
Tutand those add to our knowledge. Although, in Tuts case, he was excluded from
one list but found on another, bringing us back to the 5 main sources and my point: If
Manetho is so trusted for this critical info, why not trust him also about the Exodus?
Josephus also says Manetho acknowledged Moshe to have been a real person, a prince
and priest of Egypt, who led his enslaved brethren out of the country with miracles and
banned them from using idolatry. More than that, Josephus cites at least two other
Egyptian sources confirming these basics as facts.
On the other hand, Josephus also admits even he has certain problems with the Egyptian
version of the Exodus, but not with these basic facts I just related! Manetho then names
both the pharaoh who drove Moshe to Midian (Thutmoses) and the pharaoh of the
Exodus (Amenhotep), each ruling in the year the Bible points to!
But in the interests of fairness and full disclosure, I also admit there are challenges that
must be addressed first. To begin with, Josephus doesnt have Manetho there to discuss
certain details in person, so he says, I will set down his very words, as if I were to bring
the very man himself into a court for a witness (Against Apion, 1:73).
This is of course because three centuries separate the two men, and then we have to rely
on Josephus understanding of documents that are no longer in existence. Manetho then
gives information that is not explained by Josephus, such as the Exodus was 393 years
before Danaus came to Argos (Against Apion 1:103, 2:16).
This sounds like a historical and datable eventit is neither. when Danaus came to
Argos is in fact a famous Greek myth which also happens to involve a story about

20 | P a g e

Egypttheir name derived from Danaus brother, Aegyptus. Not surprisingly, there is
no way to know if this account ever happened, or if it did, when.
So if Manetho had an understood year in mind for when Danaus went to Argos, he
didnt pass it on to Josephus, so we cant know it either.
The next problem we have is more on Josephus side: Since he cant discuss things with
Manetho, he has no choice but to just write it down as is, wrong assumptions and all.
While there is little doubt that Manetho is broadly accurate with the names of kings, their
groupings into respective dynasties and how long each king ruled, it is what Manetho
assumes around this information that needs correcting. Here are the bad assumptions that
Manetho makes that Joe passes on. Manetho assumes:
1) There is only one king on the throne at any given time.
2) There are no co-regencies happening ever.
3) There is only one dynasty ruling at any one time, and each dynasty ruled over all
of Egypt throughout their reigns.
But the facts are that:
1) There are times when more than one king is ruling at once.
2) There are many co-regencies and even crediting the years of one kings reign
for another.
3) There are dynasties ruling the same area at once and rival dynasties in other parts
of Egypt ruling at once.
So since Josephus has no choice but to just copy what he has or risk accusations of
being unfair, he inherits and passes on these same bad assumptions. Josephus also
probably could not read hieroglyphics himself and was therefore not in a position to
go to Egypt to correlate Manethos account with actual inscriptions, as we can today.
Sometimes also, Josephus inherits exaggerated claims of antiquity from pagan
sources and passes that on intact as well, for example:
Manetho, therefore, bears this testimony to two points of the greatest consequence
to our purpose, and those from the Egyptian records themselves. In the first place,
that we came out of another country into Egypt; and that withal our deliverance
out of it was so ancient in time, as to have preceded the siege of Troy almost
1,000 years. (Against Apion, 1:104)
No doubt the ancient Greeks thought their myths came from a period vastly anterior
to their own, from a time when the world was new. Josephus builds on this,
excessively and to his own advantage, by putting the Exodus a millennium earlier
which, even if the true date of Troys fall was used as a marker, is impossibly too
early!

