Scroll to Scroll:

Todays Parsha #38: Korah (referring to Korah the Levite)

PART 1: THE LAST AND CURRENT TORAH PORTIONS

ANSWERS TO LAST WEEKS STUDY QUESTIONS (Shlach Lecha):
1) The bad report the spies gave talked about two separate groups, Nephilim and
people of great size or giants. Does that mean the giants were Nephilim?
Not necessarily. The term NEPHILIM does not mean giants. It is from
NIPHAL, meaning to fall so these are fallen ones but also men of
renown, and perhaps they were famous for creating a series of great
civilizations around Adams time.
Also notice that since this is a BAD report, the identification with these
Cannanite inhabitants as Nephilim, overly large or not, is suspect. And
besides all this, one does NOT have to be a Nephilim in order to be a giant.
Goliath was just your average nine foot tall Philistine.
2) How might the words of Yshua impact on the question on #1?
Yshua said
(Mar 12:18) And the Sadducees came to him, those who say that there is no
resurrection, and they were asking him and saying, (Mar 12:19) "Teacher,
Moshe wrote to us that if a brother dies and leaves a wife, but no sons does he
leave behind, he should take his brother's wife and raise up seed for his
brother.57 (Mar 12:20) There were seven brothers, and the first took a wife
and died, though he did not leave behind any seed. (Mar 12:21) And the
second took her and died though he also did not leave behind any seed. And
the third likewise. (Mar 12:22) And all seven of them took her and did not
leave behind any seed. The last of all of them also died as did the woman.
(Mar 12:23) Therefore, in the resurrection, which one of them will she be a
wife of? For all seven of them took her. (Mar 12:24) Y'shua said to them,
"Isn't it because of this that you err, that you do not understand the
Scriptures nor the power of Elohim? (Mar 12:25) For when they rise from
the dead, they do not marry women, nor are women given in marriage to
men. Rather they are like the Messengers who are in heaven.
The way I understand these verses at the present moment, angels cannot
marry like men and women in the resurrection cannot marry. Since the only
way to have kosher sex is through marriage, this means to me that angels
cannot have sex and give birth to a race of giants, as is often alleged

happened in Genesis 6. I say this even while knowing both Josephus and
Philo had this opinion, but if I am understanding Yshuas words correctly,
that has to trump the word of Joe and Phil.
Admittedly though, I cannot honestly totally remove as possible the idea that
angels were not ALLOWED to have sex and when they did so, ceased to be
angels.
3) The Punishment Pattern in Numbers 14 is repeated by two more prophets. Who
were those prophets?
Ezekiel and Daniel also employed the day equals a year formula (Ezekiel 4,
Daniel 9).
4) What is probably the most surprising suggestion in the Rabbinic tradition
regarding Rahab?
In my opinion, its the idea that she married Joshua later, which goes
alongside some of their efforts at trying to make her more of an innkeeper by
the word ZANAH, or at least, not a woman who has sex for money but who
may have cheated on her husband. Like the Moabitess Ruth however, a
great emphasis on these traditions is that each woman took a mikveh and
converted to Judaism.
5) In a very ironic twist given Rahabs profession, she utters a phrase that will be
repeated by someone who is the exact opposite of her. What is the phrase and
who said it after her?
The statements are identical between the Hebrew in Joshua and the Aramaic
in the NT. What Rahab says here

VET (and towards) KI-DEVARIKEM (according to your words) KEN-HU
(yes, let it be)!
Yshuas mother Maryam says in Aramaic here

NEHWEH (and let it be) LI (done) AYKH (according to) MILTHAKHA
(your words)

AND NOW FOR THIS WEEKS PORTION

Meaning of this weeks Torah portion and summary of contents:
Korah refers to the man of the same name who was responsible for mounting a
rebellion against Moshe. There are many unique aspects to this act of rebellion, such
as it being led by a Levite and a confederation of other leaders and that Moshe and
Aaron are on the same side against them. We also have touches of foreshadowing of
Eliyahus later contest against the prophets of Baal. The results of this rebellion are
among the most graphic of disasters depicted in Tanakh.
Because the very fabric of the priesthood was threatened, the stakes for the right side
surviving were incredibly high, and when order is eventually restored this time Abba
YHWH confines His instructions to the priests so that they can regain some
credibility.

Vayikach Korach ben-Yitshar ben-Kehat ben-Levi veDatan va'Aviram

beney Eli'av ve'On ben-Pelet beney Re'uven.
Vayakumu lifney Moshe va'anashim mibeney-Yisra'el chamishim
umatayim nesi'ey edah kri'ey mo'ed anshey-shem.
Read Parsha (English-Numbers 16:1-18:32). This week we will read the entire portion.
1) Play by Play commentary where appropriate.
2) Point out key Hebrew words/terms. Color Commentary:
KORAH (16:1) has an interesting double meaning. On the one hand it reminds us of
QARA, to be called, as a priest is called to service. On the other, it means bald, which
is perhaps an allusion to Korah being brought low and shamed for his rebellion. To be
bald or naked was a sign of humiliation after rebellion.
Josephus in several places indicates that Korah was a man of great wealth. Some rabbinic
commentary (BeMidbar Rabba 18:1) suggests that Korah also was a Hebrew in high
official standing with Pharaoh, thus explaining one reason why he might want to take
over and even go back to Egypt. However the real reason behind the rebellion we will
discuss at the beginning of Part 2, by answering the Torah Question of the Week.
This tradition may have subsequently taken a detour through Hollywood and been a
reason behind the decision to cast Edward G. Robinson as the CHIEF Hebrew overseer
who was then promoted to be the governor of Goshen by Pharaoh in the 1956 Ten
Commandments movie. The only difference between the movie and this tradition is that
Robinson played the role of Dathan as an official to Pharaoh, not Korah.

