This question comes up very often, especially when talking to Jews who question Yeshua’s claim to be Messiah, or when a person is being converted to Judaism and the rabbis they are listening to question the validity of Yeshua virgin birth. We have seen and read many commentaries of this question and some are very scholarly and some are rather simple to understand. We want to answer this question properly, so we are going to quote from an article called, “Is “virgin” or “young woman” the correct translation of Isaiah 7.14?” This came be found on the internet in the website called “Gotquestions.Org.” We believe that this is a very good explanation of this issue and we agree with it conclusion.

“Isaiah 7.14 reads, “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and he will call him Immanuel.” Quoting Isaiah t.14, Matthew 1.23 reads, “The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel-which means ‘God with us.’ ” Christians point to this “virgin birth” as evidence of Messianic prophecy fulfilled by Jesus. Is this a valid example of fulfilled prophecy? Is Isaiah 7.14 predicting the virgin birth of Jesus? Is “virgin” even the proper translation of the Hebrew word used in Isaiah 7.14?

“The Hebrew word used in Isaiah 7.14 is “almah” and its inherent meaning is “young woman.” “Almah” can mean “virgin”, as young unmarried women in ancient Hebrew culture were assumed to be virgins. Again, though, the word does not necessarily imply virginity. “Almah” occurs seven times in the Hebrew Scriptures (Genesis 24.43; Exodus 2.8; Psalm 68.25; Proverbs 30.19; Song of Solomon 1.3, 6.8; Isaiah 7.14). None of these instances demands the meaning of “virgin.” There is no conclusive argument for “almah” in Isaiah 7.14. being either “young woman” or “virgin.” However, it is interesting to note, that in the 3rd century B.C., when a panel of Hebrew scholars and Jewish rabbis began the process of translating the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, they used the specific Greek word for virgin, “parthenos,” not the more generic Greek word for “young woman.” The Septuagint translators, 200+ years before the birth of Christ, and with no inherent belief in a “virgin birth,” translated “almah” in Isaiah 7.14 as “virgin”, not “young woman.” This gives evidence that “virgin” is a possible, even likely, meaning of the term.

With all that said, even if the meaning “virgin” is ascribed to “almah” in Isaiah 7.14, does that make Isaiah 7.14 a Messianic prophecy about Jesus, as Matthew 1.23 claims? In the context of Isaiah chapter 7, the Aramites and Israelites were seeking to conquer Jerusalem, and King Ahaz was fearful . The Prophet Isaiah approaches KIng Ahaz and declares that Aram and Israel would not be successful in conquering Jerusalem (verses 7-9). The Lord offers Ahaz the opportunity to receive a sign (verse 10), but Ahaz refuses to put God to the test (verse 11. God responds by giving the sign Ahaz should look for, the “virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son…but before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.” In this prophecy, God is essentially saying that within a few years’ time, Israel and Aram will be destroyed. At first glance, Isaiah 7.14 has no connection with a promised virgin birth of the Kessiah. However, the Apostle Matthew, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, connects the virgin birth of Jesus (Matthew 1.23) with the prophecy in Isaiah 7.14. Therefore, Isaiah 7.14 should be understood as being a “double prophecy,” referring primarily to the situation King Ahaz was facing, but secondarily to the coming of Messiah who would be the ultimate deliverer.”

So, this article says that the “sign” to Ahaz was that a “virgin will be with child and give birth to a son, but before the boys knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.” This “son” was going to be born to Isaiah the prophet and his wife in Isaiah 8.1-4. But if Miraim the mother of Yeshua is a virgin, what was the sign to be given for her? We suggest that there was a “sign, or a way to prove to anyone in the first century that Miriam, the mother of Yeshua, was a virgin

We know that Miriam was a virgin and that was what she told Joseph after the visit of Gabriel in Luke 1.26-38 and said she was with child (Matt 1.18-25). Joseph, who did not believe her at first, was going to divorce her privately (they were considered married at their engagement), but an angel appeared to him in a dream and said that he should not be afraid to take Miriam as his wife (full marriage) because she has conceived under the power of God. This happened during the month of Kislev, which was the sixth month of Elisabeth’s pregnancy with John. This was the month of Chanukah and so John was born three months later, around Passover. That means that Yeshua was born in the fall, round the festival of Sukkot.

