YAHSWORD

IS YAHSHUA THE PASSOVER LAMB?

2011-07-24T13:29:00.000-07:00

______________________________________________________________________

(Unless otherwise noted, the Scriptures quoted are from The Interlinear Bible, a literal translation by Jay P. Green, Sr., as general editor and translator, with the transliterated Hebrew names of the Father and Son, Yahweh and Yahshua.)

Have you ever heard your Savior referred to as the Passover lamb? Yet, there are assemblies that teach that very seriously. They have built doctrines – and even religions – around that idea. Do other Scriptures truly support their doctrines?

There is only one verse that they quote as proof-text of this doctrine. In the King James Version of the Bible, this one verse says:

I Corinthians 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven; that you may be a new lump, as you are unleavened. For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us.

Their “doctrine” is made up of several components –

Yahshua was the Passover Lamb.
Yahshua died at the same time the Jews were killing the Passover lambs.
The Passover lamb was a sin sacrifice.
The Passover lamb brought forgiveness.
The partaking of the bread and wine – called by some the “Lord’s Supper” – brings forgiveness today.

Are these statements true? Is the idea factual? Or could there be more to the story? Yahshua died for our sins – that is true. But was it as the Passover lamb? Was the Passover lamb a sin sacrifice? Are these the same thing or is there a difference? What is the context surrounding Paul’s statement?

SIN SACRIFICES

Exactly what was a sin sacrifice? What animal was used? How was it done? These sacrifices are not done now, so today’s world is not familiar with them and the preachers seem to ignore the definitive Scriptures. So first, a foundation must be laid.

There are several chapters in Leviticus that outline various types of sacrifices. Leviticus 4 is concerned with the sin sacrifice rules. Differences appear in the rules depending upon who is seeking atonement and presenting an animal to be sacrificed.

Verses 3-12 give instructions for the priest that is anointed –

A young unblemished bullock is to be offered.
The priest himself shall lay his hands on the bullock.
The priest himself shall kill the bullock.
The priest shall sprinkle of the blood 7 times before the veil of the sanctuary.
The priest shall put blood on the horns of the altar in the tabernacle.
The priest shall pour the remaining blood at the bottom of the altar of the burnt offering at the door of the tabernacle.
The fat that covers the inwards, along with the kidneys, shall be burnt on the altar of the burnt offering.
The remainder of the animal shall be burned outside the camp.

Verses 13-21 give instructions if the sacrifice is for the congregation as a whole –

A young bullock is to be offered.
The elders shall lay their hands on the head of the bullock and the bullock shall be slain.
The priest shall sprinkle blood 7 times before the veil of the sanctuary.
The priest shall put blood on the horns of the altar in the tabernacle.
The priest shall pour the remaining blood at the bottom of the altar of the burnt offering at the door of the tabernacle.
The fat shall be burnt on the altar.
The remainder of the animal shall be burned outside the camp.

Verses 22-26 give instructions if the sacrifice is for a ruler –

An unblemished male kid of the goats is to be offered.
The ruler shall lay his hand on the head of the goat.
The ruler shall slay the animal at the place of burnt offerings.
The priest shall put blood on the horns of the altar of burnt offerings.
The priest shall pour the remainder of the blood at the bottom of the altar.
The priest shall burn the fat upon the altar.

Verses 27-35 give instructions for the common man –

An unblemished female kid of the goats or the lambs is to be offered.
The sinner shall lay his hand on the head of the animal.
The sinner shall slay the animal at the place of burnt offerings.
The priest shall put blood on the horns of the altar of burnt offerings.
The priest shall pour the remaining blood at the bottom of the altar.
The priest shall burn the fat on the altar.

In these four instances, who was covered by these sacrifices? Only those persons specified. In the first two instances, everything was burned. In the last two, those words do not appear, but nothing is said about the individual taking it home to eat.

In these verses, there was no specific time designated for these sacrifices.

Illustrated Dictionary of the Bible, Herbert Lockyer, Sr, editor, pages 935-936 –

“Sin Offering. This bloody offering, also known as a guilt offering, was presented for unintentional or intentional sins for which there was not possible restitution (Lev. 4:5-13; 6:24-30). If the offering was not accompanied by repentance, divine forgiveness was withheld (Num. 15:30). Expiation or covering (forgiveness) of sin was represented by the blood smeared on the horns of the altar of incense or burnt offering and poured out at the base of the altar.”

“The penalty for all sin, death, was vicariously inflicted on the sacrificial animal. Guilt for the worshiper’s sin was transferred symbolically to the animal through the laying on of the offerer’s hands.”

THE PASSOVER LAMB

Going back to the beginning, to the first Passover in Egypt, there were specific instructions given. The story is in Exodus 12. Read the entire chapter to refresh your memory of all the instructions and to see if there is any verse that states that this Passover was to be for the forgiveness or covering of sins. Yahweh told them about choosing the lamb, slaughtering it, how to cook it and eat it, and what to do with the blood. What was the purpose of all this?

Exodus 12:7, 11-13, 22-23 7 – And they shall take from the blood, and put it on the two side doorposts and on the upper doorpost, on the houses in which they eat it. 11 – And you shall eat it this way: with your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand. And you shall eat it in haste. It is the Passover to Yahweh. 12 – And I will pass through in the land of Egypt in this night. And I will smite every firstborn in the land of Egypt, from man to livestock. And I will execute judgments on all the gods of Egypt, I am Yahweh! 13 – And the blood shall be a sign to you, on the houses where you are. And I will see the blood and I will pass over you. And the plague shall not be on you to destroy, when I smite in the land of Egypt. 22 – And take a bunch of hyssop and dip it in the blood which is in the basin and apply some of the blood in the basin to the upper doorpost and to the two side doorposts. And you shall not go out, anyone from the door of his house until morning. 23 – And Yahweh will pass through to smite Egypt. And He will see the blood on the upper doorpost and on the two side doorpost, and Yahweh will pass over the door. And He will not allow the destroyer to come into your house to strike you.

So what are the main points of this lamb and this observance? The noticeable ones are –

There was to be one lamb per household set aside on the 10th day of the first month.
If necessary, households could join together.
The animal was to be an unblemished lamb or goat of the first year.
The lamb was to be kept till the 14th of the month and all were to kill it at their homes between the evenings – between sunset and dark.
Blood was to be put on the upper and side door posts of the house where the lamb would be eaten.
Roasted lamb was to be eaten that night by everyone, with unleavened bread and bitter herbs.
The lamb was not to be boiled but the whole animal roasted with fire.
Any remainder was to be burnt.

Does the Passover lamb fit the instructions for the sin sacrifice? No, there are differences.

Did you note the purpose of the blood? It was put on the door frame –it was not sprinkled, put on an altar, or poured at the base of an altar. The head of the family killed the lamb. Neither the fat nor anything else was removed from the animal. It was roasted whole. The entire family ate of the lamb. It was to protect the lives of those inside the houses from the death angel. Nothing more. There is no mention of forgiveness of sin. There is no reference anywhere in Scripture about the Passover lamb being for forgiveness. So how is that connection reached?

There is no mention in Exodus 12 regarding any sin. The blood was not shed as an atonement for sin, but as a marker to show which houses were not to be touched by death.

YAHSHUA’S SACRIFICE

So does Yahshua fit either of these – the sin sacrifice or the Passover lamb? If so, which one? They are too different for Him to fit both of them.

There is a reference to Yahshua being a lamb.

John 1:29 On the morrow, John sees Yahshua coming toward him, and said, Behold the Lamb of Elohim, who takes away the sin of the world!

Forgiveness of sin is mentioned here, but nothing about Passover – no connection.

So why did Yahshua die?

Isaiah 53:5-6, 10-12 5 – But He was pierced for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was on Him; and with His wounds we ourselves are healed. 6 – All we like sheep go astray; we have turned each man to his way; and Yahweh has made meet in Him the iniquity of all of us. 10 – But Yahweh pleased to crush Him, to make Him sick, so that if He should put His soul as a guilt offering. He shall see His seed; He shall prolong His days; and the will of Yahweh shall prosper in His hand. 11 – He shall see the fruit of the travail of His soul; He shall be fully satisfied. By His knowledge shall My righteous Servant justify for many, and He shall bear their iniquities, 12 – Because of this I will divide to Him with the great, and with the strong He shall divide the spoil; because He poured out His soul to death, and He was counted with transgressors; and He bore the sins of many, and made intercession for transgressors.

(Matthew 1:21) And she will bear a son; and you shall call His name Yahshua; for He shall save His people from their sins.

(Acts 5:30-31) 30 – The Elohim of our fathers raised up Yahshua, whom you laid hands on, hanging Him on a tree. 31 – Elohim has exalted this One as a Ruler and Savior to His right hand, to give to Israel repentance and forgiveness of sins.

(I Corinthians 15:3) For I delivered to you in the first place what I also received, that Messiah died for our sins, according to the Scriptures.

(Hebrews 9:28) So being once offered to bear the sins of many, Messiah shall appear a second time without sin to those expecting Him for salvation.

As all the lambs that were offered for sin sacrifices or for Passover, Yahshua also was unblemished and sinless.

(Hebrews 4:15) For we do not have a high priest not being able to sympathize with our infirmities, but One having been tried in all respects according to our likeness, apart from sin.

(I Peter 1:19) But with precious blood of Messiah, as of an unblemished and unspotted lamb.

(I Peter 2:21-22) 21 – For you were called to this, for even Messiah suffered on our behalf, leaving behind an example for us, that you should follow His steps; 22 – who did not sin, nor was guile found in his mouth.

Yahshua’s blood was poured out – with a purpose.

(John 19:34) But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a lance; and at once blood and water came out.

(Matthew 26:27-28) 27 – And taking the cup, and giving thanks, He gave to them, saying, Drink all of it. 28 – For this is My blood of the New Covenant which concerning many is being poured out for forgiveness of sin.

(Romans 5:9) Much more, then, being justified now by His blood, we will be saved through Him from wrath.

(Ephesians 1:7) (Yahshua) in whom we have redemption through His blood the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace.

(Colossians 1:14) (Yahshua) in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.

(Hebrews 9:22) And almost all things are cleansed by blood according to the Law; and apart from shedding of blood no remission occurs.

What were the accusations against Yahshua? Why did the Jews insist that He die?

(Matthew 26:65-66) 65 – Then the high priest tore his garments, saying, He blasphemed! Why do we have any more need of witnesses? Behold, now you have heard his blasphemy. 66 – What does it seem to you? And answering they said, He is liable to death.

(John 19:7) Then the Jews answered him, We have a law, and according to our law he ought to die, because he made himself Son of Elohim.

If anyone claimed to be a son of Elohim, they considered that to be blasphemy.

Where was that law to which they were referring? Where were blasphemers to die? Was there a specific place?

(Leviticus 24:14-16) 14 – Bring out the reviler to the outside of the camp. And all those who heard shall lay their hands on his head, and all the congregation shall stone him. 15 – And you shall say to the sons of Israel, saying, When any man curses his Elohim, then he shall bear his sin. 16 – And he who blasphemes the name of Yahweh shall certainly be put to death. All the congregation shall certainly cast stones at him. As to the alien, so to a native, when he blasphemes the Name, he is put to death.

And where did Yahshua die?

(John 19:20) Therefore, many of the Jews read this title, because the place where Yahshua was crucified was near the city. …

Notice that? If it were near the city, then it was outside the city (or camp).

(Hebrews 13:12-13) 12 – Therefore, that He might sanctify the people by his own blood, Yahshua also suffered outside the gate. 13-So now let us go forth to Him outside the camp, bearing His reproach.

DID YAHSHUA AND THE LAMBS DIE AT THE SAME TIME?

The last point of this discussion will center on the fact it is claimed that Yahshua is the Passover because He died at the same time the priests were killing the Passover lambs at the temple. Can that be supported with Scripture? Did Yahshua keep the Passover earlier than all the other Jews so that would be possible?

(Note: This discussion and searching in the Scriptures can be confusing because the terms Passover and Unleavens were used interchangeably. By the time of Yahshua, the word “Passover” had come to have three definitions: 1 – the Passover lamb/meal; 2 – the fourteenth day of the first month; and 3 – the eight-day festival season, lumping the Passover and the seven days of Unleavens into one entity.)

(Mark 14:12) And before the day of the unleavens, when they killed the Passover, His disciples said to Him, Where do you desire that going we may prepare that You may eat the Passover?

There are several points here. “Before the day of the unleavens” shows that the Passover day was lumped into Unleavens, making it an eight-day festival. Since they ate unleavened bread with the lamb, they referred to it as a day of Unleavens as well. “When they killed the Passover” tells us that it had to be that day, not one of the seven days of Unleavens. The disciples are asking Him about preparing the Passover. And note when they did it – on the day Scripture said it was to be done. Not on a different day or a day earlier.

(Luke 22:7-8) 7 – And the day of the Unleavens came, on which the Passover must be killed. 8 – And He sent Peter and John, saying, Going, prepare for us the Passover that we may eat.

When? The day the Passover must be killed. The word “must” is the Greek word #1163, dei. It carries the meaning of being mandatory, compulsory, obligatory. It includes the meaning “under compulsion of law”. The Strong’s definition says it is (was, etc.) necessary (as binding).

So how can anyone say that the majority of the Jews kept the Passover a day later than Yahshua? Based on one verse.

(John 18:28) Then they led Yahshua from Caiaphas into the praetorium, and it was early. And they did not enter into the praetorium, that they might not be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover.

This scene took place after the Passover, “early” as it says, the next morning. So what does it mean “that they might eat the Passover?” Remember the idea that the word Passover could refer to the entire eight days? There were additional sacrifices offered every day of the seven days of unleavens that the priests were to eat of (Numbers 28:17-25). Who are “they” in John 18? The chief priests!

The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Alfred Edersheim, Book II, page 482 –

“Equally untenable is it, that Christ had held the Paschal Supper a day in advance of that observed by the rest of the Jewish world – a supposition not only inconsistent with the plain language of the Synoptists, but impossible, since the Passover Lamb could not have been offered in the Temple, and, therefore, no Passover Supper held, out of the regular time.”

Where does it say in Scripture that they would be ceremonially unclean if they entered the judgment hall? Such a Scripture does not exist! According to their traditions, they became unclean by entering the home or precincts of a Gentile.

The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, page 568 –

“(from Chag, or Chagag, to bring the festive sacrifice usual at each of the 3 Great Feasts). There would have been no reason to fear ‘defilement’ on the morning of the Passover Sacrifice; but entrance into the Proetorium on the morning of the first Passover-day would have rendered it impossible for them to offer the Chagigah, which is also designated by the term Pesach.”

The problem here was not the Passover meal, but the offerings made during the week of Unleavens of which the priests were instructed to eat.

Another point to consider: if they were to eat the Passover meal that night, the same day Yahshua died, what were the chief priests doing? They were the ones responsible for arresting Yahshua, the ones taking Him from place to place, the ones who made the demands for His death, and they were present at the crucifixion site.

(Mark 15:31) And also the chief priests and the scribes mocking to one another said the same, He saved others; he is not able to save himself.

(Matthew 27:41-42) 41 – And in the same way the chief priests with the scribes and elders, mocking him, said, 42 – He saved others; he is not able to save himself. If he is the king of Israel, let him come down now from the cross and we shall believe him.

Now if they were to be killing the lambs that day, why were they there at the place of His crucifixion and not at the temple making preparations? There were certain duties to be carried out during the day to be ready for that event. The day the lambs were offered, the priests were to be at the temple.

The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, page 487 –

“…time for the ordinary Evening-Service and Sacrifice. Ordinarily this began about 2:30 P.M. – the daily Evening-Sacrifice being actually offered up about an hour later; but on this occasion, on account of the Feast, the Service was an hour earlier. … The Priest’s Court was filled with white-robed Priests and Levites – for on that day all the twenty-four courses were on duty, and all their services would be called for, although only in the Course for that week would that afternoon engage in the ordinary service, which preceded that of the Feast.”

Notice – “on duty”. Did that duty include being sure another human being was being sacrificed? If they were “on duty” why were they not at the temple?

SYMBOLS

Looking back at Exodus 12, what were the symbols of that first Passover? Lamb, unleavened bread and bitter herbs. That would have been the meal of which Yahshua and His disciples partook on that last Passover evening. Then He instituted something new to represent His soon-approaching sacrifice for sin – unleavened bread and wine. The unleavened bread was to represent His sinless body and the wine portrayed His blood. Wine does not appear in the instructions for that first Passover. Does it appear with any other sacrifices – along with unleavened bread or a food offering?

(Numbers 15:1-5, 11-12) 1 – And Yahweh spoke to Moses saying, 2 – Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, When you have come to the land of your dwellings, which I am giving to you, 3 – then you shall prepare a fire offering to Yahweh, a burnt offering or a sacrifice, in fulfillment of a vow, or as a free-will offering, or in your appointed seasons, to make a sweet fragrance to Yahweh, out of the herd, or out of the flock. 4 – And he who is bringing his offering to Yahweh shall bring near a food offering of flour, a tenth part, mixed with a fourth of a hin of oil; 5 – and wine for a drink offering, a fourth of a hin shall you prepare for the burnt offering, or for a sacrifice, for the one lamb. 11 – So it shall be done for one ox, or for the one ram, or for a lamb of the sheep, or of the goats. 12 – You shall prepare according to the number. So you shall do for everyone according to their number.

When sin sacrifices were offered, unleavened bread (the food or meat offering) and wine were offered as well. That is what Yahshua offered the twelve at the table. His body being offered completed the sacrifice for our sins, but not at the same time as the Passover lambs.

So does partaking of the bread and wine today bring forgiveness? No, we have seen that it was Yahshua’s blood that does that. The bread and wine are only symbols. We are simply commemorating what He has done for us – for the world.

Now let’s go back to Paul’s words in I Corinthians 5. If Yahshua is not the Passover lamb, then why does Paul say that He is? Or does he? Remember, he was not writing in English. What did he actually say?

I CORINTHIANS 5:7

First of all, look at the context of the entire chapter, at the verses above and below verse 7. Paul is talking about the people and chastising them for being puffed up – leavened – in their attitudes and sins. They have a man in the assembly openly and blatantly committing sin. This was during the Passover/Unleavens season because he says, “as you are unleavened.” The subject of the chapter is not the Passover! The subject of the chapter is about becoming unleavened, meaning to get leaven – sin – out of their midst and out of their lives.

Once again, the King James says:

(I Corinthians 5:7) Purge out therefore the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, as you are unleavened. For even Messiah our Passover is sacrificed for us.

Now let’s look at the same verse in a literal translation, not one that has been rearranged to English grammar standards. Keep in mind that Greek and Hebrew sentence structure is not the same as English. And there was no punctuation in either of those languages. Translators have added it wherever and however they saw fit.

(I Corinthians 5:7) Purge out then the old leaven that you be a new lump as you are unleavened also for the Passover of us for us was sacrificed Messiah.

Do you see any difference? Look at the last phrase carefully. Does it say that Yahshua is the Passover? No, it doesn’t. Paul states that they were to purge out the old leaven and become unleavened for the Passover/Unleavens. Then he adds a phrase at the end of that – the reminder that Messiah was already sacrificed for them – and for us. There is no other Scripture to substantiate the “doctrine” that Yahshua was the Passover lamb. Not one.

By examining the instructions for the original Passover and the sin sacrifices, as well as the Scriptures about Yahshua, it is clear that they are all different. Yahshua does not fit totally into any category. His was a separate, one-time sacrifice, never to be repeated.

But there are glimpses of Him in other sacrifices. Following are a few examples.

The blood of the Passover lamb described in Exodus was to protect the firstborn from physical death. Yahshua’s blood protects His followers – the first fruits – from spiritual death.

(John 6:53-54) 53 – Then Yahshua said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, you do not have life in yourselves. 54 – The one partaking of my flesh and drinking of my blood has everlasting life, and I will raise Him up at the last day.

(Revelation 20:6) Blessed and set apart is the one having part in the first resurrection. The second death has no authority over these, but they will be priests of Elohim and of Messiah, and will reign with Him a thousand years.

During the Days of Unleavens, the first-fruit of the barley – the wave sheaf – was offered. Yahshua was offered up as the Wave Sheaf and became the first of the first-fruits among mankind.

(Colossians 1:18) And He (Yahshua) is the head of the body, the church; who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that He be pre-eminent in all things.

(I Corinthians 15:20) But now Messiah has been raised up from the dead; He became the firstfruit of those having fallen asleep.

At Shavuot – the Feast of Weeks – the people brought offerings – first fruits of the wheat and other crops they might have. As the first of the first fruits, Yahshua redeemed His people.

(I Corinthians 15:22-23) 22 – For as all die in Adam, so also all will be made alive in Messiah, 23 – but each in his own order: Messiah, the firstfruit; afterward those of Messiah at His coming.

(Titus 2:13-14) 13 – looking for the blessed hope and appearance of the glory of our great Elohim and Savior Yahshua Messiah, 14 – who gave Himself on our behalf, that He might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify a special people for Himself, zealous of good works.

(Revelation 5:9) And they sing a new song, saying, Worthy are you to receive the scroll, and to open its seals, because you were slain, and by your blood purchased us to Elohim out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation.

(Revelation 14:1-4) 1-And I saw, and behold, the Lamb standing on Mount Zion! And with Him were a hundred and forty-four thousands, with the name of His Father having been written on their foreheads, 2-And I heard a sound out of the heaven, as a sound of many waters, and as a sound of great thunder. Also I heard a sound of harpers harping on their harps. 3-And they sing as a new song before the throne, and before the four living creatures and the elders. And no one was able to learn the song except the hundred and forty-four thousands, those having been redeemed from the earth. 4-These are the ones who were not defiled with women, for they are virgins. These are the ones following the Lamb wherever He may go. These were redeemed from among men as first-fruit to Elohim and to the Lamb.

Animals slaughtered on Atonement provided a covering for the sins of the people. Yahshua’s sacrifice was more than a covering. He blots out and removes our sins. He cleanses us.

(I John 1:7) But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of His Son Yahshua Messiah cleanses us from all sin.

(Revelation 1:5) Even from Yahshua Messiah the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him loving us and having washed us from our sins by His blood.