ITZHAR (yitzhar-16:1) = shining one. Korah is literally descended from a shining one,
but again he falls.
ABIRAM (16:1) = exalted father, aka Abram. This was Abrahams name before
YHWH called him to service. The theme here is trying to get back to an expected order
rather than the one Abba YHWH chose. For example, Reuben is the first born of Jacob,
but is demoted because of his sin against his brother Joseph. This rebellion seeks to put
Reuben on top instead of Judah and also take the priesthood away from Aaron, when both
decisions were overturned by Abba YHWH in the first place away from the first born and
to the righteous.
DATHAN (16:1) = meaning uncertain. Some think the word is well or attached to a
fountain. More likely this has something to do with an ancient Assyrian-Aramaic
wordobelisk. The obelisk was the symbol associated with Egyptian paganism and
this was an attempt to set up a rival leadership that Abba YHWH did not enjoin.
ELIAB (16:1) = El is my Father. Dathan is the civil leader (Korah the religious leader)
behind this rebellion. Dathan and Abiram (exalted father) are sons of EliAb, perhaps
hinting that they want restoration to prominence as El their Father originally had it before
their ancestors sinned.
PELETH (16:1) = swiftness, as they rebel suddenly, out of nowhere. But also perhaps
related to PALLU (which see) and PELESET (Philistines)! It is ironic in the sense that
the Israelites wanted to avoid the Way of the Philistines though it was the shortest route
to Sinai and end up taking the Way of the Philistines in another sense, by setting up idols
and being led by Dathan and Korah into a rival and corrupted priesthood.
RAV LEHEM (16:2) = literally, much to you, probably you take too much on for
yourself, in a bad sense, as a power grab from the rest of the congregation of Israel as
the rest of the rebuke shows.
ANSHEY-SHEM (16:2) = Literally men of name, or famous men. This is similar to the
description attached to the Nephilim in Genesis 6:4, men of great renown. Also see the
note in 16:4.
VAYISHMA MOSHE VAYIPOL AL PANAV (16:4) = When Moshe heard this he fell
on his face. From niphal meaning to fall, this is a curious reading as it suggests that
Moshe feels humiliated as if he is to blame. However, the better reading in probably his
face fell meaning abject sadness came over him for the sake of his people. NIPHAL
(fall) is also related to Nephilim, the fallen ones.
HA-MEAT MIKEM (16:9) = Is it not enough? However, the literal meaning of MEAT
is small, tiny. Therefore the Hebrew actually reads, It is a small thing that you already
have been set-apart? Most translations interpret it to is it not enough, but JPS 1917
retains the right reading of is it not enough, which is one of the reasons why sometimes
I prefer JPS 1917 to its later counterparts in 1985 and 1999.

ME-ERETZ ZAVAT CHALAV UDEVASH (16:11) = a land flowing with milk and
honey. For the vast majority of Israelites, they should see the reality that Abba YHWH
would bring them to a much better land than the one they left, and from slavery into
freedom. However, Jewish tradition tells us Dathan and Abiram, like Korah himself
whom we mentioned at the outset, prospered in Egypt and had both rank and wealth.
Other traditions talk about how Dathan and Abiram were the two Hebrew slaves fighting
that, when Prince Moshe tried to stop them said, Why? Do you plan to kill us as you did
the Egyptian? and this caused Moshe to flee to Midian (Nedarim, 64b). Therefore in a
sense, at least according to tradition, what Moshe ran away from before he needs to face
up to now. But again the real reason for the rebellion is a topic for later.
ERETZ ZAVAT CHALAV UDEVASH (16:13) = land flowing with milk and honey.
Ironically the rebels are giving this appellation to Egypt, not Canaan! However, the rest
of the comment makes even less sense in that first the rebels complain they were brought
out of Egypt to be killed and then and then they complain that Moshe has set himself
over them. My question is this: If you are afraid for your life, what does it matter who is
your leader? Finally, the fact that for Dathan and Aviram Egypt would seem to be a land
flowing with milk and honey as opposed to a place of hardship and bondage has led to
the rabbinic speculation that they were not treated as lowly servants but had wealth and
privilege.
AF LO ERETZ ZAVAT CHALEV U-DVASH HAVIOTANU VA-TITEN
NACHALAT SADEH VECHEREM (16:14) = You did not bring us to this land of milk
and honey nor give us an inheritance of fields or vineyards. In this complaint the rebels
seems to completely ignore the fact that it was Abba YHWH, not Moshe, who made them
remain at Mount Sinai for two years and it was also Abba YHWH, not Moshe, who
ordered them to wander in the wilderness for another 40 years after the bad report of the
spies. This is why Moshe says their argument is actually with Father Yah and not with
him personally (Numbers 16:11).
LO CHAMOR ECHAD MEHEM (16:15) = (I) did not take a single donkey from them.
Megillah 9a makes a very interesting comment that the Hebrew text was altered from
CHAMOR (donkey) to CHAMUD (desirable) on purpose so it could read the latter in
Greek. In Hebrew without vowels these two words would look almost identical.
LE MISHKAN KORACH, DATAN VAAVIRAM (16:24) = the Tabernacle of Korach,
Dathan and Aviram. It looks like the rebels were so brazen that they already set up a
rival shrine, and apparently they would have moved the sacred objects into their tents if
they had succeeded.
VAYEDABER EL-HA-EDAH LEMOR SURU NA MEAL AHOLEY HA-ANASHIM
HA-RESHAIM HA-ELEH VE-AL TIGU BE-CHOL ASHER LAHEM PEN TISAFU
BE-CHOL CHATOTAM (16:26) = He announced to the community: Get away from
the tents of these evil men. Do not touch anything that is theirs or you will be swept away
because of their sins. Moshe gives this warning because at this moment the Korah rebels