Now, what we are going for is the “sign” mentioned in Isa 7.14 and how it could allude to another sign concerning Miriam. However, at face value, a young woman having a baby wasn’t much of a sign outside of how it applied to the time of Ahaz. If Miriam was a virgin, how could that be proved in the first century? It is, therefore, significant that Miriam went “with haste” after the announcement by Gabriel to her cousin Elisabeth’s (God’s oath) house. Why would she do that? Elisabeth was married to Zacheriah (Yehovah remembers), an older man and a respected priest, a tzaddik, a righteous man. Was she told to go to a respected kohen’s house? We know she stayed there for three months until Passover, when specific ceremonies were conducted. She was beginning to show.

There is a ceremony in the Torah that could have proven that she was a virgin or not. It is called “The Sotah” and it is found in Num 5.11-31, and this portion is read between Sukkot and Chanukah in the synagogues in the first century. Sotah means “one who has strayed” and it was given because a husband may suspect his wife has been unfaithful, and this ceremony is done before the Lord to prove her innocence. The Sotah of Miriam cannot be proven because there are no records from the Temple anymore, but if she did do this, there would have been a record in the first century in the Temple. By 70 A.D., this ceremony was no longer being practiced because there were so many adulterous women in that generation, and the Temple was destroyed. This ceremony is only associated with the Temple. The Temple in the first century was a supernatural environment, just like in the time of the wilderness, and there were things that happened there all the time that were miraculous.

Now, there were two types of Sotah. First, there is the Sotah where there is no specific evidence, just a suspicion by the jealous husband. The second Sotah is one where there is specific evidence, such as the woman is pregnant. This what Miriam was and she would have been called “the presumptive Sotah.” The Mishnah has a tractate in this called “Sotah” and it says in Sotah 1.1 that the husband had to warn her before two witnesses to stay away from someone. If she didn’t, then this ceremony could be initiated. Did Miriam “volunteer” for this ceremony by going to two witnesses who could testify of her chaste behavior? Did she volunteer for the Sotah ceremony by going to her house in order to see she was a virgin? Could the Lord have told her to volunteer for this ceremony?

This is no small thing. In the Mishnah, the husband would take his wife to a local Beit Din (court) and two learned men would accompany her on the way to the Temple to prove that the husband does not cohabit with her on the way. Did Zachariah and Elisabeth perform a similar function during her three month stay with them? Both of them knew about the supernatural circumstances about the conception of their son, who would be the forerunner of the Messiah. They would have never doubted a word Miriam told her.

Once at the high court in Jerusalem, the priests tried to instill fear within her (Sotah 1.4). They wrote on paper the curse if she was not telling the truth before the Lord, and the Lord’s name Yehovah was written on it as well. Dust from the Temple is mixed with water and the paper with the curses on it, and she was made to drink it. If she dies immediately she is believed to be guilty, but this could take up to three years. She has the opportunity to say she is guilty. If so, then a certificate of divorce is written and she is divorced. Id she says she is pure, they can take her up to the eastern gate, called the “gate of the just.” It was here that the ashes of the red heifer were kept and where they purify the lepers and women after childbirth. Here, a priest takes hold of her garments, and if they were torn they were torn. They let down her hair and try to humiliate her, but this is not done in front of the younger priests if she wasa attractive. all of this was meant to get her to confess.