(Hebrews 10:1-18) 1-For the law had a shadow of the coming good things, not the image itself of those things. Appearing year by year with the same sacrifices, which they offer continually, they never are able to perfect the ones drawing near. 2-Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered because those serving did not still have conscience of sins, having once been cleansed? 3-But in these there is a remembrance of sins year by year, 4-for it is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. 5-For this reason, coming into the world, He says, Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but You prepared a body for Me. 6-You did not delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as to sins. 7-Then I said, Lo, I come, in the heading of the book, it was written concerning Me, to do your will, O Elohim. 8-Above, saying, you did not desire nor were pleased with offering and burnt offerings and sacrifices about sins, which are offered according to the law. 9-Then He said, Lo, I come to do your will, O Elohim. He takes away the first in order that He may set up the second; 10-by which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Yahshua Messiah once for all. 11-And indeed every priest stands day-by-day ministering, and often offering the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12-But He, offering but one sacrifice for sins, sat down in perpetuity at the right hand of Elohim, 13-from then on expecting until His enemies are placed as a footstool of His feet. 14-For by one offering He has perfected in perpetuity the ones being sanctified. 15-And the set-apart spirit witnesses to us also. For after having said before, 16-This is the covenant which I will covenant to them after those days, says the Master: giving my laws on their hearts, and I will write them on their minds; 17-And I will not at all still remember their sins and their lawless deeds. 18-But where forgiveness of these is, there is no longer offering concerning sins.

As seen in all these Scriptures, Yahshua’s sacrifice was unique. No others are necessary. No animal sacrifice can match – or even come close – to what He has done for us. His sacrifice has done away with the need to slaughter any animals in our worship of Elohim.

FRINGES-TASSELS & PHYLACTERIES-TEPHILLIN

2010-07-18T12:50:00.000-07:00

(The Scriptures quoted are from The Interlinear Bible, a literal translation by Jay P. Green, Sr., as general editor and translator, with the transliterated Hebrew names of the Father and Son, Yahweh and Yahshua - added.)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FRINGES AND TASSELS – WHAT?

What do people mean when they refer to fringes and/or tassels? What do the Scriptures say about them? What is their purpose? Another word used today is “tallit”. Does it appear in the Scriptures? What does Yahweh expect of us today?

HISTORICAL SOURCES

The Torah – A Modern Commentary, edited by W. Gunther Plaut –

Page 1123, regarding Numbers 15:37-41 – “The embellishment of garments with tassels and fringes appears to be older than the Bible and may be seen in pictorial representations of other peoples. [Finds from Mari show that fringes and locks of hair represented the whole person (note that in Ezek 8:3 tzitzit means ‘lock of hair’). They were required as verifications from laymen who had experienced visions and wanted to transmit them as prophetic reports. Fringes and locks of hair were also used in legal contexts as occasional substitutes for seals in signing clay documents.]”

“The Kitzur Schulchan Aruch, which lists the essentials of the Halachah, says: ‘The precept relating to fringes is great because Scriptures weighed it and ascribed it to all the commandments, as it is said: ‘Look upon it and recall all the commandments of the Lord’ (verse 39). Therefore every Jew must be careful to wear a talit katan all day. This must be made of white lamb’s wool, about three-fourths of a cubit in length and half a cubit in width; others hold that it must be a cubit square. Every man should also be careful to have a big talit with fringes, to wrap himself in while praying, and he should be particular to possess a handsome talit. Every religious act must be done in the handsomest way, as it is written: ‘This is my God, and I will glorify Him,’ and it is explained to mean: Become proud before Him when performing His commandments’.”

Page 1125 – “Gematria – The Jews’ search for a logical correlation between the talit and the commandments of God was rewarded with intriguing discoveries. The numerical value of the word tzitzit is 600. Each of the fringes contains 8 threads and 5 knots, making a total of 613. This number corresponds to the 613 commandments contained in the Torah. It was also noted that in making the fringes one winds the long thread around the other threads between the 5 knots 7, 8, 11, and 13 times respectively. The first 3 numbers equal 26, which is the numerical value of the Tetragrammaton. The remaining number 13 equals the numerical value of the word ‘one’ (echad) – the last word in the opening verse of the Shema. The fringes of the talit thus, not only remind the Jew of the 613 divine commandments, but also underscore the central doctrine of Judaism, that the Lord is one. (A. Milgram)”

Page 1486 – “The normal garment was square or oblong and had four corners. When in time different (tailored) clothes were adopted, the law was believed not to apply to them, and in order to fulfill the commandment, a special four cornered cloth with tassels (called talit) was donned during prayer. There are also observant Jews who at all times wear a “four-corners” garment (called arba kanfot), a square cloth with tassels and with a hole in the middle which is slipped over the head and is regularly worn as part of one’s clothing (usually as an undergarment). Certain groups of Orthodox Jews make sure that the fringes are seen at all times.”

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, James Orr, M.A., D. D., General Editor, volume 2,

Page 1146 – “Fringes – Tassels worn by the Israelites on the four corners of their garments as reminders of ‘all the commandments of Jehovah,’ in accordance with the law set out in Nu 15:37-41 and Dt 22:12. These tassels originally contained a thread of tekheleth, ‘violet.’ Jewish tradition, however, has failed to retain the tekheleth, because of doubt as to the exact meaning of the term, and instead dark blue lines were dyed on the borders of the tallith or garments in which the fringes were placed. According to tradition any garment having four corners required the mnemonic fringes, the importance of which was weighed against ‘all the commandments of the Lord.’ In New Testament times such garments were still worn (cf Mt 9:20; 14:36; 23:5). The later Jews, after adopting the garments of the Diaspora, in order to observe the cicith commandment began to use two extra four-cornered fringed garments: the large tallith while at prayer, and the small tallith, or arba kanphoth, as an undergarment during the day. Their tradition prescribes the exact manner in which each tassel shall be made, and gives a symbolic meaning to the number of windings and knots, somewhat after the manner of the string-writing of several early civilizations. Thus in the cicith a long cord is wrapped around seven shorter cords first seven times, then eight, then eleven, and finally thirteen, each series being separated from the others by two knots. The numbers seven and eight constituting fifteen together suggest YH, and the number eleven, WH. Together they make up the holy name YaHWeH. The number thirteen stands for ehadh, the letters of which taken as numerals equal thirteen. The sentence Yahweh ehadh means ‘Yahweh is one’.”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, volume 1,

Page 497 – “They are ordered to make fringes upon the borders of their garments, which were to be memorandums to them of their duty, that they might not sin through forgetfulness. 1. The sign appointed is a fringe of silk, or thread, or worsted, or the garment itself raveled at the bottom, and a blue ribband bound on top of it to keep it tight. 2. The intention of it was to remind them that they were a peculiar people. They were not appointed for the trimming and adorning of their clothes, but to stir up their pure minds by way of remembrance (2 Peter 3:1), that they might look upon the fringe and remember the commandments. Many look upon their ornaments to feed their pride, but they must look upon these ornaments to awaken their consciences to a sense of their duty, that their religion might constantly beset them, and that they might carry it about with them, as they did their clothes, wherever they went. If they were tempted to sin, the fringe would be a monitor to them not to break God’s commandments.”

Manners and Customs in the Bible, Victor H. Matthews –

Pages 117-119 – “Although the general style of dress for the people of Israel did not change markedly during the monarchy period, there were some shifts in costume, jewelry, and other personal items – especially among the well-to-do.”

“Designed to be draped loosely around the body, garments regulated body heat and allowed for ease of movement. They were most commonly made of wool, although linen was also used.”

“The basic dress for both men and women was the kethoneth, a shirtlike garment which is depicted in ancient art in a variety of styles. Usually made of wool, it could reach as far as the ankles or just to the knees; it might have either long or short sleeves. This garment is mentioned in the ‘Black Obelisk’ inscription of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III (842 BC). In a series of sculpted, captioned registers, Jehu, king of Israel, is depicted bowing before the king; his servants are shown carrying gifts as tribute payments.”

“Jehu is wearing a fringed kethoneth tied with a girdle which also has tassels hanging from it…. The porters have a slightly different costume. They also are wearing a kethoneth, but it is covered by a fringed simlah, or mantle, which is draped over their left shoulders.”

“The rather elaborate hems with suspended tassels found on most garments in the ancient Near East symbolized the rank of kings and their advisers as well as the military…. Hems and tassels, parts of which were dyed blue with an extract taken from the hypobranchial gland of the murex snail, were also worn as a sign of wealth among the nobility and merchant class (Ezk 23:6). Even the poor, however, were expected to have at least four blue threads in their tassels as a sign of devotion (Num 15:37-41).”

Page 233-234 – “By the time of Jesus there was no stigma attached to wearing the colobium, a long seamless tunic (Jn 19:23), with a cloak (pallium, Mt 27:31), and tassels (tsitsith) on the four corners of the hem (Mt 9:20; Mk 6:56).”

Page 235 – “Throughout the biblical period, men wore the kethoneth, a knee-length, wool tunic with half-sleeves. This was held at the waist with a belt. An over-robe or mantle (simlah) was also worn as protection against the sun and during storms.”

Biblical Literacy, Rabbi Joseph Telushkin –

On page 513 the author says that the Bible does not give a number of the laws. It is recorded in the Talmud. The scholars he refers to – Moses Maimonides and Rabbi Aaron haLevi – did not do their counting and research until the twelfth and thirteenth centuries respectively.

Page 480 – “ ‘Numbers 15:39, which almost always is rendered in a sanitized translation, literally reads: ‘…Look at it (the fringe) and recall all the commandments of the Lord and observe them, so that you do not follow your heart and eyes after which you go whoring’ (in Hebrew, zonim acha-rei-hem)’.”

Page 481 – “If the goal of tzitzit is to remind all Jews to observe God’s laws, then why is the commandment restricted to males? Indeed, the Torah does not mandate such a restriction (it speaks of it as obligatory for the ‘Israelite people’). However, by the time of the Talmud, the Rabbis ruled that tzitzit are not obligatory for women. Perhaps the rationale was that women were more homebound than men, and thus less likely to come into contact with the sort of temptations that tzitzit were intended to guard against (in addition, the wearing of tzitzit was only mandated during the day, when they could be seen, and women were generally exempt from fulfilling such time-bound commandments (Babylonian Talmud, Menachot 43a).”

Illustrated Manners and Customs of the Bible, J I Packer and M C Tenney, editors –

Page 480 – “The Hebrew men wore an ‘outer garment’ consisting of a square or oblong strip of cloth, 2 to 3 m. (80 to 120 in.) wide. This garment (me’yil) was called the coat, robe, or mantle. It was wrapped around the body as a protective covering, with two corners of the material being in front. The outer garment was drawn in close to the body by a girdle. Sometimes the Israelites decorated the girdle of this outer garment with rich and beautiful ornaments of metal, precious stones, or embroidery. The poor man used this outer garment as his bed clothing (Exod. 22:26-27). The rich often had a finely woven outer garment, and the poor a coarsely woven garment of goat’s hair.”

“Jewish men wore fringes with blue ribbons on the ‘border’ (hemline) of this outer garment (Num 15:38). The fringes reminded them of the constant presence of the Lord’s commandments. Jesus referred to these fringes in Matthew 23:5; apparently, the scribes and Pharisees made these fringes very large so that people could see how faithful they were in doing the Lord’s commandments.”

Page 482 – “The Hebrew woman’s outer garment differed from that of the man. It was longer, with enough border and fringe to cover the feet (Isa. 47:2; Jer. 13:22).”

The First Jewish Catalog, Richard Siegel, Michael Strassfeld, Sharon Strassfeld –

Page 51 – “The tallit is the prayer shawl worn by married men in Orthodox synagogues, and by all males past the age of Bar Mitzvah in Conservative and Reform synagogues. It is a composite garment consisting of two main parts, the garment itself and the tzitzit – fringes on the corners which transform the garment from a piece of cloth to a tallit.”

“Women are not obligated to wear a tallit, nor are they prohibited from wearing one.”

Page 52 – “While the large tallit is used specifically for prayer, it is a mitzvah in itself to wear a garment with tzitzit all day. Traditionally Jews, therefore wear a tallit katan – small tallit – all day and a large tallit just for morning prayers.”

“The tallit is not worn at night because the mitzvah stipulates that one should see the tzitzit. (The implication is that this should be seen by light of day, not by artificial light.)”

“The tzitzit have to be at the corners; but there is a question as to where the corner is on a four-cornered piece of material. A general guide is that the hole be three or four fingerbreadths from the corner edges.”

Page 53 – “In Gematria, tzitzit = 600. In addition there are eight strands plus five knots. The total is 613 – which, according to tradition, is the exact number of commandments – mitzvot – in the Torah. Just to look at them, therefore, is to remember all the mitzvot.”

Everyman’s Talmud, Abraham Cohen,

Page 153 – “The purpose of the fringe is described in the verse, ‘That ye may look upon it and remember all the commandments of the Lord and do them’ (Num. Xv. 39), on which the Talmud remarks, ‘This ordinance is equal to all the precepts, because seeing leads to remembering and remembering to performing’ (Men. 43b). An instance is quoted in the context of a man who was saved from acting immorally by the reminder he received from the fringe on his garment (ibid. 44a). Hence it was taught: ‘Whoever is particular with this ordinance is worthy of receiving the presence of the Shechinah’ (ibid. 43b). ‘The text does not read “Ye may look upon them,” but “look upon Him,” thus declaring that whoever fulfills the law of the fringe is accounted as though he had received the presence of the Shechinah, since the colour of the blue thread resembled the colour of the sea which is like that of the firmament and in turn is like that of the Throne of Glory’ (Sifre Num 115; 34b). The meaning is that the understanding use of the fringe kept a person’s life pure, and so brought him into closer communication with God.”

“Here, too, we find a superstitious value attached to the religious rite as a protective force. The neglect of the wearing of the fringe, as well as the omission to fasten the Mezuzah to the doorpost, caused death among one’s children (Shab. 32b); and conversely, ‘Whoever scrupulously observed the law of the fringe was worthy that two thousand eight hundred servants should attend upon him; as it is written, “Thus saith the Lord of hosts, In those days shall ten men of all the languages of the nations take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you for we have heard that God is with you” (Zech. Viii, 23’ (ibid.).”

Journey Through Judaism, Alan D Bennett, editor,

Pages 25-26 – “Just as the mezuzah is a reminder to walk in the right path, so tzitzit serve to ‘remember all the commandments of God and do them…’ (Numbers 15:39). How do the tzitzit serve as reminders of all the commandments? Here we have to revert to gematria. The numerical value of tzitzit is 600. But there are 613 commandments. The difference is made up by the eight threads and five knots. Originally one of the threads (fringes) was blue ‘because this color resembles the sea, and the sea resembles the sky, and the sky resembles the throne of glory’ (Menachot 443b). But this was discontinued because the process of getting the proper shading of blue was lost and the rabbis forbade its use. So the blue was introduced as stripes in the talit, which later inspired the blue and white colors of the Jewish flag.

“The Bible requires that men wear fringes on four-cornered garments. When this type of garment went out of style, the wearing of tzitzit was endangered. So a special four-cornered garment was introduced to allow observance of this mitzvah. Worn under a shirt at all times, this garment is called a talit katan (a miniature talit) or arba kanfot (four-cornered garment), not to be confused with the talit.

“The large talit originated as a distinctive garb for the rabbi, much as an academic robe identifies a scholar. In time the lay leaders took a fancy to it and eventually the rest of the male population began to wear it at worship services. In Eastern Europe only married men wore it, enabling the women to know which men were eligible. Today Orthodox Jewish males over thirteen years of age wear the talit as a sign of adulthood. So important is the talit to Orthodox Jews that it is a gift generally bought by grandparents for the Bar Mitzvah and by in-laws from the groom. An Orthodox Jew is buried in a talit. Among Reform Jews the wearing of a talit is optional, though very few choose that option. But Reform rabbis often wear a talit-like garment called an atorah over their rabbinic robes.

“The talit certainly is a distinctive Jewish symbol. Why it captured the imagination of the Jew remains as mysterious as the adoption of tefilin as a unique Jewish symbol.”

To Be A Jew, Rabbi Hayim Halevy Donin –

Page 155 – “Garments not possessing four or more corners are not required to have special fringes.”

Page 156 – “Although in ancient times four-cornered garments or robes were common, the development of clothing not having four corners would have rendered this mitzvah totally obsolete, with the full sanction of the law. To prevent the total disappearance of a mitzvah that possessed such great symbolic significance (since it serves as a reminder to observe all the commandments), the Sages encouraged the wearing of specially-made four-cornered garments so as to provide the opportunity to observe and implement this commandment.”

“The tallit, a four-cornered robe with the required tzitzit, has thus become the garment traditionally worn by men during morning prayer services. In English, it is commonly called a ‘prayer shawl’.”

“It is the fringes (tzitzit) on the four corners of the tallit that provide it with its religious significance. The rest of its design, whether simple or elaborate, colorful or plain, rich in embroidered Jewish religious symbols or lacking them, is only incidental to its primary use for the observance of the mitzvah of ‘putting tzitzit on the corners of your garments so that you may look upon them and remember to do all the commandments of the Lord…’”

“The shorter fringes found along the two sides of many tallitot (plural) are not tzitzit, but only ornaments and have no particular significance.”

Page 159 – “The specific instructions as to how the tzitzit are tied to the tallit are not found in the Written Torah, but have been handed down by the Oral Torah. The Shulhan Arukh describes it in detail. There is much mystical as well as symbolic meanings attached to the procedure. For example, the 39 windings that go into the making of each of the four fringes equals the numerical value of the Hebrew words for ‘The Lord is One’.”

www.tekhelet.co.il/guide.htm --

If you’re curious, check out the website. Or put the word “tzitzit” into the Internet search engine. You will be amazed at how many various ways there are of tying the tassels. Now, who is right? Who has the authority? How would you know for sure if Yahweh specified one of them or another? You don’t!

Oxford Concise Companion to the Jewish Religion, Louis Jacobs –

Page 258 – “Tallit – The robe with which the worshipper is wrapped during prayer and hence often referred to as a ‘prayer shawl,’ though this is not the traditional Jewish name for the garment, which was not originally associated particularly with prayer. In the book of Numbers (15:37-40), the Israelites are commanded to put tzitzit (‘fringes’) on their garments in order to remind them of God’s laws. But in the book of Deuteronomy (22:12) it is stated that these fringes have to be placed on the four corners of the garment, from which the Rabbis conclude that only four-cornered garments have to have tzitzit affixed to them. In Talmudic times people wore four-cornered garments and to these tzitzit were attached. In fact, the word tallit, of uncertain etymology, simply means a robe or a cloak (some connect the word with the Latin stola). The sole significance of the tallit was in the tzitzit. The tallit itself had no religious significance. The result was that in Europe in the Middle Ages, where people did not wear four-cornered garments, the precept of tzitzit was in danger of being forgotten. To prevent this the Jews took it upon themselves to wear a four-cornered garment to which they would be obliged to attach the tzitzit and thus restore a precept that was in danger of vanishing from Jewish life. This specific four-cornered garment was given the name tallit on the analogy of the four-cornered garment worn in ancient times. Strictly speaking, the precept of the tzitzit has to be carried out for the whole of the day but since Jews could hardly go about wearing such an unusual garment as the tallit all day, the wearing of the tallit was limited to the time of the morning prayers.”

Page 283 – “Tzitzit – The fringes the Israelites were commanded to put in the corners of their garments: ‘Speak to the children of Israel, and bid them that they make throughout their generations fringes [tzitzit] in the corners of their garments’ (Numbers 15:38). The tzitzit are now placed in the special tallit worn during prayer. The insertion of the tzitzit in the tallit is as follows. Four threads, one longer than the other three, are inserted in a hole at the corner of the tallit and then doubled over to form threads of equal length and one longer one at the right-hand side. The threads of the two sides are tied in a double knot. The longer thread is then wound around the others seven times and a further double knot is made. The longer thread is then wound around eight times and another double knot is made. A third winding is then made eleven times and a double knot is made, and then there is a winding of thirteen and the last of the double knots is made. It is desirable that after the windings and the knots have been made, all eight threads are of equal length.”

“The symbolism of all this has been variously interpreted. Thus, on one view, the Hebrew word tzitzit has the numerical value of 600 (tzaddi = 90; yod = 10; tzaddi = 90; yod = 10; tav = 400; = 600 in total). When the eight threads and the five knots are added there is a total of 613, corresponding to the 613 precepts of the Torah. In another version, the eight threads correspond to the eight days that elapsed from the Israelites leaving Egypt until they sang the song of deliverance at the sea (Exodus 15). The five knots correspond to the five books of Moses (the Pentateuch). The numerical value of the Hebrew for ‘the Lord is One’ in the Shema is 39 and this is represented by the total of the windings (7+8+11++13=39). Since the tzitzit are on all four corners of the tallit they act as a reminder to Jews to acknowledge God and His Torah at every turn.”

http://www.templesanjose.org/JudaismInfo/faq/tallit.htm

“The tallit (also spelled tallis or talith) is a garment one can wear to create a sense of personal space during prayer - the name comes from two Hebrew words: TAL meaning tent and ITH meaning little. Thus, you have an etymology of LITTLE TENT. By wrapping yourself in it, or by covering your head with it, the intention and direction of your prayers can be enhanced. The tradition is that the tallit is worn only during the morning prayers, except for the Kol Nidre service during Yom Kippur. The garment can be made out of linen, wool, silk or synthetics, so long as the biblical prohibition against the wearing of clothing combining linen and wool is observed.”

“How to put on a Tallit”

“Open tallit and hold in both hands so you can see atarah (the collar band on which the blessing is often embroidered.

Recite the berachah

Kiss the end of atarah where the last word of the blessing is embroidered, and then and beginning where the first word is.

Wrap the tallit around your shoulders, holding it over your head for a moment of private meditation.

Adjust the tallit on your shoulders comfortably.”

“Kissing the Tzitzit”

“There are several times during the service when people kiss the Tzitzit symbolically. First is during the recitation of the third paragraph of the Shema (Numbers 15:37-41) which mentions the Tzitzit three times. As the worshiper reads the word “Tzitzit,” it is customary to kiss the Tzitzit, which were gathered together in one hand prior to reciting the Shema.”

“When the Torah is removed from the Ark and carried around the synagogue in a Hakafah (procession), those within reach touch the Torah mantle with Tzitzit (if they are wearing a tallit) or a siddur (prayerbook) if they are not. They then kiss the Tzitzit or siddur which touched the Torah scroll. This is an expression of love and affection for the great gift which Torah is to our people.”

