Podcasts about pentateuchal

Today's Messianic movement really does not know what to do with Pentateuchal source criticism.

Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.”— Galatians 3:11-12 CALL OUT: Shout out to Mark Lerom, who is hosting me at Men's Advance this year. I am excited to be with you, 700+ guys. Let's see what God does! These verses may sound a bit cryptic if you only read them once, but if you read them multiple times, Paul is saying there are two ways to salvation. Yep, you read that right. This text contains two quotes from Old Testament Scriptures. The first is from Habakkuk 2:4, and the second is from Leviticus 18:5. The operative connecting phrase is "shall live by," which is found in both. The first declares justification by faith, while the second declares justification by works. The first is humanity's only possible means of salvation, and the second is Jesus Christ's means of providing salvation, who is "The one" of the text. So yes, there are two ways to salvation. One way, the second way, would require someone to fulfill the entire works of the Pentateuchal law, with its 242 positive commands and 365 prohibitions. Only this person could stand before God at judgment and be justified on the basis of his performance. That person, of course, was Jesus (Matthew 5:17). This way is impossible for us. The first way is our only hope. Therefore, we have only one possible way to salvation: "by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me" (Galatians 2:20). Paul is going to beat this point to death, hoping that the Galatians will see the hopeless nature of a doctrine of justification by works. He is trying to beat this out of their minds. The effort he makes is notable. It is exactly what we should do when we encounter questionable ideologies. We should test them against Scripture. Then, we should test them again against the work of Jesus Christ. If they don't pair up, we need to refuse and remove them from our minds and lives because our only hope is faith in Jesus. Put your faith in him today. #FaithVsWorks #JustificationByFaith #SalvationThroughChrist #GalatiansInsights #HopeInJesus ASK THIS: How does understanding the contrast between justification by faith and justification by works impact your daily walk with Christ? In what areas of your life do you find yourself relying more on your own efforts rather than trusting in God's grace through faith? DO THIS: Have faith. There is only one possible way. PRAY THIS: Father, help me to fully grasp the depth of your grace and the significance of justification by faith alone. Guide me to place my trust entirely in Christ, knowing that my salvation rests solely on His finished work on the cross. Amen. PLAY THIS: Faithful God.

This class covers the annual cycle reading known as MiKetz (Genesis 41:1-44:17). It is part of the popular series of Pentateuchal studies and the second in the Joseph Saga. In this teaching, we discuss the texts from Pharaoh's dreams through the meeting in Egypt between all Israel's sons. The class provides insights into the connectedness […]

The Bible Its Pentateuchal Structure by F W Grant

Origin-of-life research got a boost with the recent publication of a massive new computer program that was designed to model early chemical evolution. At least, that's what the headlines say. Dr C explains that things are only getting worse for the evolutionary story of how life arose and how these problems tie into the study of genetics. Location: Pickett's Mill Battlefield State Historic Site, Dallas, GA. Links: Tan, C. and Stadler, R., 2020. The Stairway to Life: an origin-of-life reality check, available on Creation.com. Remember to add "I love Biblical Genetics" to the comment section on your order! Evolution's Achilles' Heels (book and documentary), available on Creation.com. Ditto about the comment! The main paper being discussed: Wolos A, et al. 2020. Synthetic connectivity, emergence, and self-regeneration in the network of prebiotic chemistry, Nature 369(6511):eaaw1955. Popular-level summary from MSN.com: Starr, M. 2020. A New Chemical 'Tree of The Origins of Life' Reveals Our Possible Molecular Evolution. Video: New “Allchemy” Software Helps Chart Chemical Origins of Life Uracil synthesis link: DeGraw, J. 1990. Synthesis and antifolate properties of 10-alkyl-5,10-dideaza analogs of methotrexate and tetrahydrofolic acid, J Med Chem 33:673–677. Grigg, R. 2012. Did Darwin become a Christian before he died? on Creation.com. There is also an audio version of this article available. Jacob's Livestock Breeding Experiment, Biblical Genetics (episode 22) July 1, 2020. You can copy and paste these quotes into any search engine to find the proper reference or the larger context: Letter from Darwin to Joseph Hooker in 1863: “But I have long regretted that I truckled to public opinion & used Pentateuchal term of creation, by which I really meant ‘appeared’ by some wholly unknown process.—It is mere rubbish thinking, at present, of origin of life; one might as well think of origin of matter.” Darwin's Origin of Species last page: “Authors of the highest eminence seem to be fully satisfied with the view that each species has been independently created. To my mind it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes, like those determining the birth and death of the individual.” Darwin's Origin of Species last sentence: “There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.” Darwin's 'warm little pond' quote in another letter to Joseph Hooker, 1871: “But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sort of ammonia and phosphoric salts,—light, heat, electricity present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present such matter would be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed”

This is a lecture in the Introduction to the Bible series. In this presentation Dr. Wolthuis explores how to read and apply the Pentateuchal Law and history.

