The Serpent in the Wilderness

[Caino]

The only thing you are truly saying is that you don't know the "ABC's" about the Jewish People. If it takes too much for you to read the Tanach about them, read the Essay of Mark Twain about the Jews. Perhaps that Essay will guide you into the Tanach with a reason to read about them.

I'm saying that the Jews got caught up in the "ABC's". Their traditions and self importance overwhelmed what the Jews were chosen for. They developed a national egotism which became a diversion from Abrahams faith in Gods promise. You are stuck, marooned in the past, in replaying the same movie!

 

[Ben Masada]

You're not paying attention. The portion of scripture has already been referenced.

The passage clearly states that Gentiles MUST go up to Jerusalem to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles and worship the KING, on penalty of plague and drought upon their nation.

The passage does not state any thing clearly about Gentiles coming to Jerusalem to celebrate the Jewish feast of Tabernacles. Here, I am reading from the JPS: "However, if the COMMUNITY of Egypt does not make this pilgrimage..." The Community of Gentiles or of Jews in Egypt? It is only obvious that the Prophet is talking about the Jewish Community dwelling in Egypt. What's going on Beameup? The thing is so clear that I wonder if your stiffness is based on the strong desire to be one among the Jews coming from the Diaspora to celebrate a Jewish festival. If that's true, you don't need that. All you need is to join God's Covenant with His People according to Halacha and be one of us. (Isaiah 56:1-8)

 

[Ben Masada]

I'm saying that the Jews got caught up in the "ABC's". Their traditions and self importance overwhelmed what the Jews were chosen for. They developed a national egotism which became a diversion from Abrahams faith in Gods promise. You are stuck, marooned in the past, in replaying the same movie!

Why don't you say clearly that Jesus was the first maroon stuck in the past teaching his disciples to listen to "Moses" aka the Law? (Luke 16:29-31) I think you are not reading even your own NT.

 

[Ben Masada]

The Scriptures clearly say that the Gentiles, during the Millennium, must pilgrimage
to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles on penalty of drought and plagues upon their nation.

No, it does not! If you are using the same quote of Zechariah, I have already made it very clear to you. As I said, you don't need to do that. Just join us and you will have that Jewish ritual as a law on you too. But as long as you are a Gentile, you don't have it!

 

[beameup]

No, it does not! If you are using the same quote of Zechariah, I have already made it very clear to you. As I said, you don't need to do that. Just join us and you will have that Jewish ritual as a law on you too.

:readthis:

the LORD will smite the Gentiles that come not up to keep the Feast of Tabernacles

And it will be that whichever of the families of the earth does not go up to Jerusalem to WORSHIP the King, the LORD of hosts, there will be no rain on them. - Zechariah 14:17

Perhaps you should read the entire chapter. It deals with the return of Messiah to establish his Kingdom.

 

[Caino]

Why don't you say clearly that Jesus was the first maroon stuck in the past teaching his disciples to listen to "Moses" aka the Law? (Luke 16:29-31) I think you are not reading even your own NT.

The parable of Dives and Lazarus was not original to Jesus. It was a comparison to the Parable of the Shrewd Steward. Jesus drew from the monotheistic religion of Judaism but knew it was basically an evolved human religion.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings Ben Masada,

The Serpent in the Wilderness
Numbers 21:9 (JPS) "Then Moses made a copper serpent and mounted it on a standard; and when any one
was bitten by a serpent, he would look at the copper serpent and recover." Christians love to read
this text and to find in it a reference to Jesus.

Getting back to the original subject of this thread, I would like to suggest that the brazen serpent in the wilderness has some parallel teaching with the altar of burnt offering, and there could also be a link to the same or similar word “seraphim” in Isaiah 6.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[beameup]

There was a plague of poisonous snakes in the camp of Israel in the wilderness.
Then the LORD said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a standard [pole]; and it shall come about, that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, he will live.”
And Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on the standard; and it came about, that if a serpent bit any man, when he looked to the bronze serpent, he lived.
Numbers 21:8-9

 

[Ben Masada]

:readthis:


And it will be that whichever of the families of the earth does not go up to Jerusalem to WORSHIP the King, the LORD of hosts, there will be no rain on them. - Zechariah 14:17

Perhaps you should read the entire chapter. It deals with the return of Messiah to establish his Kingdom.

Wish thinking this of yours.

 

[Ben Masada]

The parable of Dives and Lazarus was not original to Jesus. It was a comparison to the Parable of the Shrewd Steward. Jesus drew from the monotheistic religion of Judaism but knew it was basically an evolved human religion.

Quote please!

 

[clefty]

Hezekiah removed the high places and broke down the sacred pillars and cut down the Asherah. He also broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for until those days the sons of Israel burned incense to it; and it was called Nehushtan. - 2 Kings 18:4

The "Bronze Serpent" had become an object of worship by the Jews.