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Understanding Judaism, Rabbi Benjamin Blech,

Pages 302-304 – “Tzitzit turn simple clothing into a uniform with a special insignia, like soldiers in the army who know they owe allegiance to a higher authority.”

“The law in the Bible is pretty clear. The tzitzit are put on garments that have four corners. What do we do when our clothes aren’t made that way?”

“The simple answer might be then that we don’t have to wear fringes. But that would deprive us of a mitzvah and risk the chance that a biblical law might just disappear.”

“A tallit is the special prayer shawl worn at services. Actually, it’s simply a four-cornered garment put over our clothing that, because of its shape, can legally have tzitzit attached. It’s usually large enough for the person wearing it to wrap it around the body.”

“After death, there is a tradition to be buried wrapped in the tallit that one wore during one’s lifetime. It’s a way of demonstrating that we go to the other world dressed for our meeting with God in the same way we always encountered Him here on Earth.”

“The substitute for a tallit is a smaller item of clothing known, appropriately enough, as tallit katan – a little tallit. Usually worn by traditional Jews under their shirts, the tallit kattan also has four corners and fringes and is worn throughout the day.”

There are not a lot of verses in the Scriptures that pertain to this subject. So let’s check out each of them, one at a time.

EXODUS 22: 26-27 26–If you indeed take the clothing of your neighbor as a pledge, you shall return it to him by the going of the sun. 27–for that is his only covering, that is his covering for his skin. In what shall he lie down? And it shall be, when he cries to Me, I will hear, for I am compassionate.

In ancient times, the people did not have separate day and night clothes. They simply lived in their clothes, wearing them to bed at night. The cloak that they wrapped around themselves during the day was the cover they spread over themselves at night. It was also used as collateral if they borrowed something, as a guarantee of their word. But Yahweh said they were to have it back at night for a covering. Apparently they did not have sheets, blankets or quilts.

In those days, clothes were more valuable than now. They had very few of them, for one thing. But think what went into that garment. The people – usually the women – had to take the wool or flax and clean it, spin it into thread, take the threads and weave the cloth before making the clothing. A lot of time-consuming labor went into each garment – something we in today’s society do not understand. Clothing was not something to be taken lightly at that time.

NUMBERS 15: 37-41 37–And Yahweh spoke to Moses, saying, 38–Speak to the sons of Israel and you shall tell them that they shall make themselves fringes on the corners of their garments for their generations, and they shall put with the fringe of each corner a thread of blue. 39–And it shall be to you for a fringe, that you may look upon it, and remember all the commandments of Yahweh, and do them; and that you do not go about after your own heart and your own eyes, after which you usually go astray. 40–that you may remember and do all My commandments, and be holy to your Elohim. 41–I am Yahweh your Elohim, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, to be your Elohim; I am Yahweh your Elohim.

These fringes or tassels were to be a part of their garments – the ones they wore daily. Remember, they did not have a whole closet full of clothes to deal with then.

“Fringes” is Hebrew #6734 tzitzit and it means a floral or wing-like projection; i.e. a fore-lock of hair, a tassel; a fringe. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

What do you think of when someone talks about a fore-lock of hair or a fringe of hair? It certainly isn’t twisted and knotted, is it? It is usually a fore-lock – a small amount of hair – that stands up or hangs down or doesn’t do what the person usually wants it to do. A good description of a fringe of hair is a little girl’s or woman’s bangs. It is just a fringe around the top of the face – not all the hair. It is not knotted or twisted either. Bangs are usually straight, with sometimes a little curl to them.

The word “corners” is Hebrew #3671, kanaph, which means an edge or extremity; spec (of a bird or arm) a wing, (of a garment or bed-clothing) a flap, (of the earth) a quarter, (of a building) a pinnacle. (Strong’s Hebrew –Greek Dictionary)

DEUTERONOMY 22:12 You shall make tassels for yourself on the four corners of your cloak with which you cover.

“Tassels” is Hebrew #1434, gedil, and is defined in the sense of twisting; thread, i.e. a tassel or festoon; fringe, wreath. (Strong’s Hebrew –Greek Dictionary)

So does this definition include the twisting and knotting of the thread into the tassels? Think about it. How is thread made? By twisting! The fibers are twisted into thread by spinning.

The Hebrew word #3682, kesoot, translated “cloak” means a cover (garment); fig. a veiling; covering, raiment, vesture. (Strong’s Hebrew –Greek Dictionary)

MATTHEW 9:20 And, behold, a woman who had a flow of blood for twelve years came near, behind Him, and touched the fringe of His robe.

MATTHEW 14:36 And they begged Him that they might touch the fringe of His robe. And as many as touched were made perfectly well.

In these two verses, the word “fringe” is the Greek #2899, kraspedon. It means a the extremity or prominent part of a thing, edge, skirt; margin, i.e. (spec) a fringe or tassel; border, hem. (Strong’s Hebrew –Greek Dictionary)

The word “robe” is not as clear as what we think of in English when we use that word. We usually think of something we wrap around ourselves before going to bed or before getting dressed each morning or after taking a shower. The Greek word #2440, himation, can be translated as any of the following: dress (inner or outer), apparel, cloke, clothes, garment, raiment, robe, vesture. (Strong’s Hebrew –Greek Dictionary)

Was this fringe referred to about ankle level? Did they have to bend over to reach it? Or was it higher? On the front or the back? Only on the corners or all along the edges (hems)?

MATTHEW 23:5 And they do all their works to be seen by men. And they make their phylacteries broad, and enlarge the borders of their robes.

Yahshua was condemning their attitude of trying to appear more righteous than others. In their eyes, the bigger and longer the fringe and/or tassels, the more righteous they felt they were. It had to do with their outward appearance of righteousness, not their heart.

JOHN 19:23 Then when they crucified Yahshua, the soldiers took His garments and made four parts, a part to each soldier; also the robe. And the robe was seamless, woven from the top throughout.

Notice this says “garments” and “also” the robe. Which one had the fringe? Only one of them? Or all of them? What proof is there either way?

POSSIBILITY?

In looking at the Hebrew, it says to “make” a fringe, not to “add” a fringe. On today’s tallit it is added. It would not be if just left as it came off the loom.

The Hebrew also says to “put on the fringe” of the garment “a thread of blue”. It is put on (the Hebrew word al) the fringe, not made into a tassel and knotted and added to the corners only.

In research, there is one explanation for all this that seems most logical, and the simplest. The clothing was like that described earlier – a large rectangle of cloth with an opening in the middle to slip over the head. On each side of the body, the back sides would be pulled forward and the front sides pulled over them (or vice versa). Then it would be secured with a girdle (a long, narrow strip of fabric) around the waist. There would be a fringe on all four sides, made when the treads were cut loose from the loom. The blue thread was put around all four sides and would prevent the edges from raveling further. Thus there would be a four-cornered, fringed garment with a blue thread with very little added work on the part of the weaver/garment-maker.

FOR CONSIDERATION

Where is the Scripture that defines the type of cloth to be used? Wool or silk?
Where is the Scripture that defines the size of the tallit? Large enough to wrap in or small enough to go under a shirt or blouse?
Scripture mentions a blue thread, but where is the Scripture that specifies four white threads? Why not more? Why not an equal number? Wouldn’t bigger tassels be better?
Do the Scriptures refer to an inner or outer garment having the fringe? Or both?
If they were to wear these to remind them to follow His laws, would it seem logical to give that particular garment to someone as a pledge? If it were, then the borrower would not have with him the reminder to observe the law.
Note there are sources that say the Sages encouraged the design and wearing of the tallit. What Scripture tells us to follow the Sages?
Numerous references say that the tallit was designed so that the tassels would continue after clothing styles changed. So then the tallit cannot be what the children of Israel were wearing! The design of the tallit comes from tradition – not Scripture. Are we to follow the traditions of men?
What is gematria? Where did it originate and when?
Where is the gematria part of the fringes in Scripture?
If it is to remind a person of the law of Yahweh, why isn’t it worn all the time?
Where did the concept of the 613 laws come from? Did Moses count them as Yahweh gave them? No, they weren’t counted and categorized until the 12^th or 13^th century – A.D.!
For yourself, sometime check out the 613 that the Jews list. Are all of them “Yahweh says”? Or have some been stretched to get that number?
Where in Scriptures are the wrapping and knots in the tassels? It isn’t there – it is from mysticism!
Although we are told that the word “tallit” means “little tent”, that word itself does not appear in the Scriptures.
Yahweh had a reason for these fringes. They were not simply to be an ornament as many look on them.
A man who wore tassels on his belt loops said they made great conversation pieces. Again, is that the purpose Yahweh had in mind?
These fringes and tassels were to remind the individual of Yahweh’s laws – not the rest of the world. So shouldn’t it be something more personal and private, not something to enlarge and show off to everyone?
The command refers to “garment”, not a piece of fabric thrown around the shoulders for services or prayers.
One of the quotes said men should have a “handsome” tallit and that he should “become proud before Him when performing His commandments.” But wait! Aren’t we to appear before Yahweh in humility?
In the quote from Everyman’s Talmud, it translates a part of Numbers 15:39 as “ye may look on Him,” rather than the fringe. In Hebrew, everything is either male or female – there is no neuter gender. The word they translate as “Him” can also be translated as “it” – the fringe.
Do Scriptures mention a collar or embroidery?
What berachah (blessing)? Is it Scriptural or man-made in origin?
Do Scriptures mention kissing the fringes or anything else?
Does Scripture say anything about a procession with the Torah around the Synagogue?
Does Scripture say that the Shema is to be recited a specific number of times a day? Or at all?
In all the quotes from various writers, how much attention is given to “tradition”?

Looking at the way in which the tallit is approached, it has practically become an object of worship. It is kissed before being put on and a blessing is said. Did the ancient Israelites do that with their daily clothing? Probably not – it was simply clothing.

CONCLUSIONS

It seems obvious that the tallit is not what Yahweh was referring to in Numbers and Deuteronomy. Our clothing styles today are different and are not four-sided garments. So how do we apply these instructions today? Some make tassels and pin them at four different points of their garment of today. But that isn’t right either – according to Scripture, the garment itself was to be four-sided.

With baptism and the laying on of hands, we should have the presence of Yahweh’s Set-apart Spirit in our minds. He is to bring all things to our remembrance. This is something the ancient Israelites did not have. We are to have His laws in our hearts. We should be able to remember His laws without a physical, visible reminder to do so.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PHYLACTERIES / TEPHILLIN

In reading and studying, I understood what phylacteries or tephillin were and I had seen pictures or diagrams of them. But I never saw them in use until we were on an El Al flight to Israel in 1999. About sunrise, the religious Jewish men got up from their seats, put on these items and their tallits and went to certain areas of the plane to face towards Jerusalem and conduct their morning prayers. It was like watching a performance on stage to see all the things they went through, step by step.

Where do these objects come from? Does Yahweh require them? What are they?

The words “phylacteries” or “tephillin” do not appear in the Old Testament. Only once it appears in the New Testament. The word “phylacteries” is the Greek #5440, phulakterion, meaning a guard-case, i.e. ‘phylactery’ for wearing slips of Scriptural texts. (Strong’s Hebrew –Greek Dictionary)

These four sets of Scriptures are the ones that the Jews use to back up their use of tephillin. A tiny scroll of each of these is what will be found within the boxes on the tephillin.

EXODUS 13:1-16 1-And Yahweh spoke unto Moses, saying, 2-Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever opens the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine. 3-And Moses said unto the people, Remember this day in which you came out from Egypt, out of the house of bondage; for by strength of hand Yahweh brought you out from this place: there shall no leaven be eaten. 4-This day you came out in the month of the aviv. 5-And it shall be when Yahweh shall bring you into the land of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, which he swore unto your fathers to give you, a land flowing with milk and honey, that you shall keep this service in this month. 6-Seven days you shall eat unleavens, and in the seventh day shall be a feast to you. 7-Unleavens shall be eaten seven days; and there shall no leaven be seen with you, neither shall there be leaven seen with you in all your quarters. 8-And you shall show your son in that day, saying, This is done because of that which Yahweh did unto me when I came forth out of Egypt. 9-And it shall be for a sign unto you upon your hand, and for a memorial between your eyes, that Yahweh’s law may be in your mouth: for with a strong hand has Yahweh brought you out of Egypt. 10-You shall therefore keep this ordinance in his season from year to year. 11-And it shall be when Yahweh shall bring you into the land of the Canaanites, as he swore unto you and to your fathers, and shall give it you, 12-That you shall set apart unto Yahweh all that opens the matrix, and every firstling that comes of a beast which you have; the males shall be Yahweh’s. 13-And every firstling of an ass you shall redeem with a lamb; and if you will not redeem it, then you shall break his neck: and all the firstborn of man among your children shall you redeem. 14-And it shall be when your son asks you in time to come, saying, What is this? that you shall say unto him, By strength of hand Yahweh brought us out from Egypt, from the house of bondage: 15-and it came to pass when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that Yahweh slew all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of beast: therefore I sacrifice to Yahweh all that opens the matrix, being males; but all the firstborn of my children I redeem. 16-And it shall be for a token upon your hand, and for frontlets between your eyes: for by strength of hand Yahweh brought us forth out of Egypt.

DEUTERONOMY 6:4-9 4-Hear, O Israel, Yahweh your Elohim, Yahweh is one; 5-And you shall love Yahweh your Elohim with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. 6-And these words, which I command you this day, shall be in your heart; 7-and you shall teach them diligently unto your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise up. 8-and you shall bind them for a sign upon your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. 9-And you shall write them upon the posts of your house, and on your gates.

DEUTERONOMY 11:13-21 13-And it shall come to pass, if you shall hearken diligently unto my commands which I command you this day, to love Yahweh your Elohim, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul, 14-that I will give you the rain of your land in his due season, and the first rain and the latter rain, that you may gather in your grain, and your wine, and your oil. 15-And I will send grass in your fields for your cattle, that you may eat and be full. 16-Take heed to yourselves, that your heart be not deceived, and you turn aside, and serve other gods, and worship them: 17-and then Yahweh’s wrath be kindled against you, and he shut up the heaven, that there be no rain, and that the land yield not her fruits and lest you perish quickly from off the good land which Yahweh gives you. 18-Therefore you shall lay up these my words in your heart and in your soul, and bind them for a sign upon your hand, that they may be as frontlets between your eyes. 19-And you shall teach them to your children, speaking of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up. 20-And you shall write them upon the door posts of your house, and upon your gates: 21-That your days may be multiplied, and the days of your children in the land which Yahweh swore unto your fathers to give them, as the days of heaven upon the earth.

That’s it, for instructions from the Torah. Now let’s look to see how those Scriptures were used and interpreted and what they did to try to follow what they believed to be right.

HISTORICAL SOURCES

Journey Through Judaism, Alan D Bennett, editor,

Page 126 – “Archeologists discovered tefilin in the Bar Kochba caves, which makes their use at least two thousand years old. Orthodox and Conservative males are required to put on tefilin (leather boxes with straps for head and arm containing parchment scrolls of selected biblical passages) once they reach the age of thirteen years and one day. Though the requirement of wearing tefilin is ascribed to four biblical passages, this mitzvah is derived from the commandment ‘and you shall tie them for a sign upon your hand and they shall be for frontlets [or memorials] between your eyes’ (Deuteronomy 6:8). However, whether this really means tefilin as we know it today is a matter of dispute.”

The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, Dr J H Hertz, C H, editor,

Page 261 – “The reminders on arm and forehead are called tephillin, a late Hebrew plural of tephillah, prayer. Four sections from the Torah (Ex. XIII, 1-10, 11-16; Deut. VI, 4-9 and XI, 13-21) are in the tephillin; and ‘these four sections have been chosen in preference to all the other passages of the Torah, because they enhance the acceptance of the Kingdom of Heaven, the unity of the Creator, and the exodus from Egypt – fundamental doctrines of Judaism’. (Sefer ha-Chenuch.) The purpose of the tephillin is given in the Meditation recited before putting on the tephillin (Authorised Prayer Book, p. 15): - ‘Within these Tephillin are placed four sections of the Law, that declare the absolute unity of God, and that remind us of the miracles and wonders which He wrought for us when He brought us forth from Egypt, even He who hath power over the highest and lowest to deal with them according to His will. He hath commanded us to lay the Tephillin on the hand as a memorial of His outstretched arm; opposite the heart, to indicate the duty of subjecting the longings and designs of our heart to His service, blessed be He; and upon the head over against the brain, thereby teaching that the mind, whose seat is in the brain, together with all senses and faculties, is to be subjected to His service, blessed be He’.”

“The tephillin are not worn at night, nor on Sabbaths or Festivals, as these are themselves called ‘a sign’ of the great truths symbolized by the tephillin. The commandment of tephillin applies to all male persons from their thirteenth birthday, when they attain their religious majority (Barmitzvah). On the Sabbath following that birthday, the Barmitzvah is called to the Law, publicly to acknowledge God as the Giver of the Torah.”

The Torah: A Modern Commentary, W Gunther Plaut, editor,

Page 472 – “Tefillin is the postbiblical Hebrew term for two small boxes containing Torah passages written on pieces of parchment, with leather bands attached to the boxes in such a way that one may be worn on the forehead, between the eyes, and the other tied to the arm. Tefillin (from tefillah, prayer) is the name of a small tractate in the Talmud that assembles the relevant prescriptions of tradition.

“The Torah demands four times that words of the law be put as signs on the hand and as frontlets (or symbols) between the eyes (or on the forehead). Just what the Torah itself had in mind when these admonitions were set down can no longer be ascertained. They may have implied a demonstrative display similar to that of the mezuzah (with which they are linked in Deut. 6:8-9) or they have been meant figuratively, as was maintained as late as in the Middle Ages by the Rashbam (Rabbi Samuel ben Meir, in his commentary on the Torah.). These commandments, he writes, ‘shall be for you a reminder as if they were written on your hand. They are to be taken [fig] just as in ‘Set me as a seal upon your heart’ (Song of Solomon 8:6). At any rate, the custom of writing down some representative laws which could then be worn goes back to ancient days and may be connected with ideas that the wearing would have some prophylactic effect similar to that of amulets, or perhaps would show the wearer’s membership in a sacred community. The Rabbis still had a tradition, however, that made it clear that some regulations pertaining to the tefillin were a post-Torah development, and they held that such rules went back only to the soferim (scribes), that is, to the early teachers of the Oral Law, but no farther.”

“…traditional Judaism has stressed the great spiritual importance of carrying out the commandments. Says Maimonides: ‘The sanctity of tefillin is very great. So long as the tefillin are on the head and arm of a man, he is modest and God-fearing … and will devote his thoughts to truth and righteousness’.”

Illustrated Manners and Customs of the Bible, J I Packer and M C Tenney, editors,

Page 482 – “To counter the idolatrous practice of wearing amulets, Hebrew men began wearing phylacteries. There were two kinds of phylacteries: one worn on the forehead between the eyebrows, and one worn on the left arm. The one worn on the forehead was called a frontlet. It had four compartments, each of which contained a piece of parchment. On the first was written Exodus 13:1-10, on the second was written Exodus 13:11-16, on the third was written Deuteronomy 6:4-9, and on the fourth, Deuteronomy 11:13-21. These four pieces of paper were wrapped in animal skin, making a square package. This small bundle was then tied to the forehead with a thong or ribbon.”

“The phylactery worn on a man’s arm was made of two rolls of parchment, on which the laws were written in special ink. The parchment was partially rolled up, enclosed in a case of black calfskin, and tied with a thong to the upper left arm near the elbow. The thong was then wound crisscross around the arm, ending at the top of the middle finger.”

Commentary on the Old and New Testaments, Robert Jamieson, A R Fausset and David Brown,

Page 638, regarding Exodus 13:9 – “and … frontlets between their eyes – for bands or fillets, particularly strips of parchment, containing sentences from the Mosaic law, which the Israelites wound round the forehead. Perhaps Moses meant the metaphorical language in the eighth verse to be taken in the same sense also. But as the Israelites interpreted it literally many writers suppose that a reference was made to a superstitious custom borrowed from the Egyptians, who wore jewels and ornamental trinkets on the forehead and arm, inscribed with certain words and sentences, as amulets to protect them from danger. These, it has been conjectured, Moses intended to supersede by substituting sentences of the law and so the Hebrews understood him, for they have always considered the wearing of the Tephilim, or frontlets, a permanent obligation.”

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, James Orr, M.A., D. D., General Editor, volume 4,

Page 2393 – “It may be rendered then as a mark or ornament or jewel, and used figuratively of Jehovah’s Law as an ornament or jewel to the forehead of the Israelite, a reference to the charm or amulet worn by the pagan. The word used in the Talmud for the phylactery is tephillah, ‘prayer,’ or ‘prayer-band’, indicating its use theoretically as a reminder of the Law, although practically it might be esteemed as an automatic and ever-present charm against evil: an aid within toward the keeping of the Law, a guard without against the approach of evil; a degradation of an Old Testament figurative and idealistic phrase to the materialistic and superstitious practices of the pagans.”

“It is evident that the words in Exodus are beyond all question used figuratively; a careful reading of the verses in Deuteronomy in close relation to their contexts, in which are other figures of speech not to be taken literally, is sufficient proof of their purely figurative intention also. Only the formalism of later ages could distort these figures into the gross and materialistic practices of the phylactery. Just when this practice began cannot accurately be determined. While the Talmud attempts to trace it back to the primitive, even Mosaic, times, it probably did not long ante-date the birth of Christ.”

“In the New Testament passage (Mt 23:5) Our Lord rebukes the Pharisees, who make more pronounced the un-Scriptural formalism and the crude literalism of the phylacteries by making them obtrusively large, as they also seek notoriety for their religiosity by the enlarged fringes, or ‘borders’.”

Everyman’s Talmud, Abraham Cohen,

Page 153 – “Their purpose was to make the precepts of the Torah a controlling and guiding force in life, so that the ideals of Judaism should mould the thoughts and direct the actions of man.”

To Be A Jew, Rabbi Hayim Halevy Donin,

Page 151 – “If a person has no tefillin and enters a synagogue to join the congregation in prayer, it is preferable that he wait until after the services and borrow a pair of tefillin from another worshipper so that he may at least read the Shema and the Amidah while wearing tefillin, rather than pray with the congregation without tefillin.”