21 | P a g e

Thanks to the discovery of Troy by Heinrich Schliemann in the late 19th century, we now
have solid evidence dating Troys fall to about 1200 BCE. Now, if Exodus is 1,000 years
earlier, that would put it around 2200 BCEa time when Abraham himself wont be
born for another 300 years! Either way, whether by Manethos assumptions or Josephus
preferences, we need to sift through the data carefully.
And finally, there is more than one account given of what Manetho said, as well as
accounts of others with a different opinion:
I shall, therefore, here bring in Manetho againWhen this people or shepherds were
gone out of Egypt to Jerusalem, Tethmosis, the king of Egypt, who drove them out,
reigned afterward 25 years and 4 months, and then died. (Against Apion, 1:93-94)
Tethmosis = Thutmoses
But now look at this account:
And now I have done with Manetho, I will inquire into what Cheremon says; for he
also, when he pretended to write the Egyptian history, sets down the same name for
this king that Manetho did, Amenophis, as also of his son Ramesses, and then goes on
thus:--``The goddess Isis appeared to Amenophis in his sleep, and blamed him that
her temple had been demolished in the war; but that Phritiphantes, the sacred scribe,
said to him, that, in case he would purge Egypt of the men that had pollutions upon
them, he should be no longer troubled with such frightful apparitions. That
Amenophis accordingly chose out 250,000 of those who were thus diseased and cast
them out of the country: that Moses and Joseph were scribes, and Joseph was a sacred
scribe; that their names were Egyptian originally; that of Moses had been Tisithen,
and that of Joseph, Peteseph. (Against Apion,1:288-290)
Josephus calls Amenophis fictitious here but records him as real elsewhere. But since
we dont have Manethos works to look at directly, it is also possible Josephus
misunderstood what Manetho said, as we see here with the parallel reference to the same
event:
Manetho says that the Jews departed out of Egypt, in the reign of Tethmosis, 393
years before Danaus fled to Argos. (Against Apion 2:16)
Well which is it? Tethmosis (Thutmoses)or Amenophis (Amenhotep)? Josephus says
Manetho forgot but maybe the memory issue is on Josephus side, as Biblical sources
point to the first as the one who ejected Moshe and the other is the Exodus Pharaoh!
Admittedly, there are many pharaohs with both names that could get confused but
nevertheless, it seems far more likely to me that the name could be accurately preserved
for the Pharaoh who made Moshe flee to Midian and for the other Pharaoh Moshe faces
down 40 years later, as a core of historical truth.

22 | P a g e

The other details, possibly due to multiple sources and confusing agendas, simply got
misread.
But there is one other factor in assessing this data that needs addressing: Josephus is
furious when he is writing all this down!
Just like Manetho was angry at Herodotus, Josephus is also angry with both Manetho and
the other historian, Apion, whom Against Apion is named after. Heres one flash of
anger:
I have also made a refutation of Manetho and Cheremon, and of certain others of our
enemies. I shall now, therefore, begin a confutation of the remaining authors who
have written anything against us; although, I confess, I have had a doubt upon me
about Apion, the grammarian, whether I ought to take the trouble of refuting him or
not; for some of his writings contain much the same accusations which the others
have laid against us, some things that he has added are very frigid and contemptible,
and for the greatest part of what he says, it is very scurrilous, and, to speak no more
than the plain truth, it shows him to be a very unlearned person, and what he writes
looks like the work of a man of very bad morals, and of one no better in his whole life
than a charlatan. (Against Apion 2:1-3)
So in one place Josephus has said: 1) Manetho and Cheremon are enemies. 2) Apion, is
worse, but may be a waste of breath (or in this case, ink) to even make the effort to prove
him wrong. 3) And, in an exclusive rant dedicated only to Apion, Josephus calls him: a
frigid and contemptible teller of lies; a scurrilous writer; an unlearned person; a
man of bad morals, and my personal favorite, a life long charlatan! Dont mince words
Joe. Say what you REALLY feel!
But to be fair to Joe, I definitely understand why he is angry, but history is about them,
not you Joe. Its kind of important to leave passion like this out of the discourse. On the
other hand, I admit there are parts of the Egyptian account that tempt me to cry antiSemitism, but other parts seem historically plausible, even factual. Here is some of what
Manetho said:
It now remains that I debate with Manetho about Moses. Now the Egyptians
acknowledge him to have been a wonderful and a divine person; nay, they would
willingly lay claim to him themselves, though after a most abusive and incredible
manner; and pretend that he was of Heliopolis, and one of the priests of that place,
and was ejected out of it among the rest, on account of his leprosy. (Against Apion,
1:279)
Now, Manetho says that the king's desire of seeing the gods was the origin of the
ejection of the polluted people; but Cheremon feigns that it was a dream of his own,
sent upon him by Isis, that was the occasion of it. (Against Apion, 1:294)