Yup...and just like the temple it was a useful tool

but once used and its purpose fulfilled the Spirit departs it...just like the temple

And any continuing worship of it is idolatry...just like the temple and the lands once made holy by His presence but now departed...

Blood Israel and Jews too were a tool...sorry a vessel...but the Holy Spirit was rejected by them and thus departed too...(they too should no longer be worshipped)

His murder by their desire released Jews of His vow and promise made to their father...as vows are until death do us part...

 

[Ben Masada]

Greetings Ben Masada,Getting back to the original subject of this thread, I would like to suggest that the brazen serpent in the wilderness has some parallel teaching with the altar of burnt offering, and there could also be a link to the same or similar word “seraphim” in Isaiah 6.

Kind regards
Trevor

That was in a dream. The prophet beheld the Lord in a dream, including the seraphs standing in attendance on Him. Read Numbers 12:6.

 

[Ben Masada]

There was a plague of poisonous snakes in the camp of Israel in the wilderness.
Then the LORD said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a standard [pole]; and it shall come about, that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, he will live.”
And Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on the standard; and it came about, that if a serpent bit any man, when he looked to the bronze serpent, he lived.
Numbers 21:8-9

To be bitten by a serpent was to join an act of rebellion; to look is to remember; at the bronze seraph meant the life of captivity in Egypt; and recover meant to repent and return to obedience.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Ben Masada,

That was in a dream. The prophet beheld the Lord in a dream, including the seraphs standing in attendance on Him. Read Numbers 12:6.

I am not sure if this vision was given to Isaiah in the day or night. I suggest that Isaiah could have been in the vicinity of the Temple, contemplating the recent death of King Uzziah, who had tried to usurp also the priestly function of burning incense in the Holy Place. In contrast Isaiah sees in vision the Most Holy part of the Temple opened up, and instead of the Ark of the Covenant with the overshadowing Cherubim, he sees the future King/Priest enthroned and Seraphim in attendance. These Seraphim and the vision as a whole is interactive with Isaiah, speaking to him, and cleansing his lips with a live coal. I believe there is a connection with the brazen serpent, and the Seraphim, the burning ones, who are also associated with the brazen Altar of Burnt Offering.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Ben Masada]

Greetings again Ben Masada,
I am not sure if this vision was given to Isaiah in the day or night. I suggest that Isaiah could have been in the vicinity of the Temple, contemplating the recent death of King Uzziah, who had tried to usurp also the priestly function of burning incense in the Holy Place. In contrast Isaiah sees in vision the Most Holy part of the Temple opened up, and instead of the Ark of the Covenant with the overshadowing Cherubim, he sees the future King/Priest enthroned and Seraphim in attendance. These Seraphim and the vision as a whole is interactive with Isaiah, speaking to him, and cleansing his lips with a live coal. I believe there is a connection with the brazen serpent, and the Seraphim, the burning ones, who are also associated with the brazen Altar of Burnt Offering.

Kind regards
Trevor

At least, I am glad we have become of the same mind that Prophet Isaiah had had a dream/vision. That's the medium the Lord settled to reveal His will to a prophet of His in Israel. (Numbers 12:6)

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Ben Masada,

At least, I am glad we have become of the same mind that Prophet Isaiah had had a dream/vision. That's the medium the Lord settled to reveal His will to a prophet of His in Israel. (Numbers 12:6)

I hope that we can agree with many things that are based on a reasonable understanding of the word of God. I would be interested in your assessment of the following as being a summary of the Law. Also this seems to indicate the meaning of the burnt offering in its application to a person’s worship and way of life. Please note that the response is given by a scribe, and also that Jesus commends what the scribe says:
Mark 12:28 (KJV): 28 And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? 29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: 30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. 31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. 32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: 33 And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. 34 And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question.

I would also be interested in how you view the following, as it seems to indicate that the offerings, such as the burnt offering would ultimately be replaced by one particular individual who would come to do God’s will, prefigured as it was by David in this Psalm.
Psalm 40:6-8 (KJV): 6 Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, 8 I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Ben Masada]

Greetings again Ben Masada,I hope that we can agree with many things that are based on a
reasonable understanding of the word of God. I would be interested in your assessment of the following as being a summary of the Law.

Not really a summary of the Law but of the ritual laws. Sacrifices are not mentioned in the Law.(Decalogue)

Also this seems to indicate the meaning of the burnt offering in its application to a person’s worship and way of life. Please note that the response is given by a scribe, and also that Jesus commends what the scribe says:Mark 12:28 (KJV): 28 And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? 29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: 30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. 31 And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these[/u]. 32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: 33 And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. 34 And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question.

Focus on the answer of Jesus which is exactly according to the Jewish Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4 and it includes that HaShem is our Lord and there is no other. This is an evidence that Jesus was excluding himself from any indication of more than one God or Lord which is a negative reference to the Trinity.