If she was wearing white, they dressed her in black. If she wore jewelry, they took it off. Anyone could watch these proceedings except for her male and female servants, and her parents. She was treated according to the sin. If she adorned herself to her lover for the sin, the Lord disgraced her. If she revealed herself to sin, the Lord revealed her sin. She sinned with the thigh first, then the belly, so the thigh is struck first, and then the belly if she is guilty. If she is innocent, nothing would happen to her. The Mishnah is very detailed about how exactly this is done, so if you want more information we refer you to the Mishnah, Tractate Sotah. You can also read about it in the Torah and in Alfred Edersheim’s book called “The Temple: Its Ministries and Services”, p. 361-365.

Did Miriam volunteer for this ceremony to prove she was a virgin” We don’t know, but it would have been a very powerful “sign” to the priests, the Sanhedrin, and the people. We don’t believe Joseph would have required it because he was given a dream by God, but she did talk with Zachariah and Elisabeth. They knew Messiah was coming and their son was to go before him to prepare the way as his messenger. The Sotah in the Temple, if it happened, also verified Miriam’s pregnancy as being from God fulfilling Isa 7.14.

There was a sign at the circumcision of John when Zachariah’s tongue was loosed and of course all the signs associated with the birth of Yeshua. But Miriam did not need to convince Joseph she was a virgin, he knew she was by the dream. You also have to ask this question. When Yeshua said he was the Messiah, and they interpreted Isa 7,14 as alluding to the Messiah in the first century, why didn’t his enemies, the priests, the scribes, the Temple officials, the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and every other religious sect in the first century contest his mother’s virginity? If they could prove that his mother was nota virgin, it would put an end to all his claims to be the Messiah. On the other hand, Miriam could prove she was a virgin because there was proof in the Temple records that she took a “voluntary Sotah” and nothing has happened to her! Was the sign mentioned in Isa 7.14 also alluding to the Sotah of Miriam, and this Torah command was given as a way to prove it before man? We are not saying that this really happened, but the mechanism is there in the Torah for Miriam to prove that she was a virgin in regards to the birth of Yeshua if anyone had a question about it.

John 4.1-26 has an interesting exchange between Yeshua and a Samaritan woman at Jacob’s Well, and we want to present a different view on these verses for consideration. This conversation will not be about her personal life.

The Samaritans were the descendants of the colonists brought in by the king of Assyria when the ten tribes were deported. Yeshua stops at Jacob’s well as he is passing through Samaria and he asks a woman at the well for a drink, and she wants to know why he would ask her this since she was a Samaritan and Jews had no dealings with them. Now, this was according to the 18 Edicts of Shammai passed in 20 BC, a school of the Pharisees, that opposed the school of Hillel in over 300 different areas of halakah, or how to walk in the Torah. Yeshua told her if she knew who he was, she should be asking him for a drink of living water. So right off, we see he is going to engage her in a deep, spiritual conversation here. The woman said she wanted this water so that she would not have to thirst again, but she was thinking physically here.

So, Yeshua tells her to go call her husband. Now, he knew she wasn’t in a marriage covenant, and neither was Samaria with God, but he was trying to elicit a response from her, and she is going to represent the Samaritan people. She says she has no husband. He says, “You have well said, ‘I have no husband (or marriage covenant, and neither does Samaria).’ He then goes on to say, “You (the Samaritan people) have had five husbands (five covenants with false gods).” Now, here is what we believe he is referring to.

The Assyrians replaced the ten tribes with five alien nations from Babylon, Cuthah, Avva, Hamath and Sephar-vaim in 2 Kings17.30-31, and each of these nations brought in their own gods, or “baalim” which can mean “husbands.” These false religions reigned in the land of Samaria over the people, like a “husband.” Eventually, many of the Israelites returned and intermarried with these five nations and they became the Samaritans. They had a “form” of Torah observance but it was mixed with different beliefs (2 Kings 17.33, 41). The symbolism, we believe, is this: the woman stands for Samaria, and the five husbands, or “baalim”, stood for the five alien nations and their false gods, baalim, or husbands, that religiously ruled over the people in Samaria. And the one she was living with now, who was not her husband, was the Samaritan religion at that time. So, as we shall see, this conversation is about true worship.