have become qorban, or dedicated to destruction, much like the condemned cities they
will destroy later under Joshua. To touch or use something dedicated for destruction is
literally be destroyed on account of it. In theory, if the Korah rebels did move sacred
furniture to another Tabernacle, that might have been okay because it was their job. But
to claim ownership over that sacred furniture and elevate themselves to the priesthood
was what made them incur the death penalty, they and anyone profiting by them.
Note on 16:28-33: Moshe in essence is saying here, If you dont believe me, believe in
the miracles I do, that you will know that Abba YHWH truly sent me unto you.
Mashiyach Yshua makes the exact same point to the Pharisees in Yochanan 10:37-38
and this is at Hanukkah while Yshua is talking about my sheepa very interesting
parallel given that both Moshe and King David were shepherds!
MATTEH (17:1) = rod. But it can also mean tribe, just like another word for tribe in
Hebrew (sharba) has the meaning of rod. This may have something to do with rod and
cord that a tribal leader would carry, like Judah in Genesis 37-8.
Your descendants = Israel and all who join to her in Renewed Covenant
ET MACHTOT HA-CHATAIM HA-ELEH BE-NAFSHOTAM VEASU OTAM
RIKUEY FACHIM TSIPUY LA-MIZBEACH KI-HI-KRIVUM LIFNEY YAHWEH
VAYIKADASHU VE-YIHYU LEOT LIVNEY YISRAEL (17:3) = The fire pans that
belong to these sinful men have been presented before the face of Yahweh are therefore
sanctified, so he shall make them into beaten plates to cover the altar. Let this be a sign to
the sons of Israel. The fire came from Abba YHWH to consume them as a burnt offering
of sorts, but this is not human sacrifice, but punishment for defiled process (see Leviticus
10). Ironically though the first consumed them and their sins which made the objects they
presented before Abba YHWH sanctified.
ISH ZAR (17:5) = strange fire. This phrase validates I believe the interpretation given for
17:3 as strange fire was exactly the sin that caused the deaths of Nadav and Avihu in
Leviticus 10.
LIFNEY HA-EDUT (17:25) = before the face of the Testimony. This is referring to the
Ark of the Covenant though the word ark is missing. To be before the face or
physical manifestation of the testimony probably means to be near the physical ark
although other authorities believe it means the objects were placed INSIDE the Ark. I am
inclined to the former opinion.
VAYOMER YAHWEH EL-AHARON ATAH UVANEYCHA UVEYT-AVICHA
ITACH TISUET AVON HA-MIKDASH (18:1) = And said Yahweh to Aaron: You
along with your sons and your paternal tribe shall expiate any sin associated with the
Sanctuary. While expiate is the majority reading in English translations, the Hebrew
word actually means something closer to bear, so Aaron and sons actually bear the sins
done at the Sanctuary and those done by them as priests.

AVADOT MATTANA (18:3) = literally a gifted service. To serve Abba YHWH is a

gift from Him and not a blind obligation to Him.
VAYEDABER YAHWEH EL-AHARON VAANI HINEH NATATI LECHA ETMISHMERET TRUMOTAY, LECHOL KODESHEV VENEY-YISRAEL LECHA
NETATIM LECMOSHCHA ULEVANEYCHA LECHOK-OLAM (18:8) = And
Yahweh proclaimed to Aaron: I have given you responsibility for My elevated gifts. I am
giving you also all My Set-Apart gifts of the Israelites as part of your anointment. These
shall be an eternal portion for your descendants. I include this because of certain key
words that spell out a bit of a message
My elevated gifts I am giving the Israelites as part of your anointment, an eternal
portion for your descendants.
Elevated gifts = Yshuas power and resurrection
Anointment = Messiah
Eternal portion = Eternal life

KOL CHELEV YITSHAR (18:12) = the entire dedicated portion. However, CHELEV
means fat technically so this tells us that fat belongs to Abba YHWH but in this case it
goes to the priests.
BEHEMAH (18:15) = beast of burden. While the text appears to be vague and therefore
is suggesting any first born animal, the commandment actually links to the firstborn of a
donkey, as was delineated previously in Exodus 13:13.
BRIT MALACH OLAM (18:19) = everlasting salt covenant. The covenant lasts as long
as the earth endures with salt in her oceans and deserts. Salt is also used as a food
preservative in the Middle East, which reinforces this meaning. Ironically though in
Aramaic the same root of MELKH also means to evaporate, which is the opposite of an
eternal covenant. Perhaps then the full message was intended to be something like: If you
obey Me you have an eternal salt (malach) covenant but if not you evaporate (melkh)
when Abba YHWH destroys you for disobedience. This can also be a reference partly
inspired by the turning of Lots wife to a pillar of salt as the city of Sodom was being
destroyed.
MAASER MIN HA-MAASER (18:26) = A tithe within a tithe. The Israelites had to
give 10% to the Levites and the Levites, in turn, had to give 10% of that tithe to Abba
YHWH, or 1% of the total produce given by the entire nation.
MEALAH (18:27) = very best wine, from the word maleh which means to fill up, these
grapes are at their most delicious and therefore make the best wine. The Aramaic
equivalent term is khamra taba, or the best wine referenced when Yshua turned water
into wine in Yochanan 2.

