There seems to be some confusion among the Messianic/Hebrew Roots/Nazarene communities regarding Deuteronomy 6:8. Most Torah Keppers know by now that Deuteronomy 6:4-9 is known as the Shema and V’ahavta (or in general, just combined as the Shema). These verses are a significant section of the prayers recited in Judaism every day. Further, most Torah Keepers similarly recite the verses daily, as they are quoted directly from Scripture. What appears to confuse people, however, is verse 8, which reads, “8You shall bind them as a sign on your hand and they shall be as frontals on your forehead.”
I have been asked a number of times by people who do not understand Torah, “Well if you think you can keep the law, then why aren’t you out there offering sacrifices?”
My first response is always, “There is no Temple. So, although Yeshua was the final sin sacrifice, there is no Temple at which to offer other offerings and such that were not for sin” (such as freewill offerings, thanksgiving offerings, peace offerings, etc.). However, once I was told, in response to this statement, “Well you don’t need the Temple, just a cornerstone and an altar. Then you can offer your sacrifices and/or offerings there, as long as it is built from stone and not brick.”
There is a verse in the New Testament that has tripped up many Believers. For a long time, people have sought ways to get around it. That verse is Matthew 23:3.
1 Then Yeshua spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, 2 saying: "The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the seat of Moses; 3 therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them.
All throughout the Gospels, the Pharisees are called "vipers," "whitewashed tombs," "hypocrites" and other names as well. Why on earth would Yeshua tell us to "do and observe" all that they tell us?
With the Messianic/Hebrew Roots movements (or whatever you prefer to call them) rising in prominence, more and more people are beginning to see Torah through a new lens. Now that is not to say that we all see it through the same lens, but with resources abounding today in the form of concordances, lexicons and the mighty Internet, Truth is being spread rather rapidly. People are leaving the Christian “Church” in droves, recognizing that it is an apostate body that has rejected the Commands of YHWH Elohim, and instead chosen the doctrines, philosophies, and commands of men. Yet for the many that are now studying Hebrew and/or keeping Torah, the question often comes up: did Torah exist prior to being given at Mount Sinai? Christian scholars (and even some Jewish ones) are quick to say, ‘no,’ but is there actual evidence within the Torah itself that could refute this? Let’s examine some texts from the Torah to see if maybe, just maybe, Torah was a little more expansive pre-Sinai than we’ve been taught.
In the Torah we find numerous sacrifices being offered. There are multiple types of sacrifices, and contrary to popular belief not all of them are offered for sin. In this study, we'll look at the different kinds of sacrifices offered in the Torah.
There are five (5) classes offerings mentioned in the Torah. Let's look at each of them in turn, going straight through the book of Vayyiqra / Leviticus.
It has been accepted as truth for hundreds of years. Yet over just the past few years, the question seems to be coming up a lot more: was the Last Supper of our Messiah, actually a Passover [Pesach] meal? The synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) seem to say that it was. Yet what about John? John recorded the events of that meal (as well as the events following it) quite differently. So let’s examine it, and see if we can find out what it was as well as what it was not.
Many people over many centuries (millennia, actually) have had many different theories regarding what is commonly called “hell.”
This article continues the series on the Book that most today call "the Bible." In Part 1, we looked at the Hebrew Tanakh ('Old Testament'), and a bit of its history. We examined not only the prevalent Masoretic Text, but also the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Samaritan Pentateuch. In Part 2, we saw how the Hebrew Tanakh was then translated into three major versions: The Greek Septuagint (LXX), the Syriac Aramaic Peshitta, and the Latin Vulgate. In Part 3 we briefly discussed the Aramaic Targumim, or "translations" that were written throughout the centuries, and examined some of the interesting facets of these texts. In this fourth part, we will transition over into the Greek Apostolic Writings, most commonly called the "New Testament." If you're wondering why I'm talking about it and not about the Aramaic New Testament, please see the article Aramaic Primacy of the New Testament for a full discussion.
In Part 1 of this series, we looked at the basis of all Scripture: The Hebrew Tanakh. We compared the different textual traditions, from the Dead Sea Scroll fragments, to the Samaritan Torah, to the Masoretic Text, even to the Biblia Hebraica Quinta of today's scholars. In Part 2 we examined the three primary early translations of the Tanakh, from Hebrew. They are the Greek Septuagint (LXX), the Syriac Peshitta, and the Latin Vulgate. In this part, we will be examining the Aramaic Targumim.
In Part 1, we examined the history of how the Tanakh, commonly called the "Old Testament" came down to us. In that article, we focused solely on the Hebrew Tanakh, because it is, after all, the original language of it. In this article we will examine the early translations of the Tanakh. In particular, we will focus on three primary version: The Greek Septuagint, the Syriac Peshitta, and the Latin Vulgate (with a brief discussion of the Old Latin). Throughout this article series I hope that you, the reader, will gain a better understanding of how the Bible in your hands came down to you through the ages.