So the woman perceives that Yeshua is a prophet and she understood what Yeshua was getting at, that he was talking about Samaritan worship and religious beliefs, just like the prophets of old had done, not her personal life, and she responds. She says, “Our fathers worshiped in this mountain (Mount Gerizim), and you say (the Jews) that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship (Deut 12.11; 1 Kings 8.29; 2 Chr 6.6).

Yeshua says, “Woman, believe me, an hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem shall you worship the Father (because the Temple in Jerusalem is going to be destroyed, and whatever worship they did on Mount Gerizim would cease to be also).” He says the Samaritans worship what they do not know (they were ignorant of true worship), and the Jews worship what they knew (to be true), for salvation is from the Jews. That means there were true worshipers among the Jews, which he was a part of, and they knew the Lord. They had the oracles of God, the services of God, and they were instructed from the Torah, which defines what sin is. The promise of salvation through the Messiah comes from the Jewish people. He then says an hour is coming and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit, as opposed to the fleshly concepts about him; and truth, as opposed to hypocrisy, because in a short time the Jerusalem temple of the Jews, and the Samaritan worship on Mount Gerizim was going to end and be destroyed by the Romans.

The woman tells him she knows that Messiah is coming because there was a high level of expectation, as seen in Luke 3.15. This was based on the prophecies in Daniel also. She said when that happens, he will declare all things to the people, teaching the people what was the truth. One of the roles of the Messiah was he was going to be a teacher (Deut 18.15; John 11.28). It was at this point Yeshua reveals to her that he is the Messiah, and at the same time his talmidim came back from an errand, but no one questioned him as to why he was speaking to the woman. The woman left her water pot and went into the city of Shechem and told everyone that she has met the Messiah. And they came out of the city because they believed her, so she must have had a good reputation or they would not have listened to her. So they came running to Yeshua at the well.

Yeshua says, “There are yet four months, and then comes the harvest (so this event was around Shavuot and he is talking about the harvest at Sukkot, which taught the salvation of all the nations). Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes, and look on the fields that they are white for harvest (he is telling them to look at all the Samaritans running to them and many were in white; he is saying the harvest is now). The Samaritans came and they eventually asked him to stay longer with them, and he stayed there for two days. Their attitude was totally different than the Scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, Gadarenes and the others. Yeshua would later be called a Samaritan in John 8.48 as an insult.

For a detailed look into these verses, we refer you “Brit Chadasha Foundations-Concepts in John Chapter 4” on this website.

Yeshua said in Luke 24.27 that the Scriptures teach about him and the redemption, so this story is no exception. It is found in 2 Kings 6.1-7 and Elisha (God is my salvation) will be a picture of Yeshua who is sent by the Father. The story takes place near Gilgal and that is important (2 Kings 4.38). Gilgal is where the kingdom is renewed in 1 Sam 11.14-15. Saul in that story is a picture of Adam/man, the first king over the Kingdom of Yehovah (1 Chr 28.5; 2 Chr 13.8), and he goes with Samuel and is made king, but later he falls just like the first king Adam fell. Yochanon Ha Matvil or John the Immerser has his ministry in the area because the Kingdom of Yehovah has come and it is going to be renewed, and he is getting the people ready for it through an immersion of repentance, and Yeshua himself goes there for an immersion (John 1.28). Gilgal has the same root as “Golgotha” and the symbolism is even clearer. When Israel crossed over the Jordan they were circumcised at Gilgal, removing the reproach of Egypt. Our reproach of sin is removed at Golgotha by the death of Yeshua. With that said, let’s go back to 2 Kings 6.1-7.