Torah Question of the Week:

Other than the phrase Moshe, you take too much on yourself, what was the real
reason for this rebellion?
END PART 1

PART 2: THE HAFTORAH

Torah Question of the Week:
Other than the phrase Moshe, you take too much on yourself, what was the real
reason for this rebellion?
Lets look at the last passages of Scripture before this portion opens:
37

YHWH also spoke to Moses, saying, 38 "Speak to the sons of Israel, and tell
them that they shall make for themselves tassels on the corners of their garments
throughout their generations, and that they shall put on the tassel of each corner a
cord of blue. 39 "It shall be a tassel for you to look at and remember all the
commandments of YHWH, so as to do them and not follow after your own heart
and your own eyes, after which you played the harlot, 40 so that you may
remember to do all My commandments and be holy to your Elohim. 41 "I am
YHWH your Elohim who brought you out from the land of Egypt to be your
Elohim; I am YHWH your Elohim." (Numbers 15:37-41 NAU)
So I call this The Tzit-Tzit Rebellion because that was the last specific command
Moshe gave them before they rebelled. Lets go deeper
Why would something so simple create such consternation in the ranks of Israel?
I have often likened the command to wear tzit-tzit with how we might tie a string around
our finger to not forget something important. In this case that important thing is
actually the whole Torah and drama of the Exodus!
Israel clearly wanted to play and be like other nations. This manifests in the wilderness
and also later when they ask for a king to lead them, again, so they can be like everyone
else. This type of conformity to the nations around them, of course, is a major insult to
YHWH, Who called them OUT FROM THE NATIONS to be a set-apart people. More
than that, it was Abba YHWHs express plan that Israel learn His Torah so that THEY
could then teach the nations TO BE LIKE THEM, not the other way around!
So when we see this clearly, the rebellion is inspired, at least in part by a desire not to
stand out, even while they practice being priests of Abba YHWH! Its like after a hard
day at the office the Israelites want to go home to pagan pleasures, as if they can
separate their job from their identity. I dont think I need to explain further regarding
how this idea all turned out for them.
Everything is associated with remembering what Abba YHWH did for them and
remembering the Covenant that Abba YHWH gave to them. This is true whether we are
talking about Adam and Eve failing to remember a single instruction to Noah and
Abraham and so on up the line. This is because we are told over and over again to
SHAMAR or SHOMER Abba YHWHs Torahmeaning to guard it zealouslybut

ironically later rabbis would think this guarding involved putting a fence around it,
rather than preserve it as it originally came down.
One of the best examples with this is with Tzit-Tzit. Abba YHWH commanded a tekhelet
or blue thread be there, but because the rabbis werent sure what shade of blue it was
based on what they remembered, they decided to make it all white! Now this is
remarkable! We dont know what it was for certain so to avoid making that mistake we
choose something we KNOW for a fact it wasnt? Isnt this sort of a miniature version of
what Korah did? Didnt Korah try as a Levite to work somewhat in that system but
simply take the mantle away from Aaron whom Abba YHWH chose?
See this is what true rebellion looks like. It will try to mimic what is already there and
then suggest (or shout) that its VERSION of what is there is better, and it wont be too
much of a change if you just follow ME and put the authority of ME.
But Abba YHWH does NOT share power and if he chooses Moshe then Korah cannot
override that decision, no matter how nice his priestly outfit looks!
Havent we also seen enough of this rebellion in our own ranks at Nazarenes, Messianics
and Hebrew Roots believers? Can we think of people who dress the part and claim
proper lineage and a smooth Hebraic vibe and yet have the goal being to bring attention
and authority to themselves? Some will even try to look exactly like Korah did nearly
3,500 years ago, but its not about the coat, its about the person wearing it!
Instead Abba YHWH demands that we root ourselves in His Word and do our best and
even risk problems by guessing wrong. Better to do that than to take shortcuts amongst
charismatic yet unlearned counselors and to stop thinking and fail to test the leadership
against the Word. If we do that, even if occasionally we guess wrong, we will still do
right in Abba YHWHs eyes. Moshe clearly was not perfect. He sinned too and was
punished severely for those sins. But compared to everyone else, Moshe was the best
MAN for that job, and every time people tried to deny him that Abba YHWH fought for
him. Abba YHWH will then also fight for us as well when we follow that example.
1) Haftorah portion (English- 1 Samuel 11:14-12:22) and discuss common themes
with the Torah portion.