And you thought Joshua was bad! In this episode I undertake to persuade Dad that the other-least-popular book of the Old Testament is not just an arcane collection of burnt offerings and sin offerings and wave offerings but in fact is the metaphysical substrate of the gospel itself. (Spoiler alert: he is won over.) Have a listen for a new perspective on "detestable" animals, mixed fibers, death on account of blasphemy, liver lobes, and so much more! Notes: 1. As mentioned before, Dad has a forthcoming commentary in the Brazos series on the book of Joshua. 2. Dad mentions the stroke he had two years ago in this episode; in case you missed it, a bonus episode from last year recounts that experience 3. Ephraim Radner, Leviticus 4. Luther’s commentary on Deuteronomy (specifically ch. 7) deals with the question of who exactly the commands in the Bible are addressed to 5. The only two appearances of Leviticus in the Revised Common Lectionary are Epiphany 7 and Proper 25, both in Year A, both from ch. 19 6. Mary Douglas, Leviticus as Literature 7. The hymn is indeed “There is a Fountain Filled with Blood” but the author is William Cowper, not Isaac Watts. 8. More enthusing from me about Leviticus: “Learning to Love Leviticus” (yup, I loved the alliteration so much I stole it from myself to give this episode the same title); a brief review of Douglas’s Leviticus as Literature (scroll to the bottom of the page); commentary on the intra-Pentateuchal discussion between Jesus and the scribe in Mark 12:28–34; and an issue of my e-newsletter Theology & a Recipe devoted to “Discerning Walls with Leviticus” (plus an awesome pair of recipes for Hot Quiche and Cold Tomato Soup!). More about us at sarahhinlickywilson.com and paulhinlicky.com!

In this episode, we accentuate the tragedy of Samson by highlighting his potential role as a Messiah/King of the Jewish People and the partnership between his tribe of Dan and the tribe of Judah (Yehudah). We then continue with a brief introduction to the two judges from the Book of Samuel: Eli the Kohen and Shmuel the Prophet. Afterwards, we look back at all the Shoftim and seek out each one's redeeming qualities and summarize our findings regarding their tribal affiliations. We also return to the idea of judges in general and contrasted the role of the judges with that of the kings (and, in doing so, offered Pentateuchal support from the Torah as to the very concept of judges). Finally, we visit the blessings that Jacob (Yaakov) gave to his children on his deathbed and saw how those blessings offer hints to the various judges who were destined to descend from those sons and the tribes they progenated.

In this episode, Tim and Jon trace this theme through the Old Testament. In part 1 (0-19:45), the guys briefly recap their discussion so far. Tim notes that Eve’s reaction in Hebrew between the birth of Cain and the birth of Seth are decidedly different. Tim says that Eve takes an arrogant stance by naming Cain, seeming to place herself alongside God. However, she takes a humble stance when she names Seth, seeing that God has granted her a son. Tim quotes scholar Umberto Cassuto: “The first woman in her joy at giving birth to her first son, boasts of her generative power, which in her estimation approximates the divine creative power. The Lord formed the first man, and I have formed the second man. Literally, ‘I have created a man with the Lord,’ by which she means, ‘I stand together equally with the Creator in the rank of creators.’” (Umberto Cassuto, Commentary on the Book of Genesis: Part I - From Adam to Noah) Tim notes that in the Bible, there are many stories of parents who abuse the gifts that God gives them in the ability to reproduce and have children, or they take undue parental pride in the gift of children. In part 2 (19:45-25:45), Tim and Jon discuss the theme of God choosing one over another. Tim points out that God’s choosing of one over another is actually a desire to bless all through the exaltation of the one. God says Cain will be exalted if he only obeys. Instead, Cain chooses to bow to his sinful desires. In part 3 (25:45-32:30), Tim moves onto the story of the Tower of Babel. Humans were called to spread out and rule the earth. Instead of embracing that gift, the humans decide to build a towering city. In part 4 (32:30-44:15), Tim dives into the story of Abraham. God chooses one family, the family of Abraham. Tim says that the Promised Land is God’s “gift” to Abraham’s family: Genesis 12:1-3
 Now the Lord said to Abram,
 “Go forth from your country, And from your family
 And from your father’s house, 
To the land which I will show you;
 And I will make you a great nation,
 And I will bless you,
 And make your name great;
 And you shall be a blessing;
 And I will bless those who bless you, 
And the one who treats you as cursed, I will curse.