“The tefillin is part of the religious uniform worn by adult males during the weekday morning service. To engage in morning weekday prayers without them is a mark of disrespect. It is to approach the Lord, as a soldier in the army of God, improperly attired… To deliberately refuse to put on tefillin while reciting the Shema; where the commandment to put on tefillin appears twice, is looked upon as an act of arrogant contempt before the Lord. The Sages said: ‘Whoever recites the Shema without tefillin, it is as if he bears false witness against himself,’ i.e., accuses himself of falsehood (Brakhot 14b).”

“When the tefillin are put on, a male Jew testifies to his identification with the Jewish past, its present, and its future. Whether one prays in the synagogue or in the privacy of one’s own home, tefillin is a required daily weekday observance.”

http:///www.karaite-korner.org/tefillin.shtml

“…in reality the Karaites and Sadducees never wore Tefillin at all, let alone between their eyes because this is simply not what the verse is talking about. One Rabbinite polemicist asked, ’How can you Karaites know how to make Tefillin without all the specifications laid down in the “Oral Law”?’. The answer is we can not because the “Oral Torah” made the whole thing up.”

“The brilliant Rabbanite commentator Rashbam (Rashi’s grandson) was wise enough to realize the true meaning of this expression. Commenting on the verse ‘And it shall be for a sign upon your hand and a remembrance (Zicharon) between your eyes’ he writes:

“ ‘For a sign upon your hand’ According to its plain meaning (Omek Peshuto), ‘It shall be remembered always AS IF it had been written upon your hand’ SIMILAR TO ‘he put me as a seal upon your heart’ (Cant 8,6). ‘Between your eyes’, LIKE a piece of jewelry or gold chain which people put on the forehead for decoration’ (Rashbam on Ex 13,9).”

“Rashi’s grandson rightfully interprets the ‘Tefillin passage’ as a metaphor which demands that we remember the Torah always and treasure it like a piece of fine jewelry. Rashbam and the Karaites realize that not everything in the Torah is to be taken literally as a command. The classic example of this is ‘And you shall circumcise the foreskin of your heart’ (Dt 10,16). Obviously God is not commanding mass suicide but is rather commanding us to figuratively circumcise the foreskin of our hearts, i.e. remove our impurity and stubbornness and commit to his covenant with our hearts.”

http://www.karaites.org.uk/phylacteries.shtml, Phylacteries, “A SignUpon Your Hand and as Frontlets Between Your Eyes”, by Hakham Meir Yosef Rekhavi –

“While rabbinic commentators on the Bible take the verses in Exodus and Deuteronomy as literally commanding the wearing of the phylacteries (see, however, Shemuel ben Meir [Rashbam] on Exod. 13:19), the rabbis of the Talmud were aware that the Bible gives absolutely no description of phylacteries or the laws concerning them. These laws were understood by the rabbis as an example of a biblical precept whose details are elaborated only in the oral law (m. Sanh. 11:3), and all the details of their construction are attributed to those oral laws which God purportedly taught Moshe at Sinai (b. Menah. 34b-37a). Given the tenuous relationship between the laws of phylacteries described in the Talmud and the alleged scriptural basis for them, it is far from apparent at exactly what point in the history of Pharisaic Judaism phylacteries were introduced.”

“At what date did the Pharisees begin to wear phylacteries and to interpret the passages from Scripture literally? The LXX translates the word totafoth as asaleuton, "that which is fixed, immovable". This implies that in Egypt in the middle of the 3rd century BCE the institution of phylacteries was not yet known. Rather, the four scriptural passages were interpreted as meaning that the laws and rituals of Exodus 13 and Deuteronomy 6 and 11 should remain the unchanging subjects of one's thoughts, as also understood by Karaites, Samaritans and Falashas. The earliest explicit reference to phylacteries in a literary work is the Letter of Aristeas, sec. 159, where only the phylactery of the hand is mentioned. Scholars differ as to the dating of this text. Most place it in the 2nd century BCE, though some claim that parts of it, including secs. 128-71, date from the 1st century CE. It must also be noted that all names referring to parts of the phylacteries casings are in Aramaic, e.g titora, which is the square base of thick leather, another example is ma'abarta, which is the hollow projection at the back of the phylactery through which the strap is passed. Taking into account these Aramaic linguistic details one can come to the conclusion that the Pharisaic custom of tefillin, which itself is an Aramaic word, was introduced when Aramaic had replaced Hebrew as the day to day spoken language of the Jews in Israel. As already mentioned the Samaritans do not accept the precept of tefillin, this suggests that prior to the Jewish-Samaritan schism the literal interpretation of the verses in question was not accepted. Bearing all of the above facts in mind, it therefore seems prudent to attribute the introduction of phylacteries to the period between the 2nd century BCE and 1st century CE.”

“The custom of wearing phylacteries was not as widespread in the first two centuries of the Common Era, as the Rabbis would have us believe. For the wearing of phylacteries was seen as one of the criteria distinguishing a haver (member of the rabbinic "society") from an 'am haares (one not observing rabbinic customs). According to Josephus, himself a Pharisee, there were only about 6,000 of them in Israel during the late Second Temple period (Ant. 7:2:4), out of a possible Jewish population in Israel of some 2,000,000. Thus the 'am haares formed the overwhelming majority of the population, and the wearing of phylacteries was limited to a small group.”

Funk and Wagnalls Standard Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology and Legend, Maria Leach, Editor,

page 50 – “Amulet A material object, usually portable and durable, worn or carried on the person, placed in a house, on or among one’s possessions, to protect the owner from dangers such as death, shipwreck, lightning, attacks by thieves or animals, evil spirits, witchcraft, or the evil eye; to aid him in acquiring luck, wealth, physical strength, magical powers; to bring success in hunting, trading, battle, or love.”

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, James Orr, M. A., D.D., General Editor, Volume 1,

Pages 127-128, article “Amulet” –“The phylacteries and the mezuzah. – There is no distinct reference to these in the OT. The Heb technical term for the former (tephillin) does not occur in Bib. Heb, and although the Heb word mezuzah does occur over a dozen times its sense is invariably ‘door-[or ‘gate-‘] post’ and not the amulet put on the door-post which in later Heb the word denotes.”

“It is quite certain that the practice of wearing phylacteries has no Bib. Support, for a correct exegesis and a proper understanding of the context put it beyond dispute that the words in Ex 13 9.16; Dt 6 8f; 11 18-20 have reference to the exhortations in the foregoing verses: ‘Thou shalt bind them [the commands previously mentioned] for a sign upon thy hand, and they shall be for frontlets between thy eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the door-posts of thy house, and upon thy gates’ (Dt 6 8f). The only possible sense of these words is that they were to hold the precepts referred to before their minds constantly as if they were inscribed on their arms, held in front of their eyes, and written on the door-or gate-posts which they daily passed. That the language in Ex 13 9.16 does not command the use of phylacteries is obvious; and that the same is true of Prov 3 3; 6 21; 7 3 where similar words are used is still more certain. Yet, though none of the passages enjoin the use of phylacteries or of the mezuzah, they may all contain allusions to both practices as if the sense were, ‘Thou shalt keep constantly before thee my words and look to them for safety and not to the phylacteries worn on head and arm by the heathen.’ If, however, phylacteries were in use among the Jews thus early, it is strange that there is not in the OT a single instance in which the practice of wearing phylacteries is mentioned.”

“It is quite evident that phylacteries have a magical origin. This is suggested by the Gr name phulakterion (whence the Eng. Name) which in the 1^st cent. of our era denoted a counter charm or defence (phulasso, ‘to protect’) against evil influences. No scholar now explains the Gr word as denoting a means of leading people to keep (phulasso) the law. The Heb name tephillin (=’prayers’) meets us first in post-Bib. Heb, and carries with it the later view that phylacteries are used during prayer in harmony with the prayers or other formulae over the amulet to make it more effective (see Budge, Egyptian Magic, 27).”

CONCLUSION

Okay. So what is your conclusion? Do you reach the same concept of Yahweh’s words being fulfilled in these objects?

Points to think about ---

There is no description of the tephillin in the Torah – no mention of leather, boxes, small scrolls or straps.
There is no mention in the Torah of the ways or times these should be worn, if at all.
These did not come into use until around 250 B.C. or later – that is from history.
These are to be worn only when reciting the prayers. But aren’t we to remember these words all the time?
If the command truly meant these leather straps and boxes, why aren’t there any instructions in Torah on their design and construction?
If these are items Yahweh commanded, why do the words phylacteries or tefillin not appear in the Scriptures?
Are these really any different than a charm or amulet worn by the pagans?
The “importance” of tefillin is completely ignored by all the prophets and all the New Testament writers. Why?

PRAYER

These tephillin are worn only during the prayers, when reciting things like the Shema or the Amidah. The words of the Shema are in the Scripture, but there is no instruction there for them to be recited repeatedly, several times a day. The Amidah is nowhere in Scripture. It is a prayer written by a man, like most of Judaism’s prayers and blessings. They are learned by rote and repeated endlessly. Often the people do not even understand the Hebrew words they are saying. And what does Scripture say about that?

Matthew 6:6-7 – 6–But you, when you pray, enter into your room, and shutting your door, pray to your Father in secret. And your Father seeing in secret will repay you in the open. 7–But when you pray, do not babble vain words, as the nations, for they think that they shall be heard in their much speaking.

The Scriptures mention several times that Yahshua prayed – but there is no mention of Him donning the tefillin or repeating man-written prayers.

Matthew 23:5 – And they do all their works to be seen by men. And they make their phylacteries broad, and enlarge the borders of their robes.

Maybe Yahshua did not say they were wrong in wearing these, but neither did He mention anywhere that all needed to be using them. He was condemning the attitude of the Pharisees. They were making these phylacteries and their fringes bigger and better – to look more religious.

Sometimes it seems that the wearers of these objects worship the idea of appearing religious in front of others with their tephillin, kippah, tallit and beard. Do their attention and thoughts really focus on Yahweh or on all these objects and the right wording of the memorized prayers and blessings? When you take the time to pray, is Yahweh checking to see if you are wearing these things and that you have your prayerbook handy? Or is this what He is looking for?

Psalms 34:18 – Yahweh is near those who are broken hearted, and saves those who have a contrite spirit.

Psalms 51:17 – The sacrifices of Elohim are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O Elohim, You will not despise.

Isaiah 66:2 – …But I will look toward this one, to the afflicted, and the contrite of spirit, even trembling at My word.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BEARD - HAIR - HEADCOVERINGS - KIPPAH - YARMULKE

2010-07-18T11:40:00.000-07:00

(This article is written with the idea of providing a means to get started in this study. It is by no means an effort to answer every question or give you all the proof you need. To truly understand, you need to do some research on your own. Most of the Scriptures quoted are from The Interlinear Bible, by Jay P. Green, Sr., as general editor and translator, with the transliterated Hebrew names of the Father and Son, Yahweh and Yahshua.)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BEARD / HAIR

Questions have arisen from time to time about the proper length of men’s hair and whether or not it is necessary for them to maintain a beard. Can a man have long hair? What about shaving the head? If Yahweh expects a beard, can it be trimmed? Or is it to grow without cutting? What about the long side curls seen on some Orthodox Jews? Are those from Scripture?

HISTORICAL SOURCES

Manners and Customs of the Bible, James M Freeman –

Page 149, regarding II Samuel 20:9 – “To touch the beard of another was an insult, unless it was done as an act of friendship and a token of respect. Joab therefore showed the base treachery of his heart by coming to Amasa in the manner of a friend, thus entirely concealing his murderous intent. He inquired after his health, gently touched his beard as if to give a kiss, and then suddenly grasped it with his right hand and quickly stabbed the unsuspecting Amasa with the unnoticed sword which he held in his left.”

Page 93-94, regarding Leviticus 19:27 – “Among the ancients the hair was often used in divinations. The worshipers of the stars and planets cut their hair evenly around, trimming the extremities. According to Herodotus the Arabs were accustomed to shave the hair around the head, and let a tuft stand up on the crown in honor of Bacchus. He says the same thing concerning the Macians, a people of North Africa.”

“By the idolaters the beard was also carefully trimmed round and even. This was forbidden to the Jews.”

“The expression ‘utmost corners’ in Jeremiah ix, 26; xxv, 23; xlix, 32 refers not to any dwelling-place, but to the custom forbidden in Leviticus; and accordingly the margin reads, ‘cut off into corners, or having the corners [of their hair] polled’.”

Pages 46-47, regarding Genesis 41:14 – “Contrary to the custom of the Hebrews and other Orientals, the Egyptians shaved closely, only allowing the beard to grow as a sign of mourning; thus reversing the custom of the Hebrews, who shaved as a sign of mourning. Strange to say, the Egyptians, while so careful to shave the beard, sometimes fastened false beards to the chin. These were made of plaited hair, and were of different shapes and sizes, according to the rank of the wearer.”

“Joseph, while in prison, allowed his beard to grow; now that he is released, he shaves, according to the Egyptian custom, as it would have been a disgrace for him to appear with a beard in the presence of the king.”

Harper’s Encyclopedia of Bible Life, Madeleine S and J Lane Miller –

Page 52 – “The book of Leviticus prescribed (19:22) that ‘You shall not round off the hair on your temples or mar the edges of your beard’ – an ancient heathen practice for mourning the dead – and one of the requirements for such Nazirites as Samson and Samuel was that they never take a razor to their hair, but instead let it grow long, as an offering to God. Other Israelites were not forbidden to cut their hair, of course, but through most of the Old Testament period long hair was admired on men and women alike. Absalom cut his hair only once a year, and the amount he cut reportedly (2 Samuel 14:26) weighed two hundred shekels – or about five pounds!”

Page 86 – “The Assyrian and Babylonians perfumed their beards, and some Jews after the Exile probably did likewise. The male Jew wore his hair long, and his beard also, but not without an occasional grooming by the local barber. The Hebrews were forbidden by their Law to shave their heads entirely (Lev 19:27), and priests were enjoined not to make tonsures upon their heads (Lev 21:5). These prohibitions probably were in reaction to the practices of the priests of the pagan cults of the people among whom the Israelites settled in the Promised Land. To the prophets, artificial baldness was a figure of impending doom (e.g., Isa 15:2; Jer 48:37; Mic 1:16). Shaving the head was acceptable only under special circumstances as a sign of mourning (Job 1:20); at the termination of a Nazirite vow, so that the hair could be dedicated to the Lord (Num 6:9, 18); and when leprosy had been found on the head (Lev 13:33; 14:8-9). Long hair was much admired (2 Sam 14:25-26; Song of Solomon 5:11). The proscription of cutting the hair on the temples of males is still observed by strict Jews.”

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, James Orr, M.A., D.D., General Editor, Volume 1, page 418 –

“(1) – Western Semites in general, according to the monuments, wore full round beards, to which they evidently devoted great care. The nomads of the desert, in distinction from the settled Semites, wore a clipped and pointed beard (see Jer 9:26: ‘all that have the corners of their hair cut off, that dwell in the wilderness’; and cf 25:23; 49:32, etc).”

“(2) – Long beards are found on Assyrian and Babylonian monuments and sculptures as a mark of the highest aristocracy. It is not clear that it was ever so with the Jews. Yet it is significant that the Hebrew ‘elder’ (zaken) seems to have received his name from his long beard.”

“(3) – The view of some that it was customary among the Hebrews to shave the upper lip is considered by the best authorities as without foundation. The mustache (Hebrew sapham, ‘beard’), according to 2 Sam 19:24, received regular ‘trimming’.”

“(4) – In one case (1 Sam 21:13-14) the neglect of the beard is set down as a sign of madness: ‘[He] let his spittle fall down upon his beard. Then said Achish,… Lo, ye see the man is mad’.”

“(5) – It was common Semite custom to cut both hair and beard as a token of grief or distress. Isaiah (15:2), describing the heathen who have ‘gone up to the high places to weep,’ says ‘Moab waileth over Nebo, and over Medeba; on all their heads is baldness, every beard is cut off.’ Jeremiah (41:5), describing the grief of the men of Samaria for their slain governor, Gedaliah, says, ‘There came men from…Samaria [his sorrowing subjects] even four score men, having their beards shaven and their clothes rent,’ etc. And Amos, in his prophecy of the vision of the ‘basket of summer fruit,’ (8:1ff), makes Jehovah say to His people: ‘I will turn your feasts into mourning;…I will bring sackcloth upon all loins, and baldness upon every head’ (8:10). On the other hand it was even more significant of great distress or fear to leave the beard untrimmed, as did Mephibosheth, the son of Saul, when he went to meet King David in the crisis of his guilty failure to go up with the king according to his expectation: ‘He had neither dressed his feet, nor trimmed his beard, nor washed his clothes, from the day the king departed until the day he came home in peace.’ (Cf 1 Sam 21:13-14; 2 Sam 19:24).”

“(6) – Absalom’s hair was cut only once a year, it would seem (2 Sam 14:26; cf rules for priests, Levites, etc, Ezek 44:20). But men then generally wore their hair longer than is customary or seemly with us. Later, in New Testament times, it was a disgrace for a man to wear long hair (I Cor 11:6-15). To mutilate the beard of another was considered a great indignity (see 2 Sam 10:4; cf Isa 50:6, ‘plucked off the hair’). The shaving of the head of a captive slave-girl who was to be married to her captor marked her change of condition and prospects (Deut 21:12; W R Smith, Kinship, 209).”

Volume 2, page 1320 –“…the dwellers on the Nile had their heads shaved in early youth, leaving but a side lock until maturity was attained, when this mark of childhood was taken away.”

“On the other hand, the Hebrew people, like their Babylonian neighbors affected long and well-cared-for, bush curls of hair as emblems of manly beauty. Proofs thereof are not infrequent in the Scriptures and elsewhere. Samson’s (Jgs 16:13, 19) and Absalom’s (2 S 14:26) long luxuriant hair is specially mentioned, and the Shulammite sings of the locks of her beloved which are ‘busy [RVm ‘curling’], and black as a raven’ (Cant 5:11). Josephus (Ant, VIII, vii, 3) reports that Solomon’s body-guard was distinguished by youthful beauty and ‘luxuriant heads of hair’.”

“It is well known that among the surrounding heathen nations the hair of childhood or youth was often shaved and consecrated at idolatrous shrines. Frequently this custom marked an initiatory rite into the service of a divinity. It was therefore an abomination of the Gentiles in the eyes of the Jew, which is referred to in Lev 19:27; Jer 9:26; 25:23; 49:32. The Syriac version of the latter passage renders, ‘Ye shall not let your hair grow long’ (ie in order to cut it as a religious rite in honor of an idol). It is, however, probable that among the Jews, as now among many classes of Mohammedans, the periodical cropping of the hair, when it had become too cumbersome, was connected with some small festivity, when the weight of the hair was ascertained, and its weight in silver was given in charity to the poor.”

“We may also compare the shaving of the head of the Nazirite to these heathen practices, though the resemblance is merely superficial. The man who made a vow to God was responsible to Him with his whole body and being. Not even a hair was to be injured wilfully during the whole period of the vow, for all belonged to God. The conclusion of the Nazirite vow was marked by sacrifices and the shaving of the head at the door of the sanctuary (Nu 6:1-21), indicative of a new beginning of life. The long untouched hair was therefore considered as the emblem of personal devotion (or devotedness) to the God of all strength.”

Illustrated Dictionary of the Bible, Herbert Lockyer, Sr, editor –

Page 140 – “Beard – the hair on a man’s face. In biblical times most adult males of Israel wore full beards. An oiled and well-kept beard was a mark of pride (Psa 133:2). The Law of Moses required Israelite men not to ‘disfigure the edges’ of their beards (Lev 19:27), a common practice of Israel’s pagan neighbors.”

“To shave or pull out part of the beard was a sign of grief (Jer 48:37-38), and to cut off someone’s beard was to insult him (2 Sam 20:4-5). Isaiah 7:20 pictures God’s judgment on Israel as a shaving of the nation’s beard, an intentional disgrace. The word beard does not appear in the New Testament.”

Page 973 – “Shaving – removal of the beard or other body hair, as with a razor. Among the Jewish people, beards were common, especially in early times when the Hebrews lived as wandering shepherds. But the Egyptians shaved their faces closely and preferred short hair. The Greeks and Romans also preferred the clean-shaven style.”

“Shaving was a part of the ritual by which a Levite was set apart for priestly service (Num 8:7). Shaving was also required for those unclean with plague (Lev 13:33) or leprosy (Lev 14:8). Refusing to allow a man-made instrument to touch their heads, a group of Hebrews known as the Nazirites kept their hair uncut until a particular vow had been fulfilled (Num 6:18; Acts 18:18). But if a Nazirite touched a dead body, he was required to cut his hair immediately (Num 6:9).”

“Although shaving the head was often a sign of mourning (Deut 14:1; Job 1:10), priests did not follow this practice (Lev 21:5).”

Illustrated Manners and Customs of the Bible, J I Packer, M C Tenney, editors,

Page 482 – “Hair Style – Hebrew men considered the hair to be an important personal ornament, so they gave much care and attention to it. Egyptian and Assyrian monuments show examples of elaborate hair arrangements in those cultures. The Egyptians also wore various types of wigs. But we see an important difference between Hebrew and Egyptian hair styles in Genesis 41:14, which says that Joseph ‘shaved himself’ before he was presented to the pharaoh. An Egyptian would have been content to comb his hair and trim his beard; but Hebrew men cut their hair much as modern Western men do, using a primitive kind of scissors (2 Sam 14:26). The word polled in this text means ‘to cut the hair from the head.’ The Jews also used razors, as we see in Numbers 6:5.”

“When a Jewish man made a religious vow, he did not cut his hair (cf Judg 13:5). The Israelites were not to shave their hair so closely that they resembled heathen gods who had shaved heads. Nor were they to resemble the Nazirites, who refused to cut their hair at all (Ezek 44:20). In the New Testament times, long hair on men was considered to be contrary to nature (I Cor 11:14).”

“Men often applied perfumed oil to their hair before festivals or other joyous occasions (Psa 23:5). Jesus mentions this custom in Luke 7:45, when He says, ‘My head with oil thou didst not anoint…’.

The Torah, A Modern Commentary, W Gunther Plaut, editor –

From page 898, regarding Lev 19:27-28 – “Other forbidden pagan practices were certain ways of cutting the hair, ‘destroying’ the beard, gashing oneself as a sign of mourning, tattooing (perhaps with heathen emblems). The wearing of side curls (peot) by extreme Orthodox Jews is an attempt to carry out strictly the law of verse 27.”