I would also be interested in how you view the following, as it seems to indicate that the offerings, such as the burnt offering would ultimately be replaced by one particular individual who would come to do God’s will, prefigured as it was by David in this Psalm. Psalm 40:6-8 (KJV): 6 Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, 8 I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.

I don't see what you see here. The point is that the law of sacrifices had to be added by Moses as an act of Pichuach Nephesh to succeed in his mission to cause the Exodus from Egypt. It happens that, after 430 years watching the Egyptians sacrificing to their gods every day, it had become obvious that the Israelites would never let the Exodus happen if theirs would not be a religion of sacrifices. Then, it became common throughout the Tanach statements like, "Does the Lord delight in burn offerings and sacrifices, as much as in obedience to the Lord's commands? Surely, obedience is better than sacrifices. Compliance than the fat of rams." (I Samuel 15:22) Hence the revelation of Jeremiah about the Divine secret that HaShem had never commanded that sacrifices be part of the religion of Israel. (Jeremiah 7:22) Yes, Trevor, we agree with each other as sacrifices were concerned. Not that Jesus had become a sacrifice the mother of all sacrifices because he was not the only Jew to be crucified in a cross. According to Josephus, thousands of Jews were crucified by the Romans only in the First Century.

 

[beameup]

Sacrifices go all the way back to Adam and Eve.
Cain was too cheap to buy a lamb from his brother Abel,
knowing that he was disobeying God by offering the
wrong sacrifice. Then Cain murdered his brother Abel.

The oldest book in the Bible - Job - shows that blood sacrifices for sin were well established.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Ben Masada,

Not really a summary of the Law but of the ritual laws. Sacrifices are not mentioned in the Law.(Decalogue)

Perhaps I think of the expression ”The Law” as relating to all aspects of what was given through Moses, including the Book of Leviticus which starts with the offerings and sacrifices.

Focus on the answer of Jesus which is exactly according to the Jewish Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4 and it includes that HaShem is our Lord and there is no other. This is an evidence that Jesus was excluding himself from any indication of more than one God or Lord which is a negative reference to the Trinity.

Yes, I agree. I believe that there is only One God, the Father. I also believe that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God, but “Lord” here is the equivalent of the Hebrew “Adon”.

I don't see what you see here. The point is that the law of sacrifices had to be added by Moses as an act of Pichuach Nephesh to succeed in his mission to cause the Exodus from Egypt. It happens that, after 430 years watching the Egyptians sacrificing to their gods every day, it had become obvious that the Israelites would never let the Exodus happen if theirs would not be a religion of sacrifices.

Sacrifices were instituted from Eden, and Abel offered an acceptable sacrifice. I believe that Jesus is prefigured by the typical burnt offering of Isaac. Again I believe that the brazen serpent in the wilderness is a link to the altar of burnt offering, and connects with Isaac’s sacrifice. I connect the serpent with fallen human nature.

Then, it became common throughout the Tanach statements like, "Does the Lord delight in burn offerings and sacrifices, as much as in obedience to the Lord's commands? Surely, obedience is better than sacrifices. Compliance than the fat of rams." (I Samuel 15:22) Hence the revelation of Jeremiah about the Divine secret that HaShem had never commanded that sacrifices be part of the religion of Israel. (Jeremiah 7:22) Yes, Trevor, we agree with each other as sacrifices were concerned.

I suggest that God still required sacrifices under the Tanach, but he was rejecting mere ritual, or not true sacrifices Isaiah 1:11.

Not that Jesus had become a sacrifice the mother of all sacrifices because he was not the only Jew to be crucified in a cross. According to Josephus, thousands of Jews were crucified by the Romans only in the First Century.

I see crucifixion in three categories and these three are revealed in Christ’s crucifixion and the other two adjacent him.
Romans 1:1-4 (KJV): 39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. 40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. 42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. 43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee this day, shalt thou be with me in paradise. (Last part of v43 altered).
Not all that were crucified were guilty of immediate crimes as these two malefactors as some would be crucified because of the tyranny of the Romans. But Jesus had done no sin, and as such in his death laid the foundation for the reversal of the death imposed on Adam. The malefactor who identified himself with the death and resurrection of Jesus will be resurrected to be in the Kingdom to be established when Christ returns. Jesus, a descendant of Adam, bearing sin’s flesh is the antitypical burnt offering, the antitypical brass serpent upon the pole.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Ben Masada]

Sacrifices go all the way back to Adam and Eve. Cain was too cheap to buy a lamb from his brother Abel, knowing that he was disobeying God by offering the wrong sacrifice. Then Cain murdered his brother Abel.

The oldest book in the Bible - Job- shows that blood sacrifices for sin were well established.

Wrong Deameup, sacrifices go all the way back, yes, but to the author of the book of Genesis. And regarding the book of Job, it was perhaps the most recent one, written during the exile of the Jews in Babylon; probably by Ezra himself, the most famous Scribe in the History of ancient Israel.