23 | P a g e

This is just a small sampling of the material Josephus gives us from Manethoand it gets
a lot worse than what I quoted. But staying on point, I can understand why Josephus
would have grave problems with these ideas. Joe Doesnt Like Moshe being
1) Born Egyptian,
2) A pagan priest,
3) Ejected out of Egypt with the Hebrews due to leprosy, and
4) Exiled by the wrath of Egyptian gods!
Three are lies, but the 4th? Not so fast
In fact, I think Josephus was so angry, that he almost completely glosses over the good
Egyptian testimony about Moshe, and for less onerous ideas about the great prophet,
Josephus dismisses those out of hand without proof, even when strong evidence from
Scripture and history suggests it could be true! And so next up we have
The Historical Exodus Begins to Emerge
Continuing our study, Josephus remains furious with a bevy of false charges leveled
against his people by Egyptian racists. But one fact reported in multiple Egyptian sources
seems to find confirmation in the writings of Josephus mentor, Philo of Alexandria, as
well as Scripture itself. First, here are the rest of the citations about this lie that may
be confirmed as fact
But when these men were gotten into it, and found the place fit for a revolt, they
appointed themselves a ruler out of the priests of Heliopolis, whose name was
Osarsiph, and they took their oaths that they would be obedient to) It was also
reported that the priest, who ordained their polity and their laws, was by birth of
Heliopolis, and his name Osarsiph, from Osiris, who was the god of Heliopolis; but
that when he was gone over to these people, his name was changed, and he was called
Moses.'' (Against Apion,1:250)
and for that priest who settled their polity and their laws,'' he says, ``he was by
birth of Heliopolis, and his name was Osarsiph, from Osiris the god of Heliopolis; but
that he changed his name, and called himself Moses.'' (Against Apion,1:265)
Moshe a pagan priest, dedicated to Osiris and serving at the temple of Heliopolis? As
shocking as that sounds, it is not as far-fetched as it seems. After all, Joseph married a
priestess of Heliopolis (also called On in Hebrew) named Asenath, and there is no
evidence she stopped her work there (Genesis 41:45). And then theres this:
And he set over them task-masters, who should afflict them in their works; and they
built strong cities for Pharao, both Pitho, and Ramesses, and On, which is Heliopolis
( ) (Exodus 1:11, Septuagint, translated by Brenton, ca.
260 BCE)

24 | P a g e

This reading is not found in any later sources, including the Aramaic OT and the Dead
Sea Scrolls. It is also not found in the Aramaic Targums that became popular in the early
centuries of the Common Era. And yet in many cases, the Septuagint does open a
window to how the older now lost Hebrew source may have actually read.
If that is the case, it may have been edited out by later Jewish authorities because it was
embarrassing that their people also built a pagan astronomical center and not just store
cities for grain. Also the geography matches: Pithom, Rameses and Heliopolis are all in
the same NE delta region where Joseph and the Hebrew slaves later were.
However, even if the Greek reading of Exodus 1:11 is discarded, the rest of the evidence
forms a strong circumstantial case for Moshe having been a priest at On, just like his
great-great-grand-aunt Asenath was.
First, Moshe didnt know Abba YHWH for his first 40 years and it was normal for
princes to join in these cults. The two major astronomy cults were Thothnamed after
the god of the moonand Ra, named after the noon-time sun and worshipped at
Heliopolis.
However Osiris, the god whom Moshe was named after, also had a solar aspect
worshipped at Heliopolis as the western sun fully set. Moshe had to join these cults to get
astronomical knowledge. There is also no doubt, according to the NT at least, that Moshe
had this astronomical knowledge:
Moshe was trained in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was prepared in his
words and also in his deeds. (Acts 7:22- AENT)
Certainly all the wisdom must include their astronomy! Now listen to the words of
Philo who talks about Moshes training as a youth:
But On is said to be a hill, and it means, symbolically, the mind; for all reasonings are
stored up in the mind: and the lawgiver himself is a witness of this, calling On,
Heliopolis, the city of the sun. For as the sun, when he rises, shows visibly the things
which have been hidden by night, so also the mind, sending forth its own proper light,
causes all bodies and all things to be seen visibly at a distance. (Posterity and Exile of
Cain,1:57)
Of course one can argue Philo is influenced by the same Greek Exodus 1:11 quote we
just read. Fortunately though, this isnt the only place Philo talks about Moshes
training:
Accordingly [Moshe] speedily learnt arithmetic, and geometry, and the whole science
of rhythm and harmony and meter, and the whole of music, by means of the use of
musical instruments, and by lectures on the different arts, and by explanations of each
topic; and lessons on these subjects were given him by Egyptian philosophers, who
also taught him the philosophy which is contained in symbolsor hieroglyphics...and
25 | P a g e