Page 1061 – “Hair. Throughout history the hair of the head has been important to people. Men and women have usually considered it as the crown of the visible self, the most malleable part of their external personality; they have beautified it; shaped or colored it, and have on occasion removed or hidden it. Already in biblical times, cutting a man’s beard against his will (as was done by the Nazis to Jews) or a woman’s hair as a punishment … represents the ultimate in public humiliation (2 Sam 10:4; Isa 3:17). Where hair was or is cut or shaved voluntarily, the act symbolizes consecration. And so does the reverse: a Nazirite, a medieval king, or a hermit set themselves aside for special purposes and their hair signified their status.”

“Frequently, hirsute appearance has symbolized personal integrity. In cultures favoring short hair, the growing of long hair may indicate a rebellious spirit or a different value system. Not long ago the expression ‘long hair’ meant classic or esoteric taste in the arts. To this day, the Jews observant of biblical tradition (Lev 19:27; 21:5) will not let a razor come upon the corners of his beard. Detailed halachic regulations govern the methods of trimming the beard, and a Chasid is distinguished by his earlocks (pe-ot). By their appearance, the observant aim to testify to membership in a people who, all of them, are consecrated to God. In light of these ancient identifications of hair with separateness and holiness, we can better understand the profound unease with which, in our century, young people’s preoccupation with short or (later) long hair was greeted by their elders, for more than mere appearance was at stake.”

Page 107, regarding Numbers 8:7 – “Their whole body with a razor. This is what certain physically afflicted people had to do (Lev 14:8), and it emphasizes that the Torah considers the Levites spiritually separated from the rest of the people, even as lepers and others were separated bodily. On the other hand, a Nazirite who had been defiled only shaved his head (Num 6:9). Egyptian priests shaved their bodies every second day for hygienic reasons, especially to avoid lice.”

Page 1483, regarding Deuteronomy 21:12 – “Trim her hair. Others, ‘shave her head.’ The procedure signifies a change in the woman’s status.

“The custom persists among some Orthodox women who cut off their hair prior to marriage.”

Biblical Literacy, by Rabbi Joseph Telushkin,

Page 548 – “Lev. 19:27 – In fulfillment of this commandment, many of the most traditional Orthodox men grow side-curls (peyot). Jewish law understands this prohibition as applying only to a hand razor, and permits men to use electric shavers.”

To Be A Jew, by Rabbi Hayim Halevy Donin,

Pages 181-182 – “ ‘You shall not…destroy the corners of your beard’ (Lev. 19:27). The halakha (by relating this verse to Lev. 21:5) clearly understood this prohibition as one which prohibited the use of a razor blade or knife to shave the beard of one’s face. (Technically, it’s only the five corners that are thus forbidden: at the chin, in front of but just above and just below the ears.)”

“This law, as well as several others which forbid tattooing and other forms of self-mutilation, were directed against practices common to idolatry and associated with pagan customs. ‘It was the practice of pagan priests to destroy (shave) their beards. Therefore did the Torah forbid it… But one is not culpable for it unless it is done with a razor… therefore if one cut the beard of his face with scissors, one is not liable’ (Hil. Avodat Kochavim 12:7).”

“This prohibition had an obvious impact on the historical style of Jewish grooming; hence the traditional image of the Jew as a full-bearded person.”

“It is only since this past century when it became possible to use means other than a razor with which to remove facial hair that even observant Jews began to appear clean-shaven. At first, clippers (which operate on the principle of a scissors rather than a knife), powder and similar depilatories came into use. The modern electric shaver (which operates on the scissors principle rather than as a blade) was ruled permissible by religious authorities. This made it possible for even the pious Jew to be clean-shaven or partially bearded without violating the Torah law. Nevertheless, the bearded face probably still reflects an image of greater piety.”

“The first part of this same Torah sentence states ‘You shall not round the corners of your head…’ The reasons are still the same as given above. Because of this, it is not permissible to totally remove the sideburns. While halakhic rulings permit the use of scissors or clippers to trim the sideburns, the custom of refusing to take advantage of such rulings prevailed among Hasidic Jews and they do not touch the sideburns at all; hence their dangling side-curls (payos), most noticeable on the children and young boys whose beards are not yet fully grown.”

Mysteries of the Bible, Reader’s Digest Association, Inc, Alma E Guinness, editor –

From page 113 - 114 – “The Ammonites knew what they were doing when they mutilated the Hebrews beards. The cutting of a man’s beard was a deadly insult among the ancient Hebrews, a people to whom a full set of whiskers represented masculine dignity and honor and beautiful hair was a mark of male as well as female beauty: ‘the beauty of old men is their gray hair’ (Proverbs 20:29).”

“Although razors, shaving, and cutting the hair are mentioned on numerous occasions in the Bible, only a single passage in the Old Testament, Ezekiel 5:1, makes reference to barbers. And although barbers are not even mentioned in the New Testament, there is outside evidence of their existence. In the time of Herod the Great, there was a staff of barbers at the royal court, as indicated by the Jewish historian Josephus. In all probability, there were also Temple barbers, who administered the ritual shavings of Nazirites and Levite initiates.”

“Throughout the history of ancient Israel the shaving of all the hair either from the head or the face was a radical act that marked a time of great grief or suffering (Job 1:20 and Jeremiah 48:37).”

“In Leviticus 19:27, the Lord ordered Moses to tell the children of Israel: ‘You shall not round off the hair on your temples or mar the edges of your beard.’ The reason for these strictures is unknown; possibly it was to distinguish the Israelites from neighboring people. Thus, shaving the head and beard was not ordinarily permitted. The exceptions were ritual shavings performed during certain purification ceremonies.”

In modern times, “In Me’ah She’arim, the neighborhood just north of the Old City of Jerusalem, men and boys commonly wear pe’ot, or side locks, grown in accordance with the biblical prohibition: ‘You shall not round off the hair on your temples.’ Me’ah She’arim, like some neighborhoods in Brooklyn, New York, has a high concentration of Orthodox Hasidic families. It is, in fact, a common practice among many Orthodox and Hasidic Jews all over the world to wear pe’ot – a style that instantly identifies the wearer as Jewish. Yet there is no evidence that the ancient Hebrews wore pe’ot. The wearing of side curls did not become the custom until the sixteenth century, when it was started by the disciples of the philosopher Isaac Luria. It later became popular in central and eastern Europe.”

SCRIPTURES

GENESIS 41:14 And Pharaoh sent and called Joseph; and they made him hasten from the dungeon. And he shaved and changed his clothing and came in to Pharaoh.

This event took place before Yahweh gave His law to the children of Israel. If Joseph took the time to shave and change before meeting Pharaoh, could it be that was part of his normal grooming routine? After all, the Pharaoh was waiting. It doesn’t say he was told to do so – possibly it was his custom.

LEVITICUS 14:8-9 8 – And he is to be cleansed shall wash his garments, and shall shave all his hair, and shall bathe with water, and shall be clean. And afterwards he shall come into the camp, and shall live on the outside of his tent seven days. 9 – And it shall be on the seventh day, he shall shave all his hair, his head, and his beard and his eyebrows; he shall even shave all his hair. And he shall wash his garments, and shall bathe his flesh with water, and shall be clean.

These are specific commands from Yahweh to a leper. It entails a lot more than just the hair on the head or the beard. This is part of his cleansing, or purification ritual.

LEVITICUS 19:27 You shall not round the corner of your head, nor mar the corner of your beard.

This is the verse most often used to support the doctrine of a beard on every man. But is that really what it says? Yahweh is describing a particular way of cutting and/or trimming the beard and hair. He is saying they are not to do it that way.

The word “round” is Hebrew #5362, nakaf, which means to strike with more or less violence (beat, fell, corrode); by implication (of attack) to knock together; i.e. surround or circulate. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

The Hebrew word for “mar” is #7843 shachat, meaning to decay, i.e. ruin – destroy, mar, waste. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

“Corner” is the Hebrew word #6285, peah, which means mouth in a figurative sense, i.e. direction, region, extremity. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

This has most often been understood that they were not to trim their hair and beard in a manner that framed their face with a circle. Note the last definition of round – to surround or circulate. Some of the pagans did this to honor the sun god. It defined them as sun-worshippers. It did not define a worshipper of Yahweh.

LEVITICUS 21:5 They shall not make their heads bald, and they shall not shave the edge of their beard…

Check the context. To whom does this apply? All the Israelite men? No, in this chapter the instructions are to the priests only.

Now, how many men did that affect? As stated in the first verse, all the Levites, right? No. The priests were only the family of Aaron. When these laws were given, that included only Aaron and his four sons (Numbers 3:2). The Levites were to work for and under Aaron (Numbers 3:6-9). They were not of the priesthood.

NUMBERS 6:5, 9, 18 5 – All the days of the vow of his separation, a razor shall not pass over his head; he shall be holy until all the days are fulfilled which he has separated to Yahweh, he shall allow the locks of the hair of his head to grow long. 9 – And if any man dies very suddenly beside him, and he defiles his consecrated head, then he shall shave his head on the day of his cleansing, on the seventh day he shall shave it. 18 – And the Nazirite shall shave the head of his separation at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall take the hair of the head of his separation and shall put it on the fire which is under the sacrifice of the peace offering.

These rules applied to the Nazirites and bring to mind a question – if the instructions were to keep a razor from his head, then was it okay at other times? Could other men shave their heads then? Think about it: if everyone had already been instructed not to shave the head or trim the beard, there would have been no need for these instructions.

NUMBERS 8:6-7 6 – Take the Levites from among the sons of Israel, and you shall cleanse them: sprinkle on them water of sin offering. 7 – And they shall cause a razor to pass over all their flesh and shall wash their garments and cleanse themselves.

Two points here:

– This was specific to the Levites and
– it was part of a cleansing or purification ritual.

DEUTERONOMY 14: 1 You are sons to Yahweh your Elohim; you shall not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead.

Wrong to shave your head and be bald? No, that is not what it says! There are two specific things here – “between the eyes” and “for the dead.” Apparently this was a custom of some of the people the Israelites either had or would encounter. It was a part of their religious tradition and Yahweh did not want them doing that. It was referring to only a specific shaving –it was for the purpose of honoring someone other than Yahweh.

At this point, we’ve checked the Torah. In it there are no direct commands for a man to have or not have a beard or for him to keep his hair either short or long. And, as we have seen, there are times that shaving the head is the proper thing to do.

II SAMUEL 10:4 And Hanun took David’s servants and shaved all half of their beards, and cut off their long robes in the center, to their buttocks; and he sent them away.

So what was the problem? They were most likely ashamed and humiliated because they had been caught and had their beards and robes cut. If they went home in that state, they would probably have faced taunting and teasing that they didn’t want to deal with. An insult to their manhood?

II SAMUEL 14:25-26 25 – And no man was handsome like Absalom in all Israel, to be so greatly praised. From the sole of his foot to his crown, there was not a blemish in him. 26 – And when he sheared his head – for it was at the end of days of days that he sheared it, because the hair was heavy on him, and he sheared it, he weighed the hair of his head at two hundred shekels by the king’s weight.

Notice where it says “it was at the end of days of days that he sheared it”. The Tanach translates that as “at the end of every year he would have his hair barbered.” Think how long a person’s hair can grow in a year’s time. Apparently letting it grow like that for a man was not a problem. And neither was cutting it off.

EZRA 9:3 And when I heard this thing, I tore my garments and my robe, and plucked off the hair of my head and of my beard, and sat down stricken dumb.

“Plucked” is Hebrew #4803, marat, meaning to polish; by implication to make bald (the head). Shaving head and beard, as well as tearing of the clothes, was a sign of deep mourning. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

JOB 1:20 And Job rose up and tore his robe, and shaved his head.

Job was also mourning – the death of all his children.

SONG OF SOLOMON 5:11 His head is like refined gold; his locks are bushy and black as a raven.

“Bushy” certainly is not closely-cropped hair. It is the Hebrew #8534, taltal, meaning through the idea of vibration; a trailing bough (as pendulous). That would indicate longer hair than we had thought they wore. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

In Isaiah and Jeremiah there are several references to baldness or a razor on the head. We won’t go through all of those. Often it has to do with punishment or mourning.

JEREMIAH 25:23 Dedan; and Tema; and Buz; and all who cut the corners (of their beards).

There are a few verses phrased this way. But note that the words “of their beards” are in parentheses. They are not in the original Hebrew. So we could logically ask, corners of what? It does not clearly say here. This could refer to those who cut their beards and hair to copy a pagan style. Or it could be referring to something else altogether, such as a field.

JEREMIAH 48:37 For every head shall be bald, and every beard clipped. On all the hands shall be cuttings, and sackcloth on the loins.

“Clipped” is the Hebrew #1639, gara, meaning to scrape off; by implication to shave, remove, lessen or withhold. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

These verses are referring to those in Moab. It seems to describe someone in mourning. But in includes one thing Yahweh specifically condemned – cuttings. They are not to be a part of the customs of Yahweh’s people.

EZEKIEL 44:20 And they shall not shave their heads; and they shall not send forth long hair; they shall surely trim their heads.

Some jump on this Scripture as it is yet prophetic and apply it to themselves and others. But again, check the context. To whom is this referring? The priests, again – the sons of Zadok. Not the average man.

I CORINTHIANS 11:14 Or does not nature herself teach you that if a man indeed adorns the hair, it is a dishonor to him?

The word “adorns” here is the Greek #2863, komao. It means to wear tresses of hair; to have long hair. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

This is the only verse in the New Testament where anything is said regarding the length of men’s hair. The word beard does not even appear in the New Testament. There is no indication whether men of that time wore beards or were clean-shaven or whether it was their choice.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the Scriptures examined, we cannot give anyone a specific “Thou shalt” or “Thou shalt not” when it comes to making a decision on whether or not to have a beard, to shave, or to maintain the hair short or somewhat longer. It does appear that men had a choice, unless they were of the priestly line or had a Nazirite vow. We can definitely say that the hair or beard should be clean and well groomed. It should not be grown or trimmed to copy the fashions that were or are used in religious worship. Yahweh does not want us to follow the ways of the heathen, whatever the century or the customs.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Headcoverings

In many assemblies today, women can be seen with their heads covered with a variety of styles. Why? What is the purpose? Is it necessary? Does Yahweh expect it?

Usually there is a response that it is Yahweh’s instruction to be obeyed. Is it really? Yahweh’s Law is given in the first five books of the Bible. Where in that Torah is the command stated? No, they say it is in Paul’s writings. Are Paul’s writings a part of the Law? Are his writings the same as “Yahweh says”?

There are very few scriptures that even make reference to coverings and/or veils. We will take a look at each of them.

Genesis 24:65 For she (Rebekah) had said unto the servant, What man is this that walks in the field to meet us? And the servant had said, It is my master: therefore she took a vail, and covered herself.

Commentary on the Old and New Testaments, Robert Jamieson, A R Fausset and David Brown, volume 1,

Page 185 – “The veil is an essential part of a female dress. In country places it is often thrown aside; but on the appearance of a stranger it is drawn over the face, so as to conceal all but the eyes. But the text has “the Hebrew word for “the bridal veil -- in Syria and Persia of red silk -- which envelopes the entire person, and arrayed in which a bride is commonly led into the presence of her husband. It was in this attire, becoming her bridal character, that Rebekah was adorned when about to be introduced for the first time to Isaac. In a bride it was a token of her reverence and subjection to her husband.”

Is there any previous scriptural basis for such a bridal veil? In fact, where is the basis for the marriage ceremony?

Genesis 38:14-15 14-And she (Tamar) put her widow’s garments off from her, and covered herself with a vail, and wrapped herself, and sat in an open place, which is by the way to Timnath; for she saw that Shelah was grown, and she was not given unto him to wife. 15-When Judah saw her, he thought her to be a harlot: because she had covered her face.

Do you get that? He thought she was a harlot because of her covering!

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, James Orr, M.A., D. D., General Editor, volume 2,

Page 878 – “The ‘veil’ with which Rebekah and Tamar ‘covered themselves’ was most likely a large ‘mantle’ in which the whole body could be wrapped.”

Numbers 5:18 And the priest shall set the woman before Yahweh, and uncover the woman’s head, and put the offering of the memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causes the curse.

Those championing the wearing of the head coverings say that if the priest were to bare the woman’s head, then it meant she wore a head covering. The word “bare” is the Hebrew #6544, pawrah, meaning to loosen; by impl, to expose. It doesn’t specify whether he is to loosen a covering or her hair. In the past, women have worn their hair up, in a bun, coiled or braided around their heads. As late as the first part of the last century, this was a custom among the married women, especially the older ones. Many of those women felt exposed with their hair loose and appeared that way only in the privacy of their homes. That was evident in the television series “Little House on the Prairie.” (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

Though the word is not used in Numbers 5:18, the next word in Strong’s after pawrah is interesting. It is derived from pawrah, which is a root word. #6545 is pera, meaning the hair (as disheveled). (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

The Illustrated Dictionary of Bible Life and Times, Readers Digest, Barbara J Morgan, Editor-in-Chief,

Page 166, article “Hair” – “Hair was considered an important component of feminine beauty, and by the first century AD rabbis decreed that a woman must shield her hair from public view as a sign of modesty. Unkempt hair was generally considered a mark of mourning or shame; a woman accused of adultery would have her hair disheveled by a priest (Num 5:18).”

Rather than loosening a head covering, the priest may have been simply loosening and tousling her hair.

But did you notice that something else in that last quote? It said “Rabbis decreed”, not Yahweh.

As far as I have found, this covers the scriptures in the Torah that discuss headcoverings/veils. We found no directive from Yahweh or any command that the women are to keep their heads covered. Keep that in mind.

All Scriptures given to me beyond that as proof on the subject are outside the five books of the Torah.

Isaiah 30:1, in the King James, it says, “Woe to the rebellious children, saith Yahweh, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin.”

Does that really refer to a woman wearing a headcovering? It speaks of coverings – by rebellious people. It does not specify females.

To see exactly to what this is referring, I will type the words of this verse from The Interlinear Bible, by J. P. Green, page 556, in bold print, adding some definitions in between.

“Woe to rebellious sons, states Yahweh, to make counsel, but not from Me, and to weave (#5258 - nawsak - “to pour out, especially a libation, or to cast [metal]; by analogy, to anoint a king -- cover, melt, [cause to] pour [out]), a web (#4541 - massaykaw - a pouring over, i.e., a fusion of metal [esp a cast image], by implication a libation; a league; a coverlet [as if poured out] -- covering, molten image, vail), but not by my spirit in order (#4616 - mahan - heed, purpose on account of [as a motive or an aim], in order that) to add sin (#2399 - khate - a crime or its penalty -- fault, offense) on sin (#2403 - khatawaw - an offense [sometimes habitual sinfulness] and its penalty, occasion, sacrifice of expiation).” (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

Once again the words of the same verse, in bold, as another writer translates it.

Matthew Henry’s Commentary, volume 4,

Page 129 – “They felt no need to consult -- felt they were so right. ‘They take counsel among themselves, and from one another; but they do not ask counsel, much less will they take counsel of me. They cover with a covering (they think to secure themselves with one shelter or other, which may serve to cover them from the violence of the storm), but not of my spirit (not such as Elohim by his spirit, in the mouth of his prophets, directed them to), and therefore it will prove too short a covering, and a refuge of lies’.”

Commentary on the Old and New Testaments, Robert Jamieson, A R Fausset and David Brown, volume 3,

Page 655 – “And that cover with a covering – i.e., wrap themselves in reliances disloyal towards Jehovah. ‘Cover’ thus answers to ‘seek deep to hide their counsel from their Lord’. … But the Hebrew may mean ‘who pour out libations:’ as it was by these that leagues were made (Exod. xxxiv. 8; Zech. ix. 11). … The Greek idiom for making a covenant, is, similarly, to pour out a libation. The English version takes the Hebrew as if from sakah, ‘to cover,’ as it is in ch. xxx.7, ‘covering,’ instead of from nasak, ‘to pour.’ Thus the princes of Egypt are regarded as the covering under which the Jews were hoping to find protection.”

The only other scripture used as a basis that coverings are necessary are the words of Paul. Keep in mind who is speaking as we go through these next verses. Is it Yahweh? No, it is Paul. He does not say “Yahweh says......” To whom is he speaking? Gentile converts. Did you ever look into their lives or their customs? The society around a group of people can have a strong influence on what is said to them because of what may have been going on in that area, at that time.

I CORINTHIANS 11

I Corinthians 11:3-4 3-But I want you to know that Messiah is the head of every man, and the man is head of a woman, and Yahweh is the head of Messiah. 4-Every man praying or prophesying having anything down over his head shames his head.

In verse 4, the word “anything” does not appear in the Greek. The word “down” is the Greek #2596 kata, meaning down (in place or time), in varied relations (according to the case with which it is joined).

The New Strong’s Expanded Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible,

Page 130 in the Greek dictionary – “In I Cor. 11:4 ‘having his head covered’ is, lit., ‘having (something) down the head’ signifying that hair that hangs down is too long for a man, and consequently hair that does not hang down on a woman is too short.”

I Corinthians 11:5 And every woman praying or prophesying with the head uncovered shames her head; for it is the same as being shaved.

“Uncovered” is the Greek #177 akatakaluptos, meaning uncovered. But it does not say she is to be covered with a veil. Looking at the verse above, could it be that she must have hair that hangs down to cover her head? (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

I Corinthians 11:6 For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn, or to be shaved, let her be covered.

Meaning that if her hair is really short, she may as well have it shorn. If she doesn’t want it shorn or shaved, then she should allow it to grow out to be a covering on her head.

I Corinthians 11:7-9 7-For truly a man ought not to have the head covered, being the image and glory of Yahweh. But woman is the glory of man. 8-For man is not of the woman, but woman of the man. 9-For also man was not created through the woman, but woman through the man.

In the original creation, woman came “through man” when Yahweh used one of Adam’s ribs to create Eve.

I Corinthians 11:10 Because of this, the woman ought to have authority on the head, because of the angels.

The word “authority” is the Greek #1849, exousia. It means privilege, i.e., force, capacity, competency, freedom, or mastery, or delegated influence. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

But it does not mean veil or any kind of cloth covering.

I Corinthians 11:11-12 11-However, man is not apart from woman, nor woman apart from man, in the Master. 12-For as the woman is out of the man, so also the man through the woman; but all things from Yahweh.

In the following of Yahshua the Master, man and woman are not separated. They both have an equal chance to be a child of Yahweh. As for who is from or through whom, Yahweh is the one who made it so.