 And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed.” Genesis 12:7 “To your seed I will give this land.” So he built an altar there to Yahweh who appeared to him.” Jon points out that sometimes famines come along. Sometimes, there isn’t enough. This tension does exist in the Bible, Tim notes, between God’s abundance and the existence of chaos. God didn’t create a perfectly safe world. He created a world where humans were to learn to co-rule with him, creating order from chaos. In part 5 (44:15-end), Tim notes that God keeps giving the Promised Land to Israel, and they keep misusing the gift. He cites two passages from Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy 11:8-14 “You all shall therefore keep every commandment which I am commanding you today, so that you may be strong and go in and possess the land... so that you may prolong your days on the land which the Lord swore to your fathers to give to them and to their descendants, a land flowing with milk and honey. For the land, into which you are entering to possess it, is not like the land of Egypt from which you came, where you used to sow your seed and water it with your foot like a vegetable garden. But the land into which you are about to cross to possess it, a land of hills and valleys, drinks water from the rain of heaven, a land for which the Lord your God cares; the eyes of the Lord your God are always on it, from the beginning even to the end of the year. 
“It shall come about, if you listen obediently to my commandments which I am commanding you today, to love the Lord your God and to serve him with all your heart and all your soul, that he will give the rain for your land in its season, the barley and late rain, that you may gather in your grain and your new wine and your oil.” Tim then cites scholar Joshua Berman, saying that Israel’s economy was an “Exodus-style” economy: “A key theological claim at work in these laws is that of God’s identity as the liberator of slaves. He forms a people out of those who were deemed to be people of no standing at all by the political and economic leaders who oppressed them. The egalitarian streak within Pentateuchal law codes accords with the portrayal of the Exodus as the prime experience of Israel’s self-understanding. Indeed, no Israelite can lay claim to any greater status than another, because all emanate from the Exodus—a common seminal, liberating, and equalizing event… This notion of God’s sovereignty as creator and liberator animated the biblical laws aimed at preventing Israelites from descending into the cycle of poverty and debt.” (Joshua Berman, Created Equal: How the Bible Broke with Ancient Political Thought, 88) Deuteronomy 24:19-22 “When you are harvesting in your field and you overlook a sheaf, do not go back to get it. Leave it for the immigrant, the fatherless and the widow, so that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hands. When you beat the olives from your trees, do not go over the branches a second time. Leave what remains for the immigrant, the fatherless and the widow. When you harvest the grapes in your vineyard, do not go over the vines again. Leave what remains for the foreigner, the fatherless and the widow. Remember that you were slaves in Egypt. That is why I command you to do this.” Thank you to all our supporters! Have a question for us? Send an audio recording around 30 seconds to our team at info@jointhebibleproject.com. Show Music: Defender Instrumental by Tents Quietly by blnkspc_ Mind Your Time by Me.So The Pilgrim by Greyflood Show Resources: Umberto Cassuto, Commentary on the Book of Genesis: Part I - From Adam to Noah Joshua Berman, Created Equal: How the Bible Broke with Ancient Political Thought Show Produced by: Dan Gummel Powered and distributed by Simplecast.