the knowledge of the heavenly bodies so much studied by the Chaldeans. And this
knowledge he derived also from the Egyptians, who study mathematics above all
things, and he learnt with great accuracy the state of that art among both the
Chaldeans and Egyptians. (Life of Moses, 1:23-24)
Not only is Heliopolis the most expert astronomy place Moshe could go, it was also very
close to where he was living in Goshen!
However, it is fair to look at the other side of this issue: Exodus 2:10 tells us that
Moshes name was because he was drawn from the water. I believe this is factual, but
Moses would have been a kind of nick-name, between himself and his adopted mother.
The drawn from water meaning is correct from the Hebrew but as a Hebrew word,
moshe would not work for the name of an Egyptian prince possibly next in line to be
Pharaoh.
And it might also get the princess banished or executed for defying the command of
Pharaoh to kill all Hebrew infants! This is why moshe was derived from an Egyptian
word meses which means born of/offspring of.
It is from the Egyptian word meses, sometimes rendered as moses, that we get the names
of some of the most famous Pharaohs like Thut-moses (born of Thoth) and Ra-meses
(born of Ra). Such a designation was actually required of all royaltyMoshe could not
be a prince without an Egyptian name connected to an Egyptian god.
When we then ask the next logical question, namely: which Egyptian god was Moshe
named after? Manetho gives us the answer: Osiris, and in ancient Egyptian this would
have been close to Heq Asiri-Meses, the Prince Asiri, Son of Osiris! Later, when
Moshe fled he simply reverted back to his old nick-name!
So not only has Manetho helped us recover some data about the historical Moshe, he may
have also revealed to us the actual name much of their records contained regarding him.
His Egyptian name: Asiri-Meses, Crown Prince of the Two Lands.
But who is Prince Asiri-Meses and how does he relate to the Hebrew Moshe? The
answers might surprise you
But when these men were gotten into it, and found the place fit for a revolt, they
appointed themselves a ruler out of the priests of Heliopolis, whose name was
Osarsiph [Asiri-Meses], and they took their oaths that they would be obedient to him
in all things. He then, in the first place, made this law for them, that they should
neither worship the Egyptian gods, nor abstain from anyone of those sacred animals
which they have in the highest esteem, but kill and destroy them all; that they should
join themselves to no one but to those that were of this confederacy. When had made
such laws as these, and many more such as were mainly opposite to the customs of