I Corinthians 11:13 You judge among yourselves: is it fitting for a woman to pray to Elohim uncovered?

“Fitting” is the Greek #4241, prepo, meaning to tower up (to be conspicuous), i.e. (by impl) to be suitable or proper. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

Would it be suitable or proper for a woman’s hair to be extremely short and not hanging down as a covering?

I Corinthians 11:14 Or does not nature herself teach you that if a man indeed adorns the hair, it is a dishonor to him?

“Adorns” in the King James reads as “have long hair.” The Greek word is #2863, komao, meaning to wear tresses of hair. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

Strong’s Concordance comments: “Komao signifies ‘to let the hair grow long, to wear long hair,’ a glory to a woman, a dishonor to a man (as taught by nature), I Cor 11:14, 15.” (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

I Corinthians 11:15 But if a woman should adorn the hair, it is a glory to her, because the long hair has been given to her instead of a veil.

The word “adorn” is the same as in the verse above. Did you notice what this actually says? Long hair instead of a veil! The King James says “for a covering.” “For” is the Greek #473, anti, meaning opposite, i.e. instead of or because of. “Covering is the Greek #4018, peribolaion. It is something thrown around one, i.e. a mantle or veil. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

Verse 15 is the only place in verses 3-16 of this chapter where the word for veil or covering is found in the Greek. It is not necessary that a woman wear a hat, veil, cloth or scarf over her head. Yahweh has given her long hair to take the place of that type of covering. Isn’t what He created good enough?

I Corinthians 11:16 But if anyone thinks to be contentious, we do not have such a custom, nor the churches of Yahweh.

Based on this, one in Yahweh’s assemblies would be contentious if they insisted women could pray or prophesy with short-cropped hair or if they insisted that the women must have a veil or other covering. Paul said it was a custom, and was a custom with Pharisaical Judaism.

To Be A Jew by Rabbi, Hayim Halevy Donin,

Page 180 – “Though never legislated by the Sages, the custom of not going about bareheaded at any time -- at home, in the synagogue and outdoors -- extends back several thousand years in time. In many ways, it has today become a mark of Jewish piety.”

“To wear a headcovering was the ancient Roman stigma for a servant. Free men went bareheaded. The Jews adopted this practice in a House of God and in prayer or whenever God’s name was mentioned in blessings to emphasize that they were the servants of the Lord. Gradually, the practice was extended to wearing a headcovering also under the open skies. It became the Jewish way of showing reverence for God.”

TRADITIONS OF MEN

Is this a subject which can be taken so far that it borders on the ridiculous? There have been some customs in Judaism where the hair of a bride was shaved and she was to wear a wig instead. Don’t think so?

http://everything2.com/title/Sheitl -“Sheitl (also sheitel, shaytel or shaitel, depending on your preference) is not, as it might sound, a term of abuse, but a Yiddish word meaning wig. Generally, it is used to refer to the wigs worn by married Orthodox Jewish women.”

“The driving force behind a woman covering her head is modesty. The rabbis whose discussions form the Talmud explain how a woman’s hair is one of the most erotic parts of her body. … Essentially, it amounts to a woman saving a part of herself for her husband. However, there are other people able to see a married woman’s hair: her children, other women and perhaps her father or brothers.”

“In Numbers 5 (5.18) and Isaiah 3 (3.16-17) references to uncovering a woman’s head are related to instances of shame or humiliation; it was a punishment for adultery.”

“Apart from these references, it is in the Schulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 75) where it is laid out that married women should cover their heads.”

http://www.ahavat-israel.com/torat/kisui.php -“Women who are or have been married (widows and divorcees) are required to cover their hair. A woman who has never been married does not have to.”

“It is an explicit law (Schulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim, Ch. 75) – and not only a custom – of the Torah that a married woman is to cover her hair, Kisui HaRosh.”

“The priest shall stand the woman before G-d and uncover her hair….’ BaMidbar (Numbers) 5:18’

“The source for this prohibition is from the above verse, which deals with the laws of a sotah – a suspected adulteress. Rashi provides two explanations in the Talmud, Ketuvot 72a: One, that from the fact that she is punished midah keneged midah (measure for measure) for exposing her hair, we see that this is prohibited. Two, from the fact that we expose her hair we see that under normal conditions a Jewish woman’s hair should be covered.”

“Moreover, from the great reward received for performing this mitzvah one can learn that there is great importance to fulfilling this law.”

“As the Zohar states (III, 126a) in Parshat Naso, (Mishnah Brurah, Laws of Kriat Shema, Ch. 75): ‘Her children will enjoy increased stature over other children; moreover, her husband shall be blessed with all blessings, blessings of above and blessings of below, with wealth, with children and grandchildren…’”

http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books/beautiful-within/20.htm - “The objection that wearing a sheitel was not made a condition of the match prior to the wedding, is not at all convincing. Does wearing a sheitel have anything to do with keeping one’s word? It should be worn because it brings true good fortune to the husband, the wife, to children and grandchildren.”

“In the past the custom was to cut off the hair. Later on the custom spread of wearing a sheitel. Wearing a sheitel is especially appropriate now, when one can obtain a sheitel in various shades, which looks even nicer than one’s own hair.”

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=174%letter=W - “A covering for the head, consisting of false hair interwoven with or united to a kind of cap or netting. Wearing false hair on the head to supplement a scanty natural supply, or as an adornment, appears to have been a common custom among women in the Talmudic period. The Mishnah calls false hair ‘pe’ah nokrit’ (a strange lock), and declares that on Sabbath a woman may wear a wig in the courtyard but not in the street, the apprehension in the latter case being that she might remove the wig and carry it from private to public premises, which is forbidden (Shab.vi. 5, 64b). The husband may object to a wife’s vow if it involves shaving off her hair. One tanna thought she might wear a wig, but R. Meir said the husband might object to the wig on the ground of uncleanliness (Naz. 28b). The question is discussed whether or not a wig may be considered as a part of the body of the wearer (Sanh. 112a; ‘Ar. 7b).”

“The wearing of the hair loose and exposed in the street was forbidden to women as disorderly and immoral. A married woman who disobeyed this Jewish ordinance (‘dat Yisra’el’) established a legal cause for divorce and forfeited her dowry (Ket. Vii. 6, 72a). This ordinance came to be scrupulously observed, and a married woman could be distinguished by her hair being entirely covered; if one went with uncovered head it was taken as evidence that she was a virgin (Sifre 11). For a woman, during the reading of the ‘Shema’, to leave visible hair which usually is covered is considered an impropriety (Ber. 24a). In the Middle Ages married women scrupulously cut or shaved off their hair, covering their heads with kerchiefs. Some women wore on the forehead a silk band resembling in color that of the hair. During the sixteenth century R. Judah Katzenellenbogen and R. David ha-Kohen of Corfu permitted a wig to be used under a cover (David ha-Kohen, Responsa, No. 90). Moses Alashkar permitted the side hair to be partly exposed (Responsa, No. 35). During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries rich women wore wigs in various styles, more or less exposed. The ‘pe’ah nokrit’ in the Mishnah was pointed out to prove the early custom, but the opponents of the innovation explained that the wig was covered, not exposed. R. Moses Sofer and his disciple Akiba Joseph were decidedly opposed to the wig (‘Leb ha-‘Ibri,’ pp. 129, 189, Lemberg, 1873).”

It is interesting that they will take something fake and think Yahweh will honor that while they destroy what He gave them as a part of their body. When he created the human bodies, He said “It is good.” But not good enough for them?

All these quotes are examples of what opinions of men can do to the laws of Yahweh. Were they adding things or changing things to suit their own beliefs and ideas? Are Yahweh’s people to be following the traditions of men?

CONCLUSIONS

There is only one question to be considered here. If headcoverings are as important as the proponents proclaim, why was Yahweh so silent about it? He said we are to obey HIS laws – and headcoverings are nowhere to be found in them.

WHAT YAHWEH DID SAY

Deuteronomy 4:2 You shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish ought from it, that you may keep the commandments of Yahweh your Elohim which I command you.

Deuteronomy 12:21 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it; you shall not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

KIPPAH / YARMULKE

Many Jewish men are seen wearing something on their heads, some of them all the time, others only when they go to worship or pray. It is a small, circular covering that lays against the head. They may be plain or colorful or have designs on them. These are known as a kippah (kippot in the plural) or as a yarmulke in Yiddish.

Should we as Yahweh’s people be wearing one? Are they in the Scriptures? If so, where? If not, where and when did it originate?

HISTORICAL SOURCES

Journey Through Judaism, Alan D Bennett, editor,

Page 26-27 – “Another practice shrouded in mystery is the wearing of a head covering, or kipah, a custom that was not enshrined as law until the sixteenth century, when Joseph Karo declared in the Shulchan Aruch that a man is not permitted to walk four cubits (about 72 inches) with head uncovered.”

“In biblical times bareheadedness among men was customary. The stories of Samson (Judges 13-16) and of Absalom (2 Samuel 14:26) speak of their hair as a crown of glory, indicating that their heads were uncovered. The priests covered their heads as a sign of dignity, and the High Priest wore a golden diadem on his miter inscribed with the words ‘Holy unto the Lord’.”

“The wearing of a head covering during worship might have been influenced by the practice of Roman priests, who offered sacrifices with covered heads. Muslims, too, worship with heads covered. The Talmud speaks of the desirability of covering one’s head as a sign of fearing God. In one passage, Rabbi Huna, son of Rabbi Joshua, would not walk four cubits bareheaded, saying: ‘The Shechinah (Divine Presence) is above my head’ (Kiddushin 31a).”

“According to the Talmud (Berachot 60b), the morning blessing, ‘Blessed art Thou, O Lord … who crownest Israel with beauty,’ was written to add sanctity to the act of covering the head. But the practice of wearing a head covering never fully gained acceptance in the talmudic period, remaining a status symbol and a sign that a man was married.”

“Centuries passed before the head covering was accepted as a religious symbol. As late as the thirteenth century, it was not customary in France for Jews to cover their heads during worship; yet during the same period in Spain the opposite was true. But by the sixteenth century it became a Jewish law, capturing the imagination of the Jewish people and gaining universal Jewish acceptance. Elijah of Vilna (1720-1797), known as the Vilna Gaon, acknowledged that the practice is based on custom.”

The First Jewish Catalog, Richard Siegel, Michael Strassfeld, and Sharon Strassfeld,

Page 49 – “Throughout Jewish history, the attitude toward covering the head has varied. Drawings from the third century C.E. depict Jews without hats. In the Middle Ages, many Jews wore hats only during prayer and study. Gradually it became a binding custom to wear hats at all times.”

“The use of a kipah – skullcap or yarmulka – instead of a hat is of post-talmudic origin. Lately, kippot have become a symbol for Jewish identification and are often worn for that reason alone.”

Jewish Literacy, Rabbi Joseph Telushkin,

Pages 662-663 – “In Jewish tradition, covering the head conveys the wearer’s sense that there is a force in the universe above him.”

“The head covering generally worn today is much smaller than a hat. Known in Hebrew as a kippah, it is usually made of cloth and is several inches in diameter.”

“Although the kippah might symbolize to many non-Jews a high level of Jewish religiosity, wearing one is a custom, not a law. Nowhere does either the Torah or Talmud mandate that a Jewish male wear a head covering.”

Sacred Origins of Profound Things, Charles Panati,

page 18 – “The earliest Jewish reference to a head covering exists in Exodus 28:4, which lists the vestments that set the priest apart from the congregation: ‘a breastplate, an ephod [a richly embroidered outer garment], a robe, a brocaded tunic, a miter [turban or headband], and a sash’.”

“The miter was called a mitznefet and was the tonsorial crown of the priest’s wardrobe. Whereas several biblical references view a head covering as a sign of mourning the dead, the Talmud associates headgear with the concept of reverence toward God and a gesture of respect by the faithful.”

To Be A Jew, Rabbi Hayim Halevy Donin,

Pages 180-181 – “ ‘It is a custom not to walk under the heavens bareheaded’ (Orach Hayim 2:6). Though never legislated by the Sages, the custom of not going about bareheaded at any time – at home, in the synagogue and outdoors – extends back several thousand years in time. In many ways, it has today become a mark of Jewish piety.”

“To wear a headcovering was the ancient Roman stigma for a servant. Free men went bareheaded. The Jews adopted this practice in a House of God and in prayer or whenever God’s name was mentioned in blessings (such as during meals which are preceded and followed by blessings) to emphasize that they were the servants of the Lord. Gradually, the practice was extended to wearing a headcovering also under the open skies. It became the Jewish way of showing reverence for God. ‘Cover your head, so that the reverence of Heaven be upon you’ (Shabbat 156b).”

“The head covering that is usually worn, especially indoors, is a skullcap known in Yiddish as a yarmulke and in Hebrew as a kippah. No religious significance is attached to this particular type of headcovering.”

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/Kippah.html - “KIPPAH (YARMULKE) Wearing of a head covering (yarmulke, skullcaps, kippah [pl. kippot] for men was only instituted in Talmudic times (approximately the second century CE). The first mention of it is in Tractate Shabbat, which discusses respect and fear of God. Some sources likened it to the High Priest , who wore a hat (Mitznefet) to remind him something was always between him and God. Thus, wearing a kippah makes us all like the high priest and turns us into a “holy nation.” The head covering is also a sign of humility for men, acknowledging what’s “above” us (God).”

http://www.templesanjose.org/JudaismInfo/faq/kippah.htm - “The kippah is a head-covering. It is also called a yarmulke in Yiddish and often rendered "skullcap" in English. The Torah does not mandate a head-covering. Hence it is not a mitzvah (commandment) and there is no berakhah (blessing) recited upon putting it on one's head. It is likely that the custom of covering one's head derives from the attire of the High Priest in the days when the Temple in Jerusalem stood. The High Priest garb included a head-covering. When the Pharisees democratized Judaism and taught that each person is like a priest to God and each table an altar, the custom of wearing a head-covering was transferred to ordinary people as a means of expressing awareness of, and respect for, God throughout one's day.”

“The term "yarmulke" has been explained as yireh melekh (fear or awe of the King). The custom of covering one's head. It would seem that the custom of wearing a head-covering grew slowly, over time. Originally, the kippah was worn for prayer, religious study, and while eating. By the 1500's, it was universally accepted among Jews as the proper dress throughout the day. Today, some Jews cover their heads throughout the day (except when bathing and swimming); others while praying, studying sacred texts, and eating; others not at all. In liberal synagogues, both men and women will cover their head or not, as is the custom. In Orthodox synagogues, only men are required to cover their heads.”

Harper’s Encyclopedia of Bible Life, Madeleine S and J Lane Miller –

From page 86 -- “Headdress – Apparently, Jewish men wore a headdress for special occasions (Isa 61:3), on holidays, or in times of mourning (2 Sam 15:30). We first see the headdress mentioned in Exodus 28:40, as a part of the priest’s clothing.”

“Hebrew men probably used a head covering only on rare occasions, though Egyptian and Assyrian men wore them often. Some ancient headdresses were quite elaborate, especially those worn by royalty. The common Egyptian man wore a simple headdress consisting of a square cloth, folded so that three corners hung down the back and shoulders. This may have been the type used by the Hebrews.”

From page 485 – “bonnet – a bonnet was worn by the ordinary priest. This bonnet was made of fine linen (Exod 39:28). The Hebrew word (migbaoth) from which bonnet was translated means ‘to be lofty’.”

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Understanding Judaism, Rabbi Benjamin Blech,

Pages 307-308 -“Headcoverings come in all shapes and sizes. They can be regular hats or cloth, velvet or satin kippot – the Hebrew word for small round headgear. Jews usually end up with large collections because they’re invariably given out as ‘favors’ at special occasions like weddings or Bar or Bat Mitzvahs.”

“How did a custom that originated long after the close of the Bible gain such acceptance? For one thing, its symbolic meaning appeals to many. It’s a way of acknowledging that there is someone ‘above us.’ The kippah (singular of kippot) as a symbol of God, also implies by its position that God is smarter than we are. Finally, in the absence of tefillin, which used to be worn all the time on the head and identified the wearer as Jews, the kippot is a substitute symbol for a biblical law we no longer consider ourselves worthy of fulfilling.”

There are a few Scriptures we can look at regarding the covering of the head of the men.

EXODUS 28:36-38 36 – And you shall make a plate of pure gold. And you shall engrave on it the engravings of a signet: Holiness to Yahweh. 37 – And you shall put a ribbon of blue on it, and it shall be on the miter, to the front of the miter it shall be. 38 – And it shall be on Aaron’s forehead, and Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy things which will sanctify the sons of Israel to all their holy gifts. And it shall be on his forehead continually, for the acceptance of them before the face of Yahweh.

“Miter” is the Hebrew #4701, metsnefet, defined as a tiara, i.e. official turban (of a king or high priest); diadem, mitre. (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

The miter was a special item. It was to be worn only by the high priest. No one else was to wear it.

EXODUS 28:40 – And you shall make tunics for the sons of Aaron; and you shall make girdles for them; and you shall make bonnets for them, for glory and for beauty.

The word “bonnet” is Hebrew 4021, migba’ah, meaning a cap (as hemispherical). (Strong’s Hebrew-Greek Dictionary)

Bonnets were made for the other priests, the sons of Aaron. Not for all the Levites – just for the descendants of Aaron.

II SAMUEL 15:30 And David was going up in the ascent of the olives, going up and weeping, and his head was covered, and he was going barefooted. And all the people who were with him each had covered his head, and had gone up, going up and weeping.

This event occurred after a death. This was a part of their mourning procedures. What did he cover his head with? Probably the cloak that he wrapped around himself.

I CORINTHIANS 11:4 Every man praying or prophesying, having anything down over his head shames his head.

Interesting. All Jewish men have their heads covered when they pray, either by a kippah, a tallit, or the black hat the Orthodox wear. But, of course, they do not read the writings of Paul!

Also, if you use the scriptures by Paul here to insist that a woman wear a headcovering, then it would be totally wrong to ignore this one and have the men put a headcovering on. What would be the purpose? Wouldn’t that be hypocritical?

There are times the people of Israel probably did have their heads covered – with the cloak they wore. It would protect them from the glaring sun, from the cold, from the wind, from blowing sand, show they were in mourning, etc.

FOR CONSIDERATION

There is no mention of a miter, bonnet, kippah or such in Scriptures for the average Israelite man, outside the priesthood.
The kippah is not mentioned in the Torah or the Talmud.
Custom and tradition are the basis of the kippah, not any law of Yahweh.
The kippah has no religious significance.
Until the second century C.E., the kippah did not become a widespread practice.

There have been a few suggest that since we will someday be priests of Yahweh (I Peter 2:9; Revelation 5:10) then we should be wearing bonnets and priestly clothes now.

Why? Based on what? Certainly not on Scripture. We are probably not of the descendants of Aaron. We will not be of the Levitical priesthood, but of Melchizedek. We have no idea what we will be expected to wear. It may not include anything on the head. The clothing may be completely different from what the family of Aaron wore. Wouldn’t it be presumptuous of us to take that decision on ourselves? Wouldn’t it be best to wait and see what Yahweh Himself has in mind?

---------------

DOES YAHWEH EXPECT US TO “KEEP KOSHER”?

2010-06-22T12:54:00.000-07:00

A few years ago, a group of ladies had a study at the Feast of Tabernacles about clean and unclean foods. They had come across a listing of foods and food products, divided into categories, with notations as to whether the items were clean or unclean, based on Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14:3-21. In many cases, the listing named what the added unclean ingredient was. By the end, it was suggested that if an item was labeled “kosher,” then buyers could be assured that those items were clean.

But is that the whole story? Is that all there is to it? Do we just look for items labeled as kosher? Is there a difference between “clean” and “kosher”? If a person follows the laws of clean and unclean meats, then are they “keeping kosher”? And just what is “kashrut”? Is it Scriptural? What is meant by “ritual slaughter”? Why do some wines carry the label of “kosher”? They aren’t made of animal products. If we do not follow Judaism in our beliefs, then why should we turn to it to tell us what is or is not okay to eat? Should we really rely on another group of people – or on Scripture? Are the “kosher” laws of Judaism the same as what Yahweh designated in Scripture? We will look at comments from various sources to see what “keeping kosher” really means.

DEFINITIONS

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Understanding Judaism, Rabbi Benjamin Blech –

Page 236 – “Actually, the word kosher in Hebrew means fit, suitable… What’s kosher is legal and proper. In the realm of food, it’s what’s accepted by Jewish law as permissible.”

Page 239 – “The word treif, used as the opposite of kosher, comes from the Hebrew word for torn. Literally, it refers to animals torn by wild beasts and dying without the benefit of proper slaughter. Traditionally, treif is extended to apply to anything that is unfit to be eaten by religious law.”

Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period, Jacob Neusner, Editor in Chief,

Page 231 –“Food taboos (Heb. kashrut) biblical and rabbinic regulations defining permitted and prohibited foods and methods of food preparation. The outline of the Jewish dietary system derives from Scripture, which distinguishes animals that are forbidden or permitted for consumption, defines basic requirements for slaughter of animals for meat, and indicates how food must be prepared in order to be permitted for consumption. Rabbinic writings dramatically expand the legislation in each of these areas.”

Jewish Cooking for Dummies, Faye Levy,

Page 13 –“Kashrut, or keeping kosher, is the guiding principle behind time-honored Jewish food traditions and remains so in observant homes today. Following these dietary laws is a basic precept of Judaism and is considered a divine commandment that was given to the Hebrews on Mount Sinai. Behind many of the rules is the desire to have compassion for animals and reverence for life.”

“Over the years, the basic framework, which is outlined in the Torah, has been interpreted and expanded by the rabbis.”

Pentateuch and Haftorahs, by Dr J H Hertz, Editor,

Page 448 –“Indeed, the Dietary Laws have proved an important factor in the preservation of the Jewish race in the past, and are, in more than one respect, an irreplaceable agency for maintaining Jewish identity in the present. An illustrious Jewish scientist wrote: ‘It may appear a minute matter to pronounce the Hebrew blessing over bread, and to accustom one’s children to do so. Yet if a Jew, at the time of partaking of food, remembers the identical words used by his fellow Jews since time immemorial and the world over, he revives in himself, wherever he be at the moment, communion with his imperishable race. In contrast to not a few of our co-religionists, who have no occasion for weeks and months together to bestow a thought on their Creed or their People, the Jew who keeps Kashrus has to think of his religious and communal allegiance on the occasion of every meal; and on every such occasion the observance of those laws constitutes a renewal of acquiescence in the fact that he is a Jew, and a deliberate acknowledgement of that fact’ (Haffkine).”