Vayomer Shmu'el el-ha'am lechu venelchah haGilgal unechadesh

sham hameluchah.
Vayelchu chol-ha'am haGilgal vayamlichu sham et-Sha'ul lifney
Yahweh baGilgal vayizbechu-sham zvachim shlamim lifney Yahweh
vayismach sham Sha'ul vechol-anshey Yisra'el ad-me'od.
2) Our linguistic commentary

10

CHADASH (1 Samuel 11:14) = renew, repair, but in this case totally re-make as if form
nothing. The system under the Judges hadd totally fallen and was utterly destroyed.
While you could say Abba YHWH renewed the kingdom in the sense that He
maintained Israels right to have a king, the fact is the entire kingdom had to be built
from scratch because the paradigm had changed. The sense of CHADASH, like
CHODESH which is the same word, is that the rulers from Judges had gone into
darkness/nothingness, only to re-emerge and go forth under Saul, David and Solomon.
to look the other way, I will return it to you (12:3) = interesting reading in LXX: a
pair of sandals testify against me, perhaps like Amos 2:6 or even Deuteronomy 25
where the woman takes the sandal off of the man who wont fulfill his vow to her in front
of witnesses.
and the Egyptians oppressed them (12:8) is added in the LXX and missing in the MT.
This could be an original reading in the ancient Hebrew text that the LXX was translated
from! However, the Aramaic Tanakh does not have this phrase, indicating perhaps that it
came about from an equally ancient but independent Hebrew source.
QITZIR CHITTIM HA YOM (12:16) = it is the wheat harvest today. In other words, its
SHAVUOT!
3) Renewed Covenant portion: (English) Yehuda 1:1-25 (all the way through with
applicable footnotes).
Jude 1:3
1) Maintain a conflict for the faith. Maintain the elements of Faith that cause
the clash between the two opposing forces. If there is truth to the proverb that the
opposite of love is not hate, but indifference: then the opposite of the Truth is not
lies, but relativism. Relativism is the doctrine (thinking) that nothing is
universally true; everything is relative to circumstances, application, feelings, or
emotions. When Yehudah writes, maintain a conflict we are compelled to
understand that the conflict is: for the faith which was once delivered to the Set
Apart believers. The enemy has substituted Faith with socially acceptable
religions as it is said; YHWH created Faith, but the Devil made a religion out of
it.
Jude 1:4
2) The Aramaic Mara Lord is defined in terms of human kings or false deities,
not YHWH. It may appear as if this rule is being broken here but this is not the
case. This is referred to as metaphoric transference, where two differing concepts
are linked by metaphor. Consider the Pagan court of Belshazzar, which does not
call upon the Name of YHWH. However, they use the Aramaic dialect to address
their deities by the title Mara. Along comes Daniel who employs the word Mara
to introduce them to YHWH, and he points out that there is only one real Master -

11

Mara of Heaven. In later times, Jews who remained in Babylon would simply
take off the alap and strip the word to its root level, using it for YHWH by adding
on the simplified form of the name as YAH, which is the same Name (Psa_68:4);
hence MarYah. MarYah grew out of the usage of Daniels writings, although it
was not used during his time. Daniel was the pivot point for two reasons: (1)
Daniel writes in Babylonian Aramaic, a close form to what the Peshitta Tanakh
would later be translated into. Daniel is also the only writer in Tanakh to use
Mara. (2) The use of Mara in Daniel is effectively split between human
(Dan_4:19; Dan_4:23) and divine (Dan_2:47; Dan_5:23) applications, which
reveals how the root Mar would become attached to Yah at a later time.
Although the metaphoric usage refers to YHWH, it is not equivalent to the Name
of YHWH in definition or usage. Compare: YHWH is a man of war: YHWH is
His name (Exo_15:3 JPS). Now I will scream like a woman in labor, gasping
breathlessly (Isa_42:13-14 JPS). With: (YHWH) is not a man that He should
be capricious; nor a Son of man that He should change His mind (Num_23:19
JPS). The first states that YHWH is a man of war; the second that YHWH
wails like a woman in labor - but YHWH is neither mortal man, nor woman, it
is metaphoric. There is also a Persian connection in Nehemiah: all who know
enough to understand, join with their noble brothers and take an oath with
sanctions to follow the Teaching of Elohim, given through Moses the servant of
Elohim, and to observe carefully all the Commandments of YHWH Adonenu /
MarYah Maran, His rules and Laws (Neh_10:29-30 MT/Peshitta Tanakh).
Persia and Babylon are neighboring countries. Persians speak a similar but not
identical Aramaic dialect whose influence is apparent even in Hebrew, here the
Hebrew Adonenu was translated into the Aramaic Maran. Understanding these
matters is important since YHWH Commands that we do not take His Name in
vain, (Exo_20:7). That we honor and revere His Set Apart Name (Mal_1:6).
That we sanctify His Name (Isa_29:23). That, My name is great among the
nations (Mal_1:11). Hundreds of verses tell of His Great Name. His Name and
identity is in Yshua who said, I have come in the name of my Father Joh_5:43.
Jude 1:9
3) Scholars suggest that this phrase Accuser contended about the body of
Moshe was part of an oral tradition that was later weaved into an apocryphal
pseudepigraphical work called The Assumption of Moshe. The tradition may have
arisen because of the two men named Joshua; Joshua the son of Nun and Joshua
the son of Yehozadak, that connect Moshes death scene in Deu_34:1-12, with the
quotation in Zechariah.
4) YHWH rebuke you is the proper way to cast out demons, speaking our own
words risks engaging demons and giving them permissions. YHWH rebuke you
is quoted from Zec_3:1. The Hebrew gaar (rebuke) is also used this way in
Mal_3:11 where YHWH says, I will gaar (rebuke) the devourer for your sakes.
The Hebrew Scriptures mention several classes of demons such as seirim and
shedim. In Lev_17:7 the Israelites sacrificed to seirim (hairy beings or satyrs)