The sons of the prophets (students of the prophets) go there to cut down some trees (a type of mankind) and want to build a place to live, all symbolic of our desire to live spiritually. The prophet Elisha (God is my salvation) goes with them, which alludes to the fact that the Lord is with us. They go to the Jordan, Hebrew “Yarden” which means “the descender” and is a type of “death.” And the trees are cut down, which indicates that we all have sinned (Matt 3.6-10) and we live near “death” at all times. While they were doing this, an axe head falls into the Jordan through an error (sin). The axe head is also symbolic of man (Prov 27.17). So man (the axe head) has fallen into death (the Jordan) and can’t be used. They cry for Elisha (Yeshua). In 2 KIngs 6.5 it says “it was borrowed” which symbolizes that our lives are “borrowed” and we must give an account to God (Deut 19.15; Acts 17.28). Elisha wants to know where it fell, alluding to the fact that man fell in the Garden of Eden among the trees, and Yehovah asked, “Where are you?” in Gen 3.9.

The sons of the prophets showed them the spot and Elisha cut off a branch. This alludes to Yeshua, the Branch in Isa 11.1; Zech 6.11-13; Jer 23.5, being “cut off” in Dan 9.26 and Isa 53.8. The branch is thrown into the Jordan, like Yeshua was thrown into death (1 Pet 2.21-24; Psa 69.1-14, 88.6-7, 16-18) and the axe head (man) floats, or was resurrected, and that which was lost is useable again. Elisha tells them to “take it up for yourself” which alludes to how each person must reach out by faith and take his new, useable life back up again for himself. Others can’t do it for you.

So, the presence of the wood (Messiah the “Branch”) thrown into the water of the Jordan (death) leads to a change in the nature of the iron and it floats (John 3.3-16; meaning our nature must be changed and we must be “born from above”). If that happens, man cannot be taken down to death and remain there, because his nature has changed (1 Cor 15.51-55). We will be raised by faith and made useful again. In Matt 14.25-33 this story is repeated in another form when Yeshua, the Branch of Zech 6, is in the water with a sinking Peter (the axe head), and he raises Peter out of the water and he is made useable again.

2 Sam 9.1-13 tells us about David’s inquiry about the descendants of Saul and he finds the grandson of Saul named Mephibosheth (extermination of the idol/shame) and restores his father’s land. He was crippled in both feet and was five when his father Jonathan died. Now there was a servant of the house of Saul whose name was Ziba (statue) and they brought him to David, and David asked him if there was anyone of the house of Saul who he could show kindness. Ziba said there was a son of Jonathan who is hiding in the house of Machir (sold) the son of Ammiel (my kinsman is God) in Lo-debar (no word).

So David sent for him from the house of Machir, and Mephibosheth came to David and fell on his face and prostrated himself. David told him not to fear because he was going to show kindness to him for the sake of Jonathan his father, who David had a covenant with. David will restore all the land of his grandfather Saul to him, and he will eat at the table of David regularly, and this is considered as being adopted by David. Mephibosheth was humbled by this and said, “What is your servant, that you should regard a dead dog like me?” David said all the land of Saul would be given to him and all that he has lost will be restored, and Ziba and his sons will cultivate the land for him and be his servants. So Mephibosheth lived in Jerusalem.

So, this story alludes to Yeshua and the believer. Like Mephibosheth, we were crippled in both feet and couldn’t walk before the Lord. But Yeshua showed us kindness and adopted us into the family of God and we will eat at his table in the Messianic Kingdom-Isa 25.6; Matt 8.11; Luke 22.30; Rev 19.9. Like Mephibosheth, we fear the king and death was a reality, but Yeshua will fulfill his promises like David fulfilled his promises to Jonathan. So, let’s do an overall review of these parallels between David and Mephibosheth, and Yeshua and our salvation.