For some two hundred years now, Pentateuchal scholarship has been dominated by the Documentary Hypothesis, a paradigm made popular by Julius Wellhausen. Recent decades, however, have seen mounting critiques of the old paradigm, from a variety of specializations, not only in Biblical Studies, but also in the fields of Assyriology, Legal History, and Linguistics. In a recent international meeting, scholars across these fields came together and presented papers, each one calling for a paradigm change in Pentateuchal research. Join us as we speak with one of those scholars, Richard Averbeck, about his contribution to Paradigm Change in Pentateuchal Research, edited by M. Armgardt, B. Kilchör, M. Zehnder (Harrassowitz Verlag, 2019)—his chapter is titled ‘Reading the Torah in a Better Way.' Richard Averbeck teaches at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. His areas of expertise include Old Testament, especially the Pentateuch, ancient Near Eastern history and languages, Old Testament criticism, Hebrew, and biblical counseling. He is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Institute for Biblical Research, the American Oriental Society, the American Schools of Oriental Research, and the Society of Biblical Literature. Michael Morales is Professor of Biblical Studies at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and the author of The Tabernacle Pre-Figured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology in Genesis and Exodus(Peeters, 2012), and Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?: A Biblical Theology of Leviticus (IVP Academic, 2015). He can be reached at mmorales@gpts.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For some two hundred years now, Pentateuchal scholarship has been dominated by the Documentary Hypothesis, a paradigm made popular by Julius Wellhausen. Recent decades, however, have seen mounting critiques of the old paradigm, from a variety of specializations, not only in Biblical Studies, but also in the fields of Assyriology, Legal History, and Linguistics. In a recent international meeting, scholars across these fields came together and presented papers, each one calling for a paradigm change in Pentateuchal research. Join us as we speak with one of those scholars, Richard Averbeck, about his contribution to Paradigm Change in Pentateuchal Research, edited by M. Armgardt, B. Kilchör, M. Zehnder (Harrassowitz Verlag, 2019)—his chapter is titled ‘Reading the Torah in a Better Way.’ Richard Averbeck teaches at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. His areas of expertise include Old Testament, especially the Pentateuch, ancient Near Eastern history and languages, Old Testament criticism, Hebrew, and biblical counseling. He is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Institute for Biblical Research, the American Oriental Society, the American Schools of Oriental Research, and the Society of Biblical Literature. Michael Morales is Professor of Biblical Studies at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and the author of The Tabernacle Pre-Figured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology in Genesis and Exodus(Peeters, 2012), and Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?: A Biblical Theology of Leviticus (IVP Academic, 2015). He can be reached at mmorales@gpts.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For some two hundred years now, Pentateuchal scholarship has been dominated by the Documentary Hypothesis, a paradigm made popular by Julius Wellhausen. Recent decades, however, have seen mounting critiques of the old paradigm, from a variety of specializations, not only in Biblical Studies, but also in the fields of Assyriology, Legal History, and Linguistics. In a recent international meeting, scholars across these fields came together and presented papers, each one calling for a paradigm change in Pentateuchal research. Join us as we speak with one of those scholars, Richard Averbeck, about his contribution to Paradigm Change in Pentateuchal Research, edited by M. Armgardt, B. Kilchör, M. Zehnder (Harrassowitz Verlag, 2019)—his chapter is titled ‘Reading the Torah in a Better Way.’ Richard Averbeck teaches at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. His areas of expertise include Old Testament, especially the Pentateuch, ancient Near Eastern history and languages, Old Testament criticism, Hebrew, and biblical counseling. He is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Institute for Biblical Research, the American Oriental Society, the American Schools of Oriental Research, and the Society of Biblical Literature. Michael Morales is Professor of Biblical Studies at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and the author of The Tabernacle Pre-Figured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology in Genesis and Exodus(Peeters, 2012), and Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?: A Biblical Theology of Leviticus (IVP Academic, 2015). He can be reached at mmorales@gpts.