12

also found in Isa_13:21; Isa_34:14 and 2Ch_11:15. The Israelites sacrificed to

shedim (demons) Deu_32:17 and Psa_106:37. Some Bible translations obscure
the meaning of seirim and shedim leading many Jews and Christians to believe
that demons are not mentioned in the Hebrew Tanakh. Jewish and Christian
traditions also obscure vital Scriptural elements of understanding the spiritual
realm and knowing how to deal with demons. Rabbinical Judaism tries to defeat
demons by religious traditions, prayer and keeping Torah, but not understanding
the Kingdom of Heaven or knowing Mashiyach has left many souls exposed and
vulnerable. The lower worlds (demons) created religious pride, elitism,
discrimination, ego, sectarianism, and the pride of cultural identity to entrap souls
in religious identity strongholds. The Christian world thinks along the lines of
Dualism which comes from paganism. Dualism views YHWH as a Good God
and the Devil as an evil god, and the two are at war with each other. In reality,
YHWH is Echad (One), Master over all good and evil. YHWH sends the angel
of death or the destroyer or slaughterer in Exo_12:23 killing the firstborn
sons. Scripture shows YHWH over all and in control of the demonic realm, And
it came to pass on the morrow, that the evil spirit from Elohim (1Sa_18:10).
YHWH has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all of your prophets (1Ki_22:23).
YHWH has mingled a perverse spirit in the midst thereof (Isa_19:14). The
story of Job sheds insight, And YHWH said to Satan, he is in your power; but
save his life (Job_2:6). YHWH permits haSatan to only go so far. YHWH is the
Lifegiver to the spirit realm. Paul writes, Elohim will send upon them the
strength of a deception that they may believe a lie (2Th_2:11). Yshua says
Many will say to me in that day, My master, my master! By your name, have we
not prophesied? And by your name have we cast out demons? And by your name
have we done many miracles? And then I will profess to them that from
everlasting, I have not known you. Depart from me, you workers of iniquity
(Mat_7:22-23). Demons dont prefer one religion over another, whether Judaism,
Christianity, New Age, Evolutionism etc., what they want is control and authority
over YHWHs people.
Jude 1:14
6) We have witnessed an early influence of this Epistle, and we know that Jude
was fully accepted on the Roman lists by the year 170, but an alleged problem
shows itself when this Epistle is discussed. Specifically that Jude references two
apocryphal books: "But Michael, the chief messenger, when he disputed with the
devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him
but said, 'YHWH rebuke you'" (Jud_1:9). "And about these also Enoch, in the
seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, "Behold YHWH came with
many thousands of His Set Apart ones" (Jud_1:14). The books quoted from were
in circulation during the First Century; therefore, Jude could have also written his
letter during this time. The quotation lends credence to that time period as it
would have preceded rabbinic rulings of the late First Century that fixed the
Jewish canon. Also, the Dead Sea Scrolls reveal a wide variety of books not
officially canonized by Jews that nevertheless found strong adherents. Therefore,

13

Jude was merely referring to stories he knew his audience would be familiar with.
However, the final nail in the coffin comes with the help of Shaliach Paul: "For
in him it is we live and move and exist: as one of your own wise men has said:
From him is our descent" (Act_17:28). "Be not deceived; Evil stories corrupt
well-disposed minds" (1Co_15:33). One of them, a prophet of their own, said,
"The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies" (Tit_1:12). Each of these
passages quotes a Pagan poet! 1 Corinthians is drawing straight out of a play by
Menander; Titus is a verbatim phrase lifted out of the poems of Epimenides, and
the quote from Acts was so frequently used by Greek poets as to make a listing of
them cumbersome and unnecessary! Has anyone then said Acts, Titus or 1
Corinthians should be excluded because they draw from sources that were not
themselves ultimately canonized? Certainly not! Obviously both Jude and Paul
knew something about the contemporary culture of those whom they were
addressing, and they simply used this knowledge to make a point. Perhaps this
indicates why the writings of Jude were rejected by some communities, while
simultaneously enjoying widespread acceptance and influence by others from a
very early date.
4) Highlight common themes in Aramaic (terms in footnotes which I will read)
5) Apply these themes/issues to modern issues in the Netzari faith. (Rebellion often
begins with people who have the credentials of righteousness, like Korah. But
what makes a rebellion apart from YHWH is when the rebels put authority on
themselves, rather than YHWHs Words or Will. YHWH had clearly chosen
Moshe and confirmed that choice in the last Torah portion when Miriam and
Aaron rebelled. Nevertheless, these men thought they knew better, to their
destruction.)
6) Relate to all or part of an Appendix portion of AENT or footnotes from a portion
(Read portions of Religious Leaders, p. 938-942).
STUDY QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED NEXT WEEK FOR THIS
PORTION:
1) How is one statement in this Torah portion the opposite of a popular song
sung at Pesach?
2) Where in this Torah portion do we see a line that might be a clue as to what
the original Hebrew text might have looked like before the Masoretes
standardized the text and added vowel markings?
3) In this Torah portion also there is a hidden clue that will later relate to
Hanukkah. Where is that clue?
4) The Rabbis credit Samuel with doing something very important that is not
mentioned in the Scripture. What is it?