26 | P a g e

the Egyptians, he gave orders that they should use the multitude about their city, and
make themselves ready for a war with King Amenophis. (Against Apion,1:238-240)
So here we see Moshes younger alter-ego, Prince Asiri-Meses, banning idolatry outright
for the fleeing Hebrew slaves! Then he gives them other rules we now call the Torah
the Mosaic Instruction from Abba YHWH to manthat were against the customs of the
Egyptians!
We also have the reference to making war against Amenophisand my research
independently confirmed that in the Exodus year, a man named Amenhotep II was
Pharaoh! Meanwhile, Josephus at this time also writes a very confused account from
Manetho that needs explaining.
Manethopromised to interpret the Egyptian history out of their sacred writings, and
promised this: that ``our people had come into Egypt, many ten thousands in number,
and subdued its inhabitants;'' and when he had further confessed that ``we went out of
that country afterward, and settled in that country which is now called Judea, and
there built Jerusalem and its temple.'' Now thus far he followed his ancient records.
(Against Apion, 1:228)
In other words, Josephus believes the Hyksos expulsion and the Hebrew Exodus were the
same event. However, he is not correct here at allBiblical data doesnt match. The
Hyksos expulsion happened almost a century and a half before the Hebrew Exodus! But
Josephus didnt have strong archaeological evidence to date these periods with certainty.
And there was an earlier Semitic group that left Egypt with the Hyksos that did go to
Jerusalem:
Now as for the Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the sons of Judah could not
drive them out; so the Jebusites live with the sons of Judah at Jerusalem until this day.
(Joshua 15:63 NAU)
The Jebusites stayed for another 400 years, so its no wonder they were confused for
another Semite group. Then Josephus comes along and, confirming Manethos account,
wants to link his people with the Hyksos so they can claim Jerusalem earlier! Its a
classic misidentification. It is only though in the last century or so that archaeology has
helped shed light on this confusion and give us a solid answer:
The original name of Jerusalem was Babylonian, Uru-Salim, "the city of Salim,"
shortened into Salem in Gen 14:18 and in the inscriptions of the Egyptian kings Ramses
II and Ramses III. In the Tell el-Amarna Letters (1400 BC) Jerusalem is still known as
Uru-Salim, and its king bears a Hittite name, implying that it was at the time in the
possession of the Hittites.
His enemies, however, were closing around him, and one of the tablets shows that the
city was eventually captured and its king slain. These enemies would seem to have been

27 | P a g e

the Jebusites, since it is after this period that the name "Jebus" makes its appearance for
the first time in the Old Testament (Jdg 19:10,11).
The Jebusite king at the time of the conquest was Adoni-Tzedek, who met his death at
Beth-boron (Josh 10:1; in 10:5 the word "Amorite" is used in its Babylonian sense to
denote the inhabitants of Canaan generally). The Jebusites were a mountain tribe (Nu
13:29; Josh 11:3). Their capital "Jebus" was taken by the men of Judah and burned with
fire (Jdg 18), but they regained possession of, and held, the fortress till the time of David
(2 Sam 5:6). - ISBE Bible Encyclopedia
Now the Tell Amarna letters are firmly dated to around 1400 BCE and contain
complaints of Canaanite kings to pharaohs Amenhotep III and Amenhotep IV
(Akenaten).
These texts also mention the Habiru invaders of Canaan, which may not be just the
Israelites only, but surely includes them under the Habiru leader Joshua, for which we
have a reference! Also the king of Jerusalem, Adoni-Tzedek, has a thoroughly Hebrew
name, which means Righteous Master, reminiscent of Malki-Tzedek (Heb. 7).
But now lets close this section with more information on Prince Asiri-Meses, later
known as Moshe:
And now Amenophis, the king of Egyptassembled the multitude of the Egyptians,
and took counsel with their leaders, and sent for their sacred animals to him,
especially for those who were principally worshipped in their temples, and gave a
particular charge to the priests distinctly, that they should hide the images of their
gods with the utmost care. (Against Apion,1:243-244)
If this is even partly true, I think it speaks to Egypts fears that, after failing at the Sea of
Reeds, their enemy might return and finish them off. It also shows, I think, the extent of
Moshes influence on Egyptian thought before he leftand that same influence may have
been one reason the Pharaoh Akenaten would turn to monotheism less than a century
later. The fact that he never aids the kings of Canaan might also be because he sees Israel
as kindred monotheists.
And so the faith goes on through time!
Im Andrew Gabriel Roth and thats your Torah Thought for the Week!
Next week we will be exploring Emor. Our Torah portion will be Leviticus 21:1-24:23,
our Haftorah portion will be Ezekiel 44:15-31 and our Renewed Covenant portion will be
Colossians 2:11-23, where well deal with that let no one judge you about a Shabbat or a
New moon thang once and for all! Stay tuned!

28 | P a g e