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For some two hundred years now, Pentateuchal scholarship has been dominated by the Documentary Hypothesis, a paradigm made popular by Julius Wellhausen. Recent decades, however, have seen mounting critiques of the old paradigm, from a variety of specializations, not only in Biblical Studies, but also in the fields of Assyriology, Legal History, and Linguistics. In a recent international meeting, scholars across these fields came together and presented papers, each one calling for a paradigm change in Pentateuchal research. Join us as we speak with one of those scholars, Richard Averbeck, about his contribution to Paradigm Change in Pentateuchal Research, edited by M. Armgardt, B. Kilchör, M. Zehnder (Harrassowitz Verlag, 2019)—his chapter is titled ‘Reading the Torah in a Better Way.’ Richard Averbeck teaches at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. His areas of expertise include Old Testament, especially the Pentateuch, ancient Near Eastern history and languages, Old Testament criticism, Hebrew, and biblical counseling. He is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Institute for Biblical Research, the American Oriental Society, the American Schools of Oriental Research, and the Society of Biblical Literature. Michael Morales is Professor of Biblical Studies at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and the author of The Tabernacle Pre-Figured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology in Genesis and Exodus(Peeters, 2012), and Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?: A Biblical Theology of Leviticus (IVP Academic, 2015). He can be reached at mmorales@gpts.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For some two hundred years now, Pentateuchal scholarship has been dominated by the Documentary Hypothesis, a paradigm made popular by Julius Wellhausen. Recent decades, however, have seen mounting critiques of the old paradigm, from a variety of specializations, not only in Biblical Studies, but also in the fields of Assyriology, Legal History, and Linguistics. In a recent international meeting, scholars across these fields came together and presented papers, each one calling for a paradigm change in Pentateuchal research. Join us as we speak with one of those scholars, Richard Averbeck, about his contribution to Paradigm Change in Pentateuchal Research, edited by M. Armgardt, B. Kilchör, M. Zehnder (Harrassowitz Verlag, 2019)—his chapter is titled ‘Reading the Torah in a Better Way.’ Richard Averbeck teaches at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. His areas of expertise include Old Testament, especially the Pentateuch, ancient Near Eastern history and languages, Old Testament criticism, Hebrew, and biblical counseling. He is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Institute for Biblical Research, the American Oriental Society, the American Schools of Oriental Research, and the Society of Biblical Literature. Michael Morales is Professor of Biblical Studies at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and the author of The Tabernacle Pre-Figured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology in Genesis and Exodus(Peeters, 2012), and Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?: A Biblical Theology of Leviticus (IVP Academic, 2015). He can be reached at mmorales@gpts.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For some two hundred years now, Pentateuchal scholarship has been dominated by the Documentary Hypothesis, a paradigm made popular by Julius Wellhausen. Recent decades, however, have seen mounting critiques of the old paradigm, from a variety of specializations, not only in Biblical Studies, but also in the fields of Assyriology, Legal History, and Linguistics. In a recent international meeting, scholars across these fields came together and presented papers, each one calling for a paradigm change in Pentateuchal research. Join us as we speak with one of those scholars, Richard Averbeck, about his contribution to Paradigm Change in Pentateuchal Research, edited by M. Armgardt, B. Kilchör, M. Zehnder (Harrassowitz Verlag, 2019)—his chapter is titled ‘Reading the Torah in a Better Way.’ Richard Averbeck teaches at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. His areas of expertise include Old Testament, especially the Pentateuch, ancient Near Eastern history and languages, Old Testament criticism, Hebrew, and biblical counseling. He is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Institute for Biblical Research, the American Oriental Society, the American Schools of Oriental Research, and the Society of Biblical Literature. Michael Morales is Professor of Biblical Studies at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and the author of The Tabernacle Pre-Figured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology in Genesis and Exodus(Peeters, 2012), and Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?: A Biblical Theology of Leviticus (IVP Academic, 2015). He can be reached at mmorales@gpts.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For some two hundred years now, Pentateuchal scholarship has been dominated by the Documentary Hypothesis, a paradigm made popular by Julius Wellhausen. Recent decades, however, have seen mounting critiques of the old paradigm, from a variety of specializations, not only in Biblical Studies, but also in the fields of Assyriology, Legal History, and Linguistics. In a recent international meeting, scholars across these fields came together and presented papers, each one calling for a paradigm change in Pentateuchal research. Join us as we speak with one of those scholars, Richard Averbeck, about his contribution to Paradigm Change in Pentateuchal Research, edited by M. Armgardt, B. Kilchör, M. Zehnder (Harrassowitz Verlag, 2019)—his chapter is titled ‘Reading the Torah in a Better Way.’ Richard Averbeck teaches at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. His areas of expertise include Old Testament, especially the Pentateuch, ancient Near Eastern history and languages, Old Testament criticism, Hebrew, and biblical counseling. He is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Institute for Biblical Research, the American Oriental Society, the American Schools of Oriental Research, and the Society of Biblical Literature. Michael Morales is Professor of Biblical Studies at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and the author of The Tabernacle Pre-Figured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology in Genesis and Exodus(Peeters, 2012), and Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?: A Biblical Theology of Leviticus (IVP Academic, 2015). He can be reached at mmorales@gpts.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For some two hundred years now, Pentateuchal scholarship has been dominated by the Documentary Hypothesis, a paradigm made popular by Julius Wellhausen. Recent decades, however, have seen mounting critiques of the old paradigm, from a variety of specializations, not only in Biblical Studies, but also in the fields of Assyriology, Legal History, and Linguistics. In a recent international meeting, scholars across these fields came together and presented papers, each one calling for a paradigm change in Pentateuchal research. Join us as we speak with one of those scholars, Richard Averbeck, about his contribution to Paradigm Change in Pentateuchal Research, edited by M. Armgardt, B. Kilchör, M. Zehnder (Harrassowitz Verlag, 2019)—his chapter is titled ‘Reading the Torah in a Better Way.’ Richard Averbeck teaches at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. His areas of expertise include Old Testament, especially the Pentateuch, ancient Near Eastern history and languages, Old Testament criticism, Hebrew, and biblical counseling. He is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, the Institute for Biblical Research, the American Oriental Society, the American Schools of Oriental Research, and the Society of Biblical Literature. Michael Morales is Professor of Biblical Studies at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and the author of The Tabernacle Pre-Figured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology in Genesis and Exodus(Peeters, 2012), and Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?: A Biblical Theology of Leviticus (IVP Academic, 2015). He can be reached at mmorales@gpts.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

University of Kentucky Computer Science Professor Brent Seales caused a worldwide sensation when he and his team were able to use non-invasive scans to unlock writings on the ancient En-Gedi scroll to reveal the earliest copy of a Pentateuchal book — Leviticus — ever found in a Holy Ark. Now he’s turning his expertise to more ancient texts, this time from the lost Roman city of Herculaneum.

An exploration of the major themes of Rosh Hashanah; Malchiot, Zichronot and Shofarot in the context of Ancient Near Eastern New Year festivities and rites.   Source Notes: What’s new about the Jewish New Year The three components of Rosh HaShannah Malkhiot – Kingship - מלכיות Zikhronot -  Remembrances - זכרונות Shofarot – Shofar Blast - שופרות 1. Source in the Mishnah one says avot and gevurot and kedushat Hashem, and [then] includes malkhiot with kedushat hayom, and [then] blows [the shofar; then] zikhronot and [then] he blows; [then] the ‏shofarot‎ and [then] he blows [a third time]; We may not have less then ten [verses] of malkhiot‎, ten of zikhronot‎ and ten of shofarot‎‎.  (Mishneh Rosh Hashanah 4: 5-6) 2. Source in the Torah Speak unto the children of Israel, saying: In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall be a solemn rest unto you, a memorial proclaimed with the blast of horns, a holy convocation.  דַּבֵּר אֶל-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, לֵאמֹר:  בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁבִיעִי בְּאֶחָד לַחֹדֶשׁ, יִהְיֶה לָכֶם שַׁבָּתוֹן--זִכְרוֹן תְּרוּעָה, מִקְרָא-קֹדֶשׁ Leviticus 23:24 Rashi: a remembrance of Scriptural verses dealing with remembrance and Scriptural verses dealing with the blowing of the shofar (R.H . 32a) זכרון פסוקי זכרונות ופסוקי שופרות   Where is the source for Malkhiot – Kingship – מלכיות ?         Where is the source for the New Year?              Where is the source for repentance and new beginnings?   Review of Last year’s session…. The Kingship of God is the core message of Judaism. 3. מודה אני לפניך מלך חי וקים I give thanks before You, Living and Eternal King 4. בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה' אֱ-להֵינוּ מֶלֶךְ הָעולָם  Blessed art You Lord our King… 5. בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה' הא-ל הָקדוש בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה' המֶלֶךְ הָקדוש 6. The 9th and 10th proof text for Malchiyot: The 9th proof text brought for malchuyot (kingship) is the verse from Zechariah  14, 9 used to close the Aleinu prayer. [Some believe Aleinu was written by Tanna Rav in 3rd century Babylonia for Rosh Hashanah services.]  