Mephibosheth was hiding, and so were we, and we did not have the word of God to guide us (he was living in Lo-debar meaning “no word”). He was separated from the king because of his sinful ancestors and didn’t know David’s love like we did not know God’s love for us because of our sinful ancestors. David sought him out like God seeks us out before we ever sought him and came to him in faith, and our shame and idolatry was exterminated, the meaning of the name Mephibosheth. David’s kindness is extended to him for the sake of another, and God’s kindness is extended to us for the sake of another, Yeshua, and this kindness is based on a covenant. Like Mephibosheth, we must accept this kindness in humility because our salvation is based on the kindness and grace of God and not based on our works, we were crippled in our walk. The king comes to us and returns all that we have lost, and we can eat at the king’s table because we are received as sons. He does not take away our “lameness” right away but sends us help so that we can be fruitful and prosperous.

The Bible is full of characters that accomplished great things for Yehovah and some tend to lift up these people to a stature that even the characters themselves would be uncomfortable with. They would be the first to tell us that they had no power in themselves to accomplish these works and that it was the Lord who worked through them. The Bible also brings out their flaws and this is done to show that God can use anyone, no matter what flaws they have, and that these people were not the Messiah. From Noah to Paul, we have flawed people doing great works for the Lord. One of the greatest “heroes” in the Bible is David. From a teenager to his death as king of Israel, David is a name that is well known by children and adults alike, and his exploits are legendary. But David was a man of many flaws, and he probably would wish that some of those flaws remained private. So, let’s look at David a little closer when he was living among the Philistines right before the death of Saul. If God can use David, he can use us as well.

In 1 Sam 27 David flees to the Philistines because he is afraid of Saul and knows he will never reconcile with him. He moves his army and relatives and friends and their families out of the land to Gath and aligns himself to King Achish. He is welcomed and he stays in Gath at first, but requests a place of his own, so the king gives him Ziklag. This city was taken from Israel so it had Hebrews there. Achish is one of five Philistine kings, and the other four kings are suspicious of David. Ziklag is in the country so Achish will not know what he is up to.

Once trusted by Achish, David began to attack nearby tribes to make a living. They learned about Philistine military tactics which will help later on. David raided the Geshurites, the Girzites, and the Amalekites. David was ruthless and killed everyone. Now the Geshurites were allies with the Amalekites and David felt it was justified to kill them along with the Amalekites. It does not say that David was under God’s direction here with the Geshurites and the Girzites, but he did have a mandate about the Amalekites.

David is working both sides here. He is attacking the enemies of Israel which will make him a “hero” with Judah, but those he is attacking were not friends with the Philistines, so they thought it was allowable. Achish got some of the booty and David is gaining the trust of the Philistines and making them wealthier. All the while, David is being “secretive” about all this. The king does not tell David who to raid because he will have to ask David in 1 Sam 27.10. David does not report the details to Achish, and dead men tell no tales (27.11).

David’s purpose for these killings had little to do with God’s general command to destroy Amalek, although it was part of it. Achish only knows about the treasure David decided to tell him about. David probably kept some of it back, including weapons. Also, the Philistines were not pitiless pagans and they probably would not have approved of David’s tactics. But David did not want any witnesses, especially when he was being ambiguous. Since he thought David was operating in the Negev of Judah (27.10) he figured David was hated by his own people and that he had “burned all his bridges.”

This topic about David’s actions here is avoided by many. It can get uncomfortable discussing what David is doing. However, biblical heroes are flawed people by nature, like all of us. Sometimes these flaws actually help them become heroes. David is a type of the Messiah, but that doesn’t mean he was the exact representation of the Messiah in all things, and this applies to any biblical hero. He is just a flawed man in the hands of a great God who picks him as a king. That is an important concept to remember. David failed many times. He was tempted; he could be moral; he could lie; be faithful; commit injustices, was courageous; fearful; committed murder and do anything to survive; he was over indulgent with his children. Now David is joining forces with Israel’s enemy for protection and he was ready to fight his own people in 1 Sam 29.1-11. Unless God intervenes, David may have stayed there because at this point David had no plans to go back to Israel, he will be forced to. David had a heart for God, but he also wanted to survive. He loved beautiful women, no matter what their legal marital status was. He would right moral wrongs and take a life if he needed to and not bat an eye. You will also see David was a bit impulsive, yet God loved him.