What Do Jews Believe?, David S. Ariel,

Page 177 –“Food has to be inspected at every stage of the process by a mashgiach (kosher supervisor to assure that everything is being done according to Halakhah). Packaged goods, which often contain many ingredients, are inspected and certified as kosher by several local and national Orthodox rabbinic organizations. Many kosher-observant Jews will purchase only certified kosher products. Many Orthodox Jews will only eat out in kosher restaurants, while other kosher-observant Jews will eat in regular restaurants but order only dairy, fish, or uncooked items. There are many other kosher rules that go into great detail about Jewish food rituals.”

“The rabbinic tradition also sees the dietary laws as a means of reinforcing the distinctiveness of Israel and their separation from other peoples.”

A History of Judaism, Daniel Jeremy Silver, volume 1,

Page 196 –“The period between Alexander’s conquest and the fall of the Temple produced the Sanhedrin, a rudimentary juridic council with powers to define the community’s Torah obligation. Judaism had a religious calendar, some agreed practices (many practices which are today considered traditional – kashrut, the recitation on Passover of the Haggadah, tefillin – were intensely developed only during this period), a priesthood, a central shrine, a revealed law, and a growing canon of prophetic and historical writings.”

RITUAL SLAUGHTER

Suppose a person has a herd of cattle or a flock of sheep or goats and wants to have meat for a planned event. Can they slaughter the animal themselves? For thousands of years, people had to hunt or kill domesticated animals for food. Is it proper, according to Judaism, for anyone to kill an animal for food?

The Torah: A Modern Commentary, W Gunther Plaut, Editor,

Page 972 –“For centuries, any Jew, man or woman, was permitted to slaughter; later, this right was restricted to qualified slaughterers (shochetim), licensed and supervised by the rabbinate of the community.”

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Understanding Judaism, Rabbi Benjamin Blech,

Page 240 –“For a kosher animal to be eaten it must be slaughtered by the method known as shechitah. This is a procedure designed to cause the least suffering to the animal. It requires a perfectly sharpened blade, free from the slightest nick or unevenness. The knife moves quickly over the wind and food pipes in a fraction of a second, severing the trachea, the esophagus, the two vagus nerves, as well as both carotid arteries and the jugular veins.”

“Long before there were any societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, Jewish law insisted on a humane death for all living things. The penalty for not obeying? You can’t eat the animal, it just isn’t kosher.”

“The Torah forbids the eating of the blood that courses through the body, in any form. Before meat can be eaten, it has to be soaked and salted – soaked to loosen it and allow it to properly absorb, and salted to cause the blood to exude and be drained off.”

Is It Kosher?, Rabbi E. Eidlitz –

Pages 76-77 – “Ritual slaughter of animals differs in many ways from common techniques of slaughter. In ritual slaughter, we find caution and detail in every act. In this rabbinically supervised slaughter, the animal is killed with a knife. In this act we emphasize Jewish respect for the dignity of life. Great care is taken to use a knife that has been properly sharpened. The blade must be flawless, without a nick, and perfectly smooth, thus assuring that the kill will be quick, clean and painless to the animal.”

“This entire process begins with the shochet (ritual slaughterer) inspecting the knife for possible flaws and nicks. He does this by running the edge of his fingernail and finger up and down the blade. The slightest nick means that the knife must be resharpened. After this, he recites a short berachah before beginning the actual shechitah.”

“This knife (chalaf) is usually about 6 inches long for chickens and 18 inches long for larger animals. The knife has no point at the end of it, and is of equal width from top to bottom. These precautions are necessary in order to guarantee that the neck of the animal will not be torn. The shochet must cut through the trachea and esophagus to the jugular vein very quickly and in a clean fashion. He must not kill the animal by stabbing it.”

“The animal’s neck is first washed thoroughly to remove any sand or dirt particles in the fur which could cause a nick in the knife during slaughter. The shochet’s hand must be very steady, and he must employ one continuous movement, carefully avoiding the spine.”

Pages 78-79 --“There are eight types of mortal injury that render an animal unfit to be eaten by the kosher consumer.” These are listed as:

Derussah. Poisonous substance introduced into the body by an animal of prey hacking with its claws.
Nikuvah. Organ walls perforated.
Chassarah. Complete organs or parts of them lacking.
Netulah. Organs or part of them having been removed.
Keru’ah. Walls or covers of organs torn.
Nefulah. Shattered by a fall.
Pasdanah. Pipes split.
Shevurah. Fracture in bones.

Page 79 – “Before koshering meat, we must remove the blood vessels, nerves and fats that are forbidden to eat. This includes the sciatic nerve, gid hanasheh (Bereishis 32:22). Generally, treibering is done on the forequarter because there are so many areas in the hindquarter that would have to be removed that it is not economically feasible. In Israel, many people specialize in treibering (nikkur) the hindquarter, but in America the hindquarter is generally sold for exclusively non-kosher use.”

Page 80 – “In order to kasher meat, it first must be soaked and salted. The first step in soaking is to wash off all of the blood. Soaking is done to enable the pores to open. The following are some important points in the process of soaking:

First, the meat should be rinsed of all surface blood, then it can be soaked. The water should be at room temperature, in a vessel not normally used for cooking food. The meat should then be soaked for half an hour. Afterwards, the water should be shaken off so that it will not dilute the salt. Then the meat should be salted and left to stand for one hour.
Kashering must be done within 72 hours of shechitah, while the meat is fresh (not frozen). After that time, it can be kashered over an open fire. (Sprinkle a little salt on it before koshering on the fire.)
The salt used for should be medium coarse.
After salting, one should rinse the meat 3 times.”

MEAT AND MILK

Observant Jews will not eat meat products and dairy products at the same meal. They do not eat cheeseburgers or a pizza with both meat and cheese. If they are having meat at a meal, they will not offer coffee because of the cream that is often used in it. And why would they have two sets of dishes?

To Be A Jew, Rabbi Hayim Halevy Donin,

Page 112 –“From the thrice-stated commandment in Scripture that ‘You shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk’ (Exodus 23:19, 34:26; Deut. 14:21), the Oral Torah derived the prohibition against cooking meat and milk together, against eating such a meat and milk mixture, and against deriving any benefit from such a meat and milk mixture.”

“(Although milk that comes from a kosher animal is permitted, it is precisely this kosher milk, which when mixed with the meat of kosher cattle, sheep, or goats that the Torah forbids. Rabbinical ordinances were enacted as ‘fences’ to safeguard the observance of this commandment, and these are reflected in the practices followed in a kosher household.)”

“Although fowl was not included in the Biblical prohibition, rabbinic decree extended the prohibition of meat-milk mixing to include fowl as well. Use of the term meat therefore refers also to fowl in all instances.”

The Torah: A Modern Commentary, W Gunther Plaut, Editor,

Page 973 –“Talmudic law requires separate utensils for milk and meat if the containers are of porous material, such as unglazed pottery or wood. (Utensils of other material, e.g., metal, can be ‘koshered’ and then used for either milk or meat.) Acceptable custom, however, is much stricter. Though glass is admittedly nonporous and as such could be used for both milk and meat – and the same would apply to glazed china as long as it is uncracked – it is nevertheless customary to have separate dishes, tableware, and cooking utensils for milchig and fleischig foods. Two additional sets, further, are needed for Passover use.”

Living Judaism, Rabbi Wayne Dosick,

Pages 260-262 –“Since it became impossible to tell which baby goat and which mother’s milk were related, the law was extended to say that no animal (meat) should be cooked in any milk (dairy). The law was extended even further to say that meat and dairy should not be eaten together. In time, the prohibition against mixing and eating milk and meat together became firmly implanted as one of the central rules of kashrut.”

“Modern scholarship has finally uncovered the reason for the original Torah law prohibiting seething a kid in its mother’s milk. Seemingly, boiling a baby goat in its mother’s milk (or, at the very least, boiling meat in milk) was both a pagan form of hospitality and a pagan form of worship. The Torah is saying, ‘Do not behave or worship the Lord your God in the same way that the pagans behave or worship their pagan gods’.”

“With this newfound understanding, it could be argued that there was never any Torah-based prohibition against eating meat and dairy together, and certainly no requirement to have separate sets of dishes and utensils. This contention could lead to the discarding of the laws of basar v’chalav, meat and milk. However – whatever their original intent – the laws prohibiting the eating of dairy and meat together have been observed by Jews for centuries, sanctified over time, and have taken on their own unique and distinctive Jewish characteristics and validity. They continue to be followed by Jews who are committed to kashrut observance.”

Jewish Cooking for Dummies, Faye Levy,

Page 14 –“…a frequent step in the process of making hard cheeses, such as Parmesan, involves using a product called rennet to help coagulate the milk. Traditionally, rennet is an animal product and is considered meat, and therefore its presence makes cheese not kosher.”

Is It Kosher?, Rabbi E Eidlitz,

Pages 232-233 –“All of the many varieties of commercially prepared cheeses available to today’s consumer are produced by the same basic process, an ancient and efficient one. A type of bacteria, known in the cheese trade as a “starter,” is added to a quantity of milk, souring it. In chemist’s terms, the lactose in the milk turns to lactic acid. Next, a curdling agent is added which coagulates part of the milk, and separates it from a watery liquid known as whey. Whereas this mixture may be sufficiently processed for the likes of Miss Muffet, cheese aficionados prefer the results which come when the whey is drawn off and the curds are treated in a variety of fashions, resulting in a variety of cheeses.”

”The second step in the above process, the addition of the curdling agent, is where the kashrus question arises.”

“The most common curdling agent, known as rennet, generally comes from animal sources, specifically the lining of the stomachs of calves. Such an exotic ingredient is necessary because the enzymes therein are the only chemicals known to efficiently and effectively curdle milk. It seems that long ago, people realized this fact when they saw recently suckled milk curdling in the stomach of a just slaughtered calf and they experimented with scrapings of the stomach lining. Anthropology aside, the fact that there are kashrus implications in the use of rennet is obvious.”

“If the source of rennet is a kosher species of animal, ritually slaughtered under rabbinical supervision, it may be used to turn milk into cheese. For rather involved halachic reasons, there is no problem of meat and milk mixing in such usage. Likewise, if rennet is extracted, as it occasionally is, from vegetable sources, there is no question as to the kashrus of the cheese when it is produced under rabbinical supervision.”

“However, most commercial cheeses (except those produced under rabbinical supervision) are made with rennet derived from animals slaughtered by conventional non-kosher means.”

Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period, Jacob Neusner, Editor in Chief,

Page 232 –“Food preparation is governed by the principle that meat and dairy products may neither be cooked together nor even prepared in nor served on the same utensils. The Talmud even prohibits the consumption of milk after meat during the same meal (B. Hullin 105a). The rule requiring separate dishes intends to prevent the actual mixing of the food or the imparting of a dairy taste to meat or vice versa. In the earliest formulation of the law, such mixing of utensils renders the food prohibited only if the taste of milk actually is detectable in meat or vice versa (T. Terumot 8:16). In later practices, even in the case in which no impermissible flavor is imparted to the other food, that food is deemed forbidden.”

The Torah: A Modern Commentary, W Gunther Plaut –

Page 594 – Regarding Deut 14:21 – “Long ago Maimonides, judging the law in its context, suspected that what was at stake here was another attempt to discourage idolatry. His analysis appears to have been given support by a Ugaritic text that describes a prevailing Canaanite sacrificial rite. The text, which is defective, has been read to say: ‘On the fire seven times the young men boil a kid in milk, a lamb in butter.’ Boiling a kid in this way might therefore have been considered part of the ‘abominations’ of the nations against which Israel was warned so often and so insistently. Such a practice had possibly wide currency, for many centuries later it was still a magical procedure to sprinkle milk boiled in such fashion on trees, fields, and orchards in order to assure their fertility.”

“Whether or not later generations were still aware of the original intent of the law (whatever it was), they came to consider it the fundamental proof text for the dietary halachah that forbade the mixing of any milk with meat and, thus, provided an observance certainly never contemplated when the injunction was first formulated. (Reform Jews have generally disregarded this halachah.)”

Another part of this rule on meat and milk brought about another problem – using dishes, silverware, pots, pans, sinks, etc., for both of those things. A solution was found for that dilemma. The sages determined that each kitchen must have a set of dishes, pots, pans, silverware, glasses, etc for meat dishes and another separate set for milk dishes. And they were not to be used interchangeably.

That also includes separate sinks, if possible. If not, a plastic pan may be used so that the items don’t touch the sink already “contaminated” by the other foods. Separate containers and blades are required for blenders. All sorts of kitchen items have rules for how they must be “koshered” after use.

My first glimpse of this was on a trip to Israel, in the hotels. To avoid the mixing of milk and meat, they do not even serve coffee if the meal has a meat dish, including breakfast. That way no one could even accidentally mix the milk and meat by using cream in the coffee and eating the meat served.

Another incident was at an open-air food court area in Jerusalem. The pizza place had two doors. A person going in one door could order a cheese pizza without meat. Or the individual could go in the other door and get a meat pizza, minus the cheese. Of course, what was to stop anyone from buying one of each and eating them together???

Now another question. Can foods be clean, but not kosher? In a local grocery store in the United States there is a package of small beef sausages that appears to be clean – no unclean ingredients are listed on the label. In a call to the producer, it was learned that there was absolutely no pork or any other unclean item in the food. So why didn’t it carry a kosher symbol? There are two possible answers. One would be that the beef used had not been slaughtered according to the laws of Judaism. The other would be because one ingredient listed was a small amount of milk. The sausage is clean, according to Yahweh’s rules, but not kosher according to kashrut rules.

THE SINEW THAT SHRANK

Are there any “clean” meats that are forbidden by Judaism?

Living Judaism, Rabbi Wayne Dosick,

Page 258, regarding Genesis 32:32 –“But Jacob was injured during the altercation, and he limped for the rest of his life. So the Torah commands, ‘Therefore the Children of Israel do not eat of the thigh muscle, which is on the hollow of the thigh [probably meaning the hip socket] unto this day, because Jacob was injured at the thigh muscle’ (Genesis 32:32).”

"Thus even if the animal is a permitted animal, and even if it is slaughtered according to the laws of shechitah, and even if the blood is properly drained and the fat removed, Jews are still prohibited from eating the hindquarter of the animal. This means that cuts of meat from the forequarter of the animal, such as shoulder steak and chuck steak, are kosher; but popular cuts of meat from the hindquarter, such as sirloin steak, porterhouse steak, T-bone steak, and filet mignon, are not kosher.”

“To be kosher, meat must satisfy all these requirements. Kosher meat is available only from kosher butcher shops (or frozen in a package that is certified as kosher) or from a kosher restaurant. Meat in the meat department of a regular supermarket is not kosher – even though it is from a permitted animal and is a permitted cut – because it was not slaughtered properly.”

A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments, by Robert Jamieson, A.R. Fausset and David Brown,

Page 216, regarding Genesis 32:32 –“The practice of the Jews in abstaining from eating this in the flesh of animals is not founded on the law of Moses, but is merely a traditional usage. The sinew is carefully extracted; and where there are no persons skilled enough for that operation, they do not make use of the hind legs at all. Abstinence from this particular article of animal food is universally practiced by the Jews, and is so peculiar a custom in their daily observance, that the readers of ‘The Jews in China’ will remember, the worship of that people is designated by the name of Teaou-kin-keaou, or ‘Pluck-sinew-religion’.”

KOSHER WINE

Yahweh’s laws label only animals as clean or unclean. He gives no such designation on any fruit, vegetable, grain, etc. So what is meant by “kosher wine”?

Living Judaism, Rabbi Wayne Dosick,

Page 262 –“Wine production must be certified and supervised to be kosher. It might be presumed that all wine is kosher because wine is made of grapes or other fruits, which (like all vegetables and fruits) are kosher. But the kashrut of wine is not determined from its ingredients, but by how its production is supervised and certified.”

“Judaism wanted to be sure that any wine used for Jewish ritual purposes was never used or tainted by pagan worshipers. So Judaism required that its ritual wine be carefully supervised in all phases: the planting of the vines, the growing of the grapes, the harvest, the winemaking, the barreling, the bottling, and finally, the pouring. All of these tasks had to be performed by Jews, and supervised and certified by rabbinic authorities. Today this entire process of thorough supervision is still required in order for a wine to be certified as kosher.”

“Traditional Jews drink only kosher wine, both for ritual purposes and as a beverage, and still insist that the wine be poured from bottle to glass by a Jew.”

Is It Kosher?, Rabbi E Eidlitz,

Page 209 –“The Halachah is that wine not only must be made from kosher ingredients, it also must be produced by a shomer Shabbos Jew. If it comes in contact with any other type of person before it is pasteurized, it is rendered non-kosher. Due to this stringent halachah, strict kashrus supervision is required throughout all stages of the wine-manufacturing process until the final bottling.”

“An interesting prohibition concerning wines relates to the status of boiled wine. Kosher wine that has been cooked before any contact with a non-Jew is exempted from the injunction. Boiled wine is considered “improper” to be offered as a libation to an idol: therefore, if a non-Jew subsequently came into contact with boiled wine, the wine is still permissible to drink. Many kosher wines today bear markings to indicate that they have been boiled. In such a case, it will state on the label “yayin mevushal” (boiled wine). Extra caution should be taken with a kosher wine that has not been previously boiled, lest a non-Jew or a Jew who is not shomer Shabbos come in contact with the bottle of wine (maid, etc.).”

THE TALMUD

Rather than basing beliefs only on Torah alone, Judaism uses added books. The Mishnah was compiled about 300 C.E. It was a collection of the sages’ interpretations of Yahweh’s laws, expanded to cover all situations they could think of at the time. The Talmud, compiled about 400-500 C.E. is a commentary on the Mishnah done by various rabbis giving their opinions and arguments. Here are some interesting quotes from the Talmud.

The Talmud, The Steinsaltz Edition, by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz –

Page 152 -- [Hidush] “Lit. novelty. A unique law that differs from seemingly comparable laws in the Torah. For example, the law prohibiting the consumption of meat and milk mixtures is a [hidush], since each component of the mixture is itself permitted, and only when these components are mixed is the resulting food prohibited. Other prohibited foods, by contrast, are not produced by mixing permissible. And since a [hidush] is by definition unique, no exegetical inferences can be drawn from such cases.”

Page 167 – [betul esurim] “Lit., the nullification of prohibitions. The neutralization of the prohibition on a forbidden item when it becomes mixed with other entities; for example, when forbidden food is mixed with permitted food. When a prohibited item is mixed together with other items and can no longer be singled out as an individual unit, the mixture may sometimes be permitted for use. The circumstances under which the mixture containing the prohibited item becomes permitted depending upon the nature of the prohibition and the nature of the mixture. Some prohibited items become permitted in a mixture: (1) where there is a simple majority of permitted substances; or (2) where the taste of the forbidden substance is no longer discernible; or (3) where the permitted substances are 60 times the quantity of the prohibited substance; or (4) where the permitted substances are 100 times the quantity of the prohibited; or (5) where the permitted substances are 200 times the quantity of the prohibited. Certain prohibited items or substances can never be neutralized, however much the permitted substances are greater than the prohibited (e.g., hametz on Pesah). The neutralization of a prohibited item when mixed with a permitted item can only take effect if the mixture was accidentally created – one may not intentionally effect such a neutralization. A prohibited item can also be neutralized when it loses its importance. For example, a forbidden food may become permitted when it is no longer fit for consumption.”

Page 173 – [basar b’halav] ”Lit., meat in milk. The Torah mentions the prohibition against ‘boiling a kid in its mother’s milk’ 3 times (Exodus 23:19, 34:26; Deuteronomy 14:21). The first is explained by the Sages as referring to the prohibition against cooking a mixture of meat and milk; the second refers to the prohibition against eating such a mixture; and the third refers to the prohibition against deriving benefit from it. By Torah law, these prohibitions only apply to mixtures of milk and meat of kosher domestic animals [behemah tehorah]. The Sages, however, also forbade the eating of mixtures of milk and kosher fowl or kosher non-domesticated animals [chayah tehorah], but it is permissible to benefit from such mixtures. Similarly, though the Torah prohibition only refers to an actual mixture cooked together, the Sages extended the prohibition and forbade eating milk products until a significant period of time has passed since the eating of meat (6 hours, according to the common custom).”

Page 176 – [gid hanasheh] “The sciatic nerve [nervus schiadicus, running down the back of the hind leg of an animal]. One of the parts of kosher domestic [behemah tehorah] and non-domestic [chayah tehorah] animals which is forbidden by Torah law to be eaten (Genesis 32:33). In addition to the nerve itself, it is customary not to eat any of its branches or the fat that encloses it.”

Page 217 -- [melichah] “Salting. The salting of food to make it fit for consumption or sacrifice. (1) In order to make the meat of domestic and non-domestic animals and of poultry fit for eating, the meat must be salted before being cooked, so that the salt will absorb the blood found in the meat. After salting, the meat is rinsed. (2) With reference to sacrifices, any offering placed on the altar must have some salt added to it, so as to fulfill the Torah commandment, ‘With all your offerings you shall offer salt’ (Leviticus 2:13).”

Page 221 – [ma’amid] “Binder, ingredient that curdles, supporter. Ordinarily, if a minute quantity of non-kosher food serves as a curdling agent and gives the kosher food consistency (e.g., if non-kosher rennet was used in the making of cheese), then the resulting mixture is not kosher, no matter how small the quantity.”

Page 228 – [noten ta’am] “Something that gives taste. Usually, when non-kosher food is mixed with kosher food, and the taste of the non-kosher food can no longer be detected, the mixture is permitted. Such a mixture may be given to a non-Jewish cook to determine whether or not the taste of the non-kosher ingredients is noticeable. If this is not possible, the mixture is presumed to be kosher, if it contains at least 60 times as much kosher food as non-kosher food.”