וְהָיָה ה' לְמֶלֶךְ, עַל-כָּל-הָאָרֶץ; בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא, יִהְיֶה ה' אֶחָד--וּשְׁמוֹ אֶחָד And the LORD shall be King over all the earth; in that day shall the LORD be One, and His name one. The 10th and last proof text: שְׁמַע, יִשְׂרָאֵל: ה' אֱ-לוהֵינוּ, ה' אֶחָד Hear Oh Israel the Lord your God, the Lord is one. 7. The whispered [subversive] proclamation said out loud... ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom forever and ever. 8. אבינו מלכנו א'ן לנו מלך אלא אתה “Our father. our king we have no king other than you. [author: Rabbi Akiba - Babylonian Talmud, Ta’anit 25b  highpoint of Selichot services leading up to Yom Kippur and of the Yom Kippur service itself and the closing prayer at the Neila service] 9. Biblical rejection of a human king But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said: 'Give us a king to judge us.' And Samuel prayed unto the LORD. And the LORD said unto Samuel: 'Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee; for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected Me, that I should not be king over them. According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, in that they have forsaken Me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee. ( see Samuel I 8: 4-22)    כִּי לֹא אֹתְךָ מָאָסוּ, כִּי-אֹתִי מָאֲסוּ מִמְּלֹךְ עֲלֵיהֶם. כְּכָל-הַמַּעֲשִׂים אֲשֶׁר-עָשׂוּ, מִיּוֹם הַעֲלֹתִי אוֹתָם מִמִּצְרַיִם וְעַד-הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה, וַיַּעַזְבֻנִי, וַיַּעַבְדוּ אֱ-לֹהִים 10. The New Year The four new years are: On the first of Nisan, the new year for the kings and for the festivals; On the first of Elul, the new year for the tithing of animals; Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Shimon say, on the first of Tishrei. On the first of Tishrei, the new year for years, for the Sabbatical years and for the Jubilee years and for the planting and for the vegetables. On the first of Shevat, the new year for the trees according to the words of the House of Shammai; The House of Hillel says, on the fifteenth thereof. [Mishnah Rosh Hashanah 1:1] Rabbi Chisda said, 'They only taught [that the year begins in Nissan] this in regard to Jewish kings. But for the kings of the nations of the world, we count from Tishrei, (Babylonian Talmud 3a)   א"ר חסדא לא שנו אלא למלכי ישראל אבל למלכי אומות העולם מתשרי מנינן  11. Babylonian New Year - Akitu - Akkadian: rêš-šattim, "head of the year") 21 Adar - 1 Nisannu. There were twelve days of public ritual which according to Henri Frankfort in his seminal work: Kingship and the Gods, was a time of purification, of renewal of the vegetation. It was also a time of dramatic reenactments, it was at this time that the destinies of both gods and mankind were fixed, and the king began his reign on new year’s day. Highlights: 4th day - During the day the Epic of Creation Enuma Elish would be recited. The Enuma Elish, is most likely the oldest story concerning the birth of the gods and the creation of the universe and human beings. It then explains how all the gods united in the god Marduk, following his victory over Tiamat. The recitation of this Epic was considered the beginning of preparations for the submission of the King of Babylon before Marduk on the fifth day of Akitu. 5th day - The submission of the king of Babylon before Marduk. The king would enter to the Esagila accompanied by the priests, they would approach all together the altar where the high priest of the Esagila impersonates Marduk then he approaches the king, begins to strip him of his jewelry, scepter and even his crown then he would slap him hard while the altar would kneel and begins to pray asking for Marduk's forgiveness and submitting to him saying: "I have not sinned O Lord of the universe, and I haven't neglected your heavenly might at all"... Then the priest in the role of Marduk says: "Don't be afraid of what Marduk has to say, for he will hear your prayers, extends your power, and increases the greatness of your reign". The removal of all worldly possessions is a symbol of the submission the king gives to Marduk. After this the king would stand up and the priest would give him back his jewelry, scepter and crown then slaps him hard again hoping for the king to shed tears, because that would express more the submission to Marduk and respect to his power. When the priest returns the crown to the king that means his power was renewed by Marduk, thus April would be considered not only the revival of nature and life but also to the State as well. [i] 12. Egypt there was theSed Festival The Egyptian Sed Festival held in the Fall and celebrated the continued rule of a pharaoh. The ancient festival might, perhaps, have been instituted to replace a ritual of murdering a pharaoh who was unable to continue to rule effectively because of age or condition. … They primarily were held to rejuvenate the pharaoh’s strength and stamina while still sitting on the throne, celebrating the continued success of the pharaoh.   The Sed-festival developed into a royal jubilee intended to reinforce the pharaoh’s divine powers and religious leadership. 