And that is encouraging for us because we all have a little “David” in us, and God loves us, too. This should give all of us a deep feeling of hope for our future. We have all had moments that we would not want anyone else to know about. God reveals these flaws in our “biblical heroes” so that we can see ourselves and see how God deals with the repentant attitudes some of them had. But we all have a little “Saul” in us, too. Saul went down the wrong road and went against God and did not repent. David went down the wrong road but repented and wanted God’s forgiveness. We should not lift up any biblical personality as a “hero” but realize they were flawed people in the hands of a great God. Moses spent the first forty years of his life showing what a great man he was. Then God showed him for the next forty years what a nothing he was. Then for the last forty years of his life, God showed him what a flawed man could do in the hands of a mighty God. Only Yeshua the Messiah is perfect and worthy to be called a biblical hero, and we should keep our eyes on him.

So, in short, the Bible reveals the shortcomings of the major characters because they are only pictures of the Messiah in some of the things that happened to them, and so that people in later generations would not think they were the Messiah and that he already came.

A question came to us awhile back about the biblical food laws when a Christian contended with a believer in Yeshua, and went and talked with his pastor, and the pastor gave the following Scriptures to show that Christians are no longer under those laws and can eat whatever they want. The Scriptures given by this pastor are the following: Col 2.16-17; Mark 7.14-23; 1 Cor 8.12-13; 1 Tim 4.1-5; Heb 8.6-7, 9.9-10, 10.1. The pastor quoted these Scriptures completely out of context, so we are going to rightly divide the word and give some clarification on these verses from a Torah-based faith in Yeshua.

Many who believe that a so-called believer can eat animals not allowed in the Torah have perverted God’s word and have a false premise to begin with. They think that Yeshua and Paul ate pork and the unclean (meaning out of place) creatures listed in Lev 11, and so these verses are interpreted to fit that false premise. Yeshua or Paul or any first-century believer in Yeshua never ate pork, catfish, shellfish, lobster, or any creature that was listed as unclean, and they never taught anyone else to do so either. Here are two reasons why. First, when Yeshua’s enemies were trying to find fault with him by saying he broke the Torah commands, they could not find any evidence that he did so. If he was eating pork or whatever or was teaching others to do so, don’t you think they could have accused him of it when they had a chance? The pastor that was consulted by the Christian is accusing Yeshua of doing just that, or he would not have quoted the passage in Mark 7.14-23. Secondly, Peter said in Acts 10.14 that he has never eaten unclean (out of place) creatures. Now, if Yeshua taught Peter that it was acceptable to do so, because “the law has been done away with” like Christians are taught, why didn’t he obey Yeshua and eat them after the cross? Maybe he thought Yeshua wasn’t a very good teacher and Peter just didn’t get it, but we don’t think so. Or maybe Yeshua never taught it to begin with! The first century believers in Yeshua had a Torah-based faith and they were considered a sect within the “Judaisms” of the time. Paul himself said in several places he never departed from the Torah (Acts 21.15-26, 24.14-17). That means they ate “kosher.” The Christian and his pastor have a premise that is in error, and no knowledgeable student of first century history will tell you that they disregarded the biblical food laws found in the Torah. With that said, we are going to interpretthe above verses from the premise that the believers were Torah observant and ate the biblically allowed creatures found in Lev 11 and Deut 14.

In Col 2.16-17 the Colossians were living in a pagan society and were being criticized (like the Christian and his pastor) for eating biblically kosher and keeping festivals, new moons, and sabbaths (the Temple was standing at the time). Paul is encouraging them to ignore their criticisms because they were unbelievers, and believers are not