Though these quotes refer to mixtures of clean and unclean, most sources stress that is referring only to accidental mixtures, never to anything deliberate. That more or less seemed “acceptable” until the research turned toward “kosher gelatin”.

http://www.soundvision.com/info/halalhealthy/halal.kosher.asp - “Gelatin is considered Kosher by many Jews regardless of its source of origin. If the gelatin is prepared from non-zabiha, Muslims consider it haram (prohibited). Hence foods items such as marshmallows, yogurt, etc., showing kosher symbols are not always halal.”
“Enzymes (irrespective of their sources even from non-kosher animals) in cheese making are considered mere secretion (pirsah b'almah) according to some kashrut organizations, hence all cheeses are considered kosher. Muslims look for the source of the enzyme in cheese making. If it is coming from the swine, it is considered haram (forbidden). Hence cheeses showing kosher symbols may not be halal.”

http://www.ivu.org/faq/gelatine.html What is kosher gelatine? from the Vegetarian Resource Group -- ”Kosher gelatin can be made with fish bones, and/or beef skins. Contrary to assumptions, it is also considered kosher to use it with dairy products. Kosher law is very complex and the bones and hides used in gelatin production are considered pareve. The general meaning of pareve refers to foods that are neither milk nor meat, and many people assume this means that the product is vegetarian. However, OU pareve certified ingredients can have animal products, such as fish, eggs, and gelatin, in them.”

"Kosher Gelatin Marshmallows: Glatt Kosher and 'OU-Pareve'," an article that appeared in Kashrus Magazine, explains the distinctions. A quote from the article is as follows: ..."since the gelatin product is from hides or bones - not real flesh - and has undergone such significant changes, it is no longer considered 'fleishig' (meat) but 'pareve', and can be eaten with dairy products."

The following quote was the most interesting, discussing whether or not Jello-O is kosher.

http://users.rcn.com/sue.interport/food/gelatin.html

1. How is gelatin made?

"The production of the gelatin starts w/refinement of collagen-bearing tissues of ANY ANIMAL that was raised and slaughtered for food purposes. ....These materials are carefully soaked in alkalies and/or acids and washed in clean water to remove almost all non-collagen constituents, including meat. During this soaking period the collagen is converted to gelatin. The treated materials are then cooked gently in pure water to extract the gelatin, which is further refined by filtration....(Contrary to common belief, gelatin is not manufactured from horns or hooves or meat of animals, for these do not contain the necessary collagen).”

"It is interesting to note that during manufacture of gelatin, chemical changes take place so that, in the final gelatin product, the composition and identity of the original material is completely eliminated. Because of this, gelatin is not considered a meat food product by the United States government..."

”The sheet also reminds us that gelatin is used to coat medicine pills as well.”

2. Is it Kosher and Pareve?

"JELL-O Brand gelatin is certified as Kosher by a recognized orthodox Rabbi as per enclosed RESPONSUM. In addition to being Kosher, Jell-O is also Pareve, and can be eaten with either a meat meal or a dairy meal."

”They included a sheet with a copy of "The Halachic Basis of our Kashruth Certification of Atlantic Gelatin and the General Foods Products containing this Gelatin" by Rabbi Yehuda Gershuni & Rabbi David Telsner. The upshot is that since the collagen has been taken apart by the chemical digestion and a new substance has been produced it meets the specifications of the Orthodox Dietary Laws and is Kosher and Pareve.”

Did you notice those words? “ANY ANIMAL that was raised and slaughtered for food purposes.” Unclean animals are also raised and slaughtered for food purposes (such as pigs, ostriches, emus, etc) – are they included here? Is it really okay simply because the original ingredient has changed and a new substance has been produced? Does that mesh with any Scripture? Would Yahweh approve?

HALAL

Islam also has specific food laws. Are they the same as kosher or kashrut? How do they differ?

http://www.extension.iastate.edu/valueaddedag/info/HalalandKosher.htm -- “The terms “halal” and “kosher” refer to foods that are specially processed and prepared according to the customs and beliefs of members of the Muslim and Jewish faiths respectively. Each of the terms is applied to meats, fruits, vegetables and other food items. Kosher (kashur in Hebrew) means “fit or proper for use” according to Jewish law. Halal is a comprehensive Islamic term that means “lawful” regarding matters of food, drink and daily life. For the beef merchandiser, halal and kosher foods may translate into lucrative niche markets.”

”Before being declared as kosher or halal, foods must pass inspection by an agency or individuals authorized by the hierarchy of the faith related to that label. (Although the label requirements are similar and often confused in the marketplace, discriminating buyers may demand that kosher and halal be treated as separate entities by the processor.) Certification under either of the special food labels typically includes an inspection of the production facility, review of sanitation, ingredients and labels, and training of company personnel in understanding and meeting specific label requirements. Livestock must be inspected and prepared by a qualified specialist to ensure rigorous standards have been met. There are also special processes that must be followed regarding how the animal is slaughtered and processed.”

http://www.ifanca.org/halal/ -- “Halal is an Arabic word meaning lawful or permitted. The opposite of halal is haram, which means unlawful or prohibited. Halal and haram are universal terms that apply to all facets of life. However, we will use these terms only in relation to food products, meat products, cosmetics, personal care products, food ingredients, and food contact materials.”

“While many things are clearly halal or clearly haram, there are some things which are not clear. These items are considered questionable or suspect and more information is needed to categorize them as halal or haram. Such items are often referred to as mashbooh, which means doubtful or questionable.“

“All foods are considered halal except the following, which are haram:

Swine/pork and its by-products
Animals improperly slaughtered or dead before slaughtering
Animals killed in the name of anyone other than ALLAH (God)
Alcohol and intoxicants
Carnivorous animals, birds of prey and land animals without external ears
Blood and blood by-products
Foods contaminated with any of the above products”

“Foods containing ingredients such as gelatin, enzymes, emulsifiers, etc. are questionable (mashbooh) because the origin of these ingredients is not known.”

http://sps.nus.edu.sg/~dewihart/kosher%20vs%20halal.htm -- “Gelatin is considered Kosher (regardless of its origin, even from non-Kosher animals). If the gelatin is of non-Halal (e.g. swine) origin, then Muslims consider it as Haram.”

“In cheese making, the end-product is regarded as Haram if enzymes from non-Halal sources are utilised. According to Kashrut, enzymes are considered mere secretion and all cheeses are Kosher, irrespective of the sources of the enzymes, even though they may be from non-Kosher animals.”

PAUL’S COMMENTS

Another question arose. For believers to truly follow Yahweh, is it necessary for them to eat only ritually slaughtered meat? Then a Scripture came to mind to help answer the question.

I Corinthians 10:25-26 25-Eat everything being sold in a meat market, examining nothing because of conscience, 26-for the earth is the Master’s, and the fullness of it.

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible, I Corinthians 10:25 –“Whatsoever is sold in the shambles – In the market. The meat of animals offered in sacrifice would be exposed there for sale as well as other meat. The apostle says that it might be purchased, since the mere fact that it had been offered in sacrifice could not change its quality, or render it unfit for use. They were to abstain from attending on the feasts of the idols in the temple, from partaking of meat that had been offered them, and from celebrations observed expressly in honor of idols; but lest they should become too scrupulous, the apostle tells them that if the meat was offered indiscriminately in the market with other meat, they were not to hesitate to purchase it, or eat it.”

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible, I Corinthians 10:25 –“Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat – The case to which the apostle refers is simply this; it was customary to bring the flesh of the animal to market, the blood of which had been poured out in sacrifice to an idol; or, taken more particularly, the case was this; one part of the sacrifice was consumed on the altar of the idol; a second part was dressed and eaten by the sacrificer; and a third belonged to the priest, and was often sold in the shambles. To partake of the second share, or to feast upon the sacrifice, St. Paul absolutely forbids, because this was one part of the religious worship which was paid to the idol; it was sitting down as guests at his table, in token that they were in fellowship with him. This was utterly incompatible with receiving the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, which was the communion of the body and blood of Christ. But as to the third share, the apostle leaves them at liberty either to eat of it or forbear; except that, by eating, their weak brethren should be offended; in that case, though the thing was lawful, it was their duty to abstain.”

Sketches of Jewish Social Life, by Alfred Edersheim from --
“Readers of the New Testament know what separation Pharisaical Jews made between themselves and heathens. It will be readily understood, that every contact with heathenism and all aid to its rites should have been forbidden, and that in social intercourse any levitical defilement, arising from the use of what was "common or unclean," was avoided. But Pharisaism went a great deal further than this. Three days before a heathen festival all transactions with Gentiles were forbidden, so as to afford them neither direct nor indirect help towards their rites; and this prohibition extended even to private festivities, such as a birthday, the day of return from a journey, etc. On heathen festive occasions a pious Jew should avoid, if possible, passing through a heathen city, certainly all dealings in shops that were festively decorated. It was unlawful for Jewish workmen to assist in anything that might be subservient either to heathen worship or heathen rule, including in the latter the erection of court-houses and similar buildings. It need not be explained to what lengths or into what details Pharisaical punctiliousness carried all these ordinances. From the New Testament we know, that to enter the house of a heathen defiled till the evening (John 18:28), and that all familiar intercourse with Gentiles was forbidden (Acts 10:28). So terrible was the intolerance, that a Jewess was actually forbidden to give help to her heathen neighbour, when about to become a mother (Avod. S. ii. 1)! It was not a new question to St. Paul, when the Corinthians inquired about the lawfulness of meat sold in the shambles or served up at a feast (1 Cor 10:25,27,28). Evidently he had the Rabbinical law on the subject before his mind, while, on the one hand, he avoided the Pharisaical bondage of the letter, and, on the other, guarded against either injuring one's own conscience, or offending that of an on-looker. For, according to Rabbi Akiba, "Meat which is about to be brought in heathen worship is lawful, but that which comes out from it is forbidden, because it is like the sacrifices of the dead" (Avod. S. ii. 3). But the separation went much beyond what ordinary minds might be prepared for. Milk drawn from a cow by heathen hands, bread and oil prepared by them, might indeed be sold to strangers, but not used by Israelites. No pious Jew would of course have sat down at the table of a Gentile (Acts 11:3; Gal 2:12). If a heathen were invited to a Jewish house, he might not be left alone in the room, else every article of food or drink on the table was henceforth to be regarded as unclean. If cooking utensils were bought of them, they had to be purified by fire or by water; knives to be ground anew; spits to be made red-hot before use, etc. It was not lawful to let either house or field, nor to sell cattle, to a heathen; any article, however distantly connected with heathenism, was to be destroyed. Thus, if a weaving-shuttle had been made of wood grown in a grove devoted to idols, every web of cloth made by it was to be destroyed; nay, if such pieces had been mixed with others, to the manufacture of which no possible objection could have been taken, these all became unclean, and had to be destroyed.”

A Commentary on the Whole Bible, by Matthew Henry, volume 6,

Page 450 –“He tells them that what was sold in the shambles they might eat without asking questions. The priest’s share of heathen sacrifices was thus frequently offered for sale, after it had been offered in the temple. Now the apostle tells them they need not be so scrupulous as to ask the butcher in the market whether the meat he sold had been offered to an idol. It was there sold as common food, and as such might be bought and used; for the earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof (v. 26), and the fruits and products of the earth were designed by him, the great proprietor, for the use and subsistence of mankind, and more especially of his own children and servants.”

The Bible As History, by Werner Keller,

page 385, regarding some archaeological digs shortly after1893 in the ruins of the city of Corinth –“The road from Lechaeum, the west harbor, led into the heart of the old city of Corinth. Through the great marble arch of the Propylaeum, it debouched into the market place, the agora. In those days the business quarter lay to the west of Lechaeum Street, and colonnades led past its shops and up to the steps of the Temple of Apollo. What aroused genuine admiration among the hygienically minded Americans was the ingenious system of water mains that they found immediately under the houses which fronted the broad and handsomely paved market place. It obviously provided the shops with a constant supply of fresh mountain water to keep fresh foodstuffs as were liable to perish quickly. An inscription at this place dating from the last years of the reign of Augustus actually mentioned a ‘meat market.’ The Christians in Corinth were allowed to make their purchases in these shops without scruple. ‘Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat’ is Paul’s advice to the church in I Corinthians 10:25.”

“At the marble steps of the Propylaeum the excavators found a heavy stone lintel on which they were able to decipher the words ‘Hebrew Synagogue’ clearly cut out in Greek letters.”

Think what this statement by Paul is actually saying: it is saying that kosher meat – slaughtered ritually – is not what Yahweh’s law is about. How? Why?

An observant Jew would not buy meat from a Gentile, which the majority of Corinthians were.
A Gentile would not have been slaughtering animals according to Jewish ritual.
The Gentile would not have examined, soaked or salted the meat.

The JPS Guide to Jewish Traditions, by Ronald L. Eisenberg –

Page 656-657 – “According to the dietary laws, all fruits and vegetables are permitted, based on the verse, ‘See, I give you every seed-bearing plant that is upon all the earth, and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit; they shall be yours for food (Gen. 1:29). In fact, this verse and the subsequent one imply that vegetarianism was the earliest biblical ideal. Only in the time of Noah did God allow humans to be carnivorous (Gen. 9:3). God did give Noah one restriction – the consumption of blood was prohibited - but the full set of dietary laws was commanded to the Israelites after they left Egypt, and was further embellished and explicated by the Rabbis. The Jewish dietary laws (derived largely from Lev. 11:1-43) detail which animals, birds, and fish may be eaten; how they are to be slaughtered and prepared; and the rules concerning the separation of meat and milk.”

Page 664 – “In order to create a ‘fence around the Torah,’ the Rabbis decreed that the separation of meat from milk must be as complete as possible. Thus it is necessary to use separate utensils (pots, pans, dishes, and flatware) for dairy foods and meat (known in Yiddish as milchig and fleishig, respectively). This entails storing the utensils in separate areas, washing them in separate bowls or sinks, and drying them with different dishcloths (ideally of distinct colors to prevent any mistake). When using a dishwasher, it is necessary to have separate dish racks; if these are not available, the dishwasher must be run through a cycle between meat and dairy loads.”

Page 667 – “For the early Rabbis, the secret of Jewish survival was separatism – being a holy people required being a people apart. As expressed in the early Apocryphal Book of Jubilees (22:16): ‘Separate yourself from the nations, do not eat with them, do not act according to their deeds, and do not associate with them, because their work is uncleanness, all their ways are contamination, detestation and abomination. They slaughter their sacrifices to the dead and pray to demons.’ By following the dietary laws, the observant Jew may have less opportunity to socialize with non-Jews (since this often entails eating together). According to this view, the observance of kashrut has been a critical factor in decreasing the rates of Jewish assimilation and intermarriage.”

SCRIPTURES

For all the rules that have been described here, there are only a few Scriptures that are used as the “basis” for these rules. While reading over these verses, just consider how much “expanding” of Yahweh’s word the scribes, Pharisees and rabbis did over the generations.

#1 - Genesis 32:31-32 31-And the sun rose upon him (Jacob) as he passed over Penuiel and he was limping on his hip-socket. 32-On account of this the sons of Israel do not eat the sinew of the thigh which is on the hip-socket, until this day, because He struck the hip-socket of Jacob, the sinew of the thigh.

Did those verses contain “Yahweh said” or “you shall not”? No, only a comment that certain people had chosen not to eat that part of the animal.

What purpose would Yahweh have for requiring such a thing? He had already declared these animals as clean for food, except for the fat and the blood. How would wasting a large portion of a slaughtered animal serve any greater purpose? It was Jacob, a man, who was injured, not an animal. So how does that actually relate? Is it somehow to honor Jacob?

#2 - Exodus 23:19 You shall not simmer a kid in its mother’s milk. (Also Ex 34:26 and Deut 14:21)

This is a reference to specific animals and events. There is nothing here about it being wrong to eat a cheeseburger or a meat and cheese pizza or to have a glass of milk with a steak dinner. And just how does this apply to chicken? Has anyone yet seen a chicken give milk? There is no reference here either about the separation of dishes and utensils or the need to have two sets of dishes.

#3 - Leviticus 3:17 It shall be a never-ending statute for your generations. You shall not eat any fat or blood.

#4 - Leviticus 7:23-27 23-Speak to the sons of Israel saying, You shall not eat any fat of ox, or of sheep, or of goat. 24-And the fat of a dead body, and the fat of a thing torn may be used for any work, but you certainly shall not eat it. 25-For whoever eats the fat of the animal, of which one brings near a fire offering to Yahweh, even the person who eats shall be cut off from his people. 26-And you shall not eat any blood in all your dwellings of fowl, or of animal. 27-Any person who eats any blood, even that person shall be cut off from his people.

#5 - Leviticus 17:10-14 10-And any man of the house of Israel, or of the alien who is staying in your midst, who eats any blood, I will set My face against that person that eats blood and will cut him off from his people. 11-For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you on the altar, to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood which makes atonement for the soul. 12-For this reason I have said to the sons of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood; and the alien who is staying in your midst shall not eat blood. 13-And any man of the sons of Israel, or of the aliens who reside in your midst, who hunt game of beast or fowl which may be eaten, then he shall pour out its blood and cover it with dust. 14-For the life of all flesh is its blood. And I say to the sons of Israel, You shall not eat blood of any flesh, for the life of all flesh is its blood; anyone eating it shall be cut off.

#6 - Deuteronomy 12:15-16, 21-27 15-Only with all the desire of your soul you shall sacrifice and eat flesh within your gates according to the blessing of Yahweh your Elohim which He has given you, the unclean and the clean one may eat of it, as of the gazelle and as of the hart. 16-Only you shall not eat the blood; you shall pour it as water on the earth. 21-If the place which Yahweh your Elohim shall choose to put His name there is too far from you, then you shall sacrifice of your herd and of the flock which Yahweh has given you, as I have commanded you; and you shall eat within your gates according to all the desire of your soul. 22-Only, as the gazelle and the hart are eaten, so shall you eat of it; the unclean and the clean may eat of it alike. 23-Only, be sure not to eat the blood, for the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh; 24-You shall not eat it; you shall pour it on the earth as water. 25-You shall not eat it in order that it may be well with you, and with your sons after you, when you do that which is right in the eyes of Yahweh. 26-Only, your set-apart things which you have, and your vows, you shall take up and shall go to the place which Yahweh shall choose. 27-And you shall offer your burnt offerings, the flesh and the blood, on the altar of Yahweh your Elohim; and the blood of your sacrifices shall be poured out by the altar of Yahweh your Elohim; and you shall eat the flesh.

By stating that we are to eat no blood, did Yahweh intend that the meat be soaked, salted and rinsed a set number of times? Is it ever possible to get ALL blood out of any meat? No. Draining the blood will remove as much as possible. But what about the blood that has circulated throughout the body and is deep in inner cells? The salt cannot affect every drop of it.

There is no way this was performed at the first Passover in Egypt. The command was for the slaughter, cooking and eating to be done quickly. And no change was made in those laws.

In Numbers 9 we find the instructions for the Passover in the second month. This occurred long after the law was given at Sinai (Num 9:1) and the instructions say, in verse 14, that it is to be done “according to the ordinance of the Passover.” And where is that found? In Exodus 12. The soaking and salting of the meat is not added to the instructions. Also, the soaking and salting applies to meat that has been cut up. The Passover lamb was not to be cut up, it was to be roasted with “the purtenance thereof” (Ex 12:9). That means it still had all the organs inside it. It would not have been soaked either because the same verse in Exodus 12 mentions that it was not to be sodden with water.

There are no examples in Scripture of the koshering of meat being done. Period.

As with the blood, it is impossible to remove ALL fat from meat – such as the marbling of steaks. So exactly how did Yahweh mean this? Exactly what did He say?

Leviticus 3:12-17 12-And if his offering be a goat, then he shall offer it before Yahweh. 13-And he shall lay his hand upon the head of it, and kill it before the tabernacle of the congregation: and the sons of Aaron shall sprinkle the blood thereof upon the altar round about. 14-And he shall offer thereof his offering, even an offering made by fire unto Yahweh; the fat that covereth the inwards, and all the fat that is upon the inwards, 15-And the two kidneys, and the fat that is upon them, which is by the flanks, and the caul above the liver, with the kidneys, it shall he take away. 16-And the priest shall burn them upon the altar: it is the food of the offering made by fire for a sweet savour: all the fat is Yahweh’s. 17-It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood.

This fat He is referring to is in globs that can be easily removed and separated from the meat. It is a harder, more solid type fat than what is found in the marbling of steaks and meats.

#7-Leviticus 2:13 And every offering of your food offering you shall season with salt and you shall not let the salt of the covenant of your Elohim be lacking from your food offering: you shall offer salt with all your offerings.

Notice it says “season”. It doesn’t say to coat with salt and allow to set for a specified amount of time. And note also that this verse was about sacrifices, not for the meals of the general populace.

#8-Leviticus 11:31-35 31-These are unclean to you among all which swarm; anyone who touches them in their death is unclean until the evening. 32-And anything on which any one of them falls, in their death, is unclean, of any vessel of wood, or garment, or skin, or sack; any vessel in which work is done shall be caused to go in the water, and shall be unclean until the evening; then it shall be cleaned. 33-And any earthen vessel into the midst of which any one of them falls, whatever is in it shall be unclean, and you shall break it. 34-Of all the food which may be eaten, that on which such water falls shall be unclean, and all drink that may be drunk in any such vessel shall be unclean. 35-And anything on which any part of their dead body falls shall be unclean, oven and hearth, shall be broken down; they are unclean, yes, they are unclean to you.

Maybe this reference is where the idea originated for koshering utensils and dishes. But this has to do with unclean creatures, not a mixing of milk and meat. Scripture mentions that the dish is to either be destroyed or washed. Once washed, there is no restriction on what can be put into the utensil.

#9-Leviticus 11:44-47 44-For I am Yahweh your Elohim, and you have sanctified yourselves, and you have become set-apart, for I am set-apart. And you shall not defile your persons with any swarming thing which creeps on the earth; 45-for I am Yahweh who brought you up out of the land of Egypt to become your Elohim; and you shall be holy (set-apart), for I am holy (set-apart). 46 -This is the law of the animals, and of the fowl, and of every living creature which moves in the waters, and every creature which swarms on the earth, 47-to make a distinction between the unclean and the clean, and between the living thing that may be eaten, and the living thing that may not be eaten.

This Scripture tells us why Yahweh gave the law of clean and unclean animals. Why is it important that we be holy or set-apart?

Hebrews 12:14 Eagerly pursue peace and holiness (set-apartness) with all, without which no one will see the Master.

So what does Yahweh expect of His people? Are we observe His laws regarding clean and unclean meats? Or are we to expand them and “keep kosher”? Do we follow Yahweh or do we follow man? Where is our focus to be?

Deuteronomy 4:2 You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, to keep the commandments of Yahweh your Elohim which I command you.

---------------