14

5) There are five surprising connections about Yehudah, the writer of the Epistle
that generally are not taught frequently. Four of these connections come
straight out of Scripture; the other is a part of ancient legend. What are these
five connections? (No I am NOT talking about him being Yshuas brother!)
Torah Thought for the Week:
Hey Jude: Take a Sad Song, and Make it Better
This is the one time during the year that our NT spotlight shines on the entire Epistle of
Yehudah because he is the only writer who directly mentions the Korah rebellion. As we
saw in our previous discussion, Yehudah seems to be particularly concerned about all
forms of rebellion from Abba YHWH and His Torah, whether great or small, but what
about Yehudah the man? What can Scripture and the most reliable traditions tell us about
this enigmatic brother of Yshua?
I have often delved into the mystery of recovering Yshuas early years, the so-called 18
lost years and of course much of what we can say in terms of general background that
informs us on Yshuas childhood would equally apply to Yehudah.
We know also that Yehudah is either the youngest (Matthew 13:55) or second youngest
(Mark 6:3) brother, as it was customary to list sibling names in birth order. Another
possibility is that Yehudah and Shimon (who switch places) were twins and therefore the
same age. Still another possibility lies with the moral judgments of Gospel eyewitnesses
and writers, and we will talk about that aspect later on.
Growing up in the Galilee in the first century was not easy. The money was little and the
taxes were high. Between paying food and monetary taxes to Herod Antipas and to Rome
directly, a working class person might lose almost 40% of his income. If you worked in a
trade like fishing, your boats and your other equipment had fees and taxes levied against
them as well. But after a while, just during the time Yshua and his brothers were
growing up, a leader arose in Galilee whose battle cry could best be summed up as Read
my lipsno new taxes!
His name was also Yehudahor Judas the Galilean. This Yehudah raised an army and
led a deadly insurrection against the Romans. It was a blood soaked preview to the doom
that awaited the entire nation later in that century.
In the common year 6, Yshua is about 10 years old and we have no firm ideas as to how
old Yehudah and the other brothers would have been except that they were YOUNGER
brothers, and not siblings from a previous marriage of Josephs as the Catholics claim.
Maryam, most certainly, did not die a virgin.
In any case, this rebellion took a while for Rome to crush. After defeating the rebels, the
Romans pursued them relentlessly back to their home baseSephorrisa city only 4

15

miles away from Nazareth. The city was burned to the ground and thousands died.
Yshua and Yehudah would have witnessed the Romans coming through their home area.
They would have smelled the smoke and seen the flames, along with the vanquished
rebels writhing in agony. It was a lesson both of them would eventually draw on in their
teachings: Rebellion can lead to a fiery end, and this applies even though neither of them
would have literally put the Romans in the role of a righteous judge. The event though
was so devastating it was recorded both by the historian Josephus and by Luke, and I
must believe it had a powerful impact on Yehudah himself.
But Yehudah didnt grow up in a vacuum. He had four other brothers and at least two
sisters growing up with him. Their father Joseph must have struggled to get by as a
carpenter (tekton in Greek, nagara in Aramaic) which really included a lot more than
just woodworking. Ironically though, the rebellion that scarred Yehudahs childhood
would, in a way, fuel a kind of family comeback.
Sephorris was too good a location for the Romans to let lay fallow. It was in a highly
strategic place for all sorts of trade in the region. It also had a thriving community of
both Jews and Gentiles living side by side. And so it was that the local ruler, again Herod
Antipas, took it upon himself to rebuild Sephorris with Roman permission.
In no time at all a magnificent new city arose, and with it came what we would only term
today as shovel ready projects. Antipas would need as many craftsmen from the local
area as he could find to help rebuild the city, and that meant a lot of new jobs for folks
like Yosef and Sons Carpentry. It is therefore more than likely that both Yshua and some
of his younger brothers assisted their father Joseph on this project, and it also would have
been the first time any of these boys would have come into contact with Gentiles. And so
another piece of Yehudahs childhoodand a very influential oneis recovered from
the wider historical record.
When Yehudah became a man, he seems to have opposed Yshuas ministry at first. The
Gospels speak of Yshuas brothers as a monolithic block of opposition. In Mark 3:21
Yshuas brothersprobably including Yehudahtried to get Mashiyach locked up
for being insane. The rejection of his family caused Yshua to make a number of caustic
comments including saying that those who were obedient of Abba YHWH were his
real family and that families will be divided two against three and three against two
for my sake.
Then, in Yochanan 7, those rebellious brothers of his were at it again, encouraging
Yshua to make a public spectacle of himself at Sukkot in the hopes he will get arrested!
Yehudah either was part of that plan or at minimum did nothing to stop it. Some of this
animosity to Yshua may have come from his abandonment of the family business during
the lost years because the Gospels speak of Yshua being raised in Galilee and then
subsequently returning that region just before the ministry begins.