13. When was Kingship introduced to the Jewish New Year? In the critical view, the Pentateuchal legislation in which the festival appears belongs to the Priestly Code (P) and, therefore, to the post-Exilic period, when the Babylonian influences had become particularly pronounced. The older critical views consider the whole institution to be post-Exilic, pointing out, for instance, that there is no reference to it in the lists of the feasts in Deuteronomy (16: 1—17). More recently, however, Sigmund Mowinckel has advanced the suggestion that there existed in pre-Exilic Israel an autumnal New Year festival on which God was “enthroned” as King (analogous to the Babylonian enthronement of *Marduk). (Encyclopedia Judaica; Louis Jacobs article “Rosh Hashannah’) 14. Earliest significance to Tishrei 1 -10 (Leviticus 25) Then shalt thou make proclamation with the blast of the horn on the tenth day of the seventh month; in the day of atonement shall ye make proclamation with the horn throughout all your land. 15. And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants thereof; it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family. And if thy brother be waxen poor with thee, and sell himself unto thee, thou shalt not make him to serve as a bondservant. 40. As a hired servant, and as a settler, he shall be with thee; he shall serve with thee unto the year of jubilee. 41. Then shall he go out from thee, he and his children with him, and shall return unto his own family, and unto the possession of his fathers shall he return. 42. For they are My servants, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as bondmen. For unto Me the children of Israel are servants; they are My servants whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God. In the Talmud Tishrei 1 -10 (Babylonian Talmud Rosh Hashana 8b) According to the Talmud, servants were formally freed on the 1st of Tishri, but were allowed to remain on the homesteads of their former masters and to enjoy themselves for ten days, until Yom Kippur, when the trumpet was blown (Lev. xxv. 9) as a signal for their departure, and for the restoration of the fields to their original owners (R. H. 8b). 15. Significance of remembering the sound of the Shofar (Exodus 21) If thou buy a Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve; and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. 5. But if the servant shall plainly say: I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free; 6. then his master shall bring him unto God, and shall bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him forever. Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 22b Now, why was the ear chosen to be bored out of all the organs of the body? According to Rabban Jochanan ben Zakkai The Holy One Blessed be He said said: The ear that heard on Mount Sinai, “For the children of Israel are slaves to Me ” (Lev. 25:55) and not slaves to slaves… and [then] went and acquired a master for himself, [this ear] shall be bored.  “You shall not steal” (Exod. 20:13) and [then] went and stole, shall be bored. And if [the text is referring to] one who sold himself [into servitude, the reason is that] רבן יוחנן בן זכאי היה דורש את המקרא הזה כמין חומר מה נשתנה אזן מכל אברים שבגוף אמר הקב"ה אזן ששמעה קולי על הר סיני בשעה שאמרתי (ויקרא כה, נה) כי לי בני ישראל עבדים ולא עבדים לעבדים והלך זה וקנה אדון לעצמו ירצע Conclusion 17. Eric Fromm – You Shall be as Gods pp73 – 75 “Obedience to God is also the negation of submission to man.” “The idea of serfdom to God was, in the Jewish tradition, transformed into the basis for the freedom of man from man.  God’s authority thus guarantees man’s independ ------------------ [i] Compare to the accounts of the High Priest in the Holy of Holies:   The first mishna in Yoma stipulates that the Kohen Gadol must be sequestered for one compete week prior to Yom Kippur to purify himself and prepare for the holiday. Prior to entering the Holy of Holies the Kohen Gadol removed his golden garments, immersed in the mikvah, and changed to a new set of linen garments, again washing his hands and feet twice.   There was good reason for the High Priest's decision not to elongate his prayer at this particular time: many a High Priest was struck down dead while in the Holy of Holies. Although the First Temple stood for 410 years, in all there were only 12 High Priests during that entire period; because they were very righteous, they were blessed with longevity. However, the Second Temple, which stood for a total of 420 years, was presided over by more than 300 High Priests. This is because in the spiritual decline of those days, many of these men were corrupted, and bought their office through influence. The Zohar, mentions that a rope was tied around his foot, to drag him out in case he dies.   Additionally, if he would change any detail of the incense service within the Holy of Holies (as we mentioned with regard to the Sadducees), he would also die. With this is mind, it is understandable that the eyes of all Israel awaited the exit of the High Priest with bated breath. Being aware of his people's agitation, the High Priest's first concern was that he should not cause them any unnecessary anxiety... and the longer he stayed within, the more Israel's apprehension grew. Thus the High Priest saw fit to forego the opportunity to engage in a long personal prayer, and recited the shorter version so as to exit the Sanctuary with reasonable speed.