16

As the years went on, it is almost certain that Yehudah would have faced another
challenge. He would have watched his older brother Yaakov who probably had held the
family together during the time that Yshua was away, switched sides.
In order to become the leader of the Jerusalem Beit Din, Yaakov had to establish himself
as a believer with solid credentials to lead. All Yehudah could do was watch from the
sidelines and probably lament that his whole family seemed to be falling apart over this
Messiah thing. His lament would have intensified as he saw all of Yaakovs beautiful
Torah educationwhich clearly was extensiveget wasted on the other side.
And yet, we also know somehow Yehudah did make a major change. More than
becoming a solid believer and leader in his own right, this man may have developed a
level of humility that rivaled that of his brother Yaakov.
The reason I say this is because when Yaakov introduces himself he doesnt mention his
family connections at all, but the apostle Paul has done this for him (Galatians 1:9). In
almost the same way, Yehudah has downplayed his family to, content to be called the
brother of Yaakov rather than the brother of our Master Yshua.
But in the Aramaic traditions of this text we get another insightful clue that affirms this
connection. At the end of the most ancient Aramaic copies of Yehudah is this statement:
End of the letter of Yehudah the Shaliach, the brother of Yaakov and Yosef.
The reason this reference is so important is that its the only one I am aware of that
mentions the 3rd brother of Yshua, Yosef outside of the Gospels, and the fact that Yosef
might even be delivering this epistle personally also speaks to his conversion of character
into the Set-Apart faith about his half-brother, Yshua. This is possible because none of
the usual suspects are mentioned (Tertius, Shila, Timothy, etc.).
Furthermore, apostles did not deliver their own mail, but sent their letters through the
hands of trusted intermediaries. But only with the brothers of Yshua and with
Yochanans letters are those same reliable couriers not mentioned, and the question is,
why?
Recall that Yochanan was charged with taking care of Yshuas mother Maryam when he
saw his Master on the stake. Yochanan then, along with his new extended family of
Yaakov and Yehudah, may have used the same family courier who could have visited
Yochanan in Ephesus and later Patmos for one time and from there that same courier
hooked up with the other two leaders from Yshuas family.
If thats true, neither Yaakov nor Yehudah would have delivered these letters and the
last brother, Shimon, as we are about to see, may be the least faithful of all the siblings
and therefore least likely to deliver a letter. That leaves the 3rd brother, Yosef, and that
may also be why he is mentioned at the end of the Epistle. (Get back, Joe, Joe!)

17

And that leaves only the last brother to account for: Shimon. The common saying in
scholarship goes to avoid arguments from silence generally and as a matter of process I
agree with that.
Nevertheless, three things should be discussed about Shimon. First Yshuas choice of
successor, Shimon Bar Yonah or Peter, might have something to do with replacing the
brother he knew could be lost to him for the rest of Yshua life in addition to the good
things about Peters character that are directly mentioned in places like Matthew 16.
Second of course is the fact that Shimon is the only brother whose name appears nowhere
in the rest of the NT or NT manuscript tradition at the end of various books, as the other
three brothers clearly do.
Third, there has always been something in the Gospels that has puzzled me for many
years that I finally may have a plausible answer for, and it is the list of Yshuas siblings
given in the Gospels
(Mat 13:55) Is this not the son of the carpenter, his mother is called Maryam, and
his brothers Ya'akov and Yoseh and Shimon and Yehuda?" (Mat 13:56) "And
his sisters, behold, are they not all with us? From where, thus, did all these things
come to this man?"
(Mar 6:3) "Is this not the carpenter, the son of Maryam and the brother of
Ya'akov and of Yoseh and of Yehuda and of Shimon?" And, "Behold aren't
his sisters here with us and they were offended at him."
Why the two different orderings of siblings? Why does Matthew record them as Yaakov,
Yoseh, Shimon and Yehudah while Mark says Yaakov, Yoseh, Yehudah and Shimon?
Why is Shimon 3rd in the list in Matthew and 4th or last in the list in Mark?
The normal Jewish tradition is to order siblings in the order of their birth, which is I
suspect what Matthew did here. Yehudah is the youngest brother, which concords well
with the general opinion that he served well after the time his eldest brother Yaakov was
martyred in 62 CE.
But occasionally the birth order rule is broken, and that happens with respect to kings.
There were a few instances, for example, where a younger sibling is mentioned before
and older one because he got to be king and his older brother did not. Over time, this
process could have influenced Mark to perhaps put the siblings of Yshua, not in birth
order, but in order of importance, which may be why Shimon is last, because morally he
comes in last. Such makes further sense when we consider long standing and well
established Eastern and Western tradition that Mark is taking dictation from Keefa (Peter)
who most certainly could have made that kind of moral judgment, perhaps thinking about
his own failures as another man also named Shimon in the process.
The question is, if this is true, does Shimon the brother of Yshua being last morally

18

mean he never came to faith at all or does it simply mean his faith was least of all among
the siblings? Well, if the minor indulgence of two Beatles references is tolerated up until
now, allow me to offer a hopeful speculation to the more positive possibility based on the
words of another Shimonthe one who sang with Art Garfunkel these words
And the sign said, The words of the Prophets are written on the subway walls
and tenement halls
And
Yshua loves you more than you will knowwhoa, whoa, whoa. Yah bless you
please Mrs. Robinson, heaven holds a place for those who pray. Hey, hey, hey.
And so may it be that all of Yshuas family finally, at the end of all things, came to
proper understanding of who their immediate relative Yshua both was and is because
The minute, you let Yshua come in
Then you begin
To make it better
Im Andrew Gabriel Roth and thats your Torah Thought for the Week!
Next week we will be exploring Chukkat, or Numbers 19:1-22:1. Our Haftorah portion
will be Judges 11:1-33 and our Renewed Covenant portion will be Yochanan 3:1-21!
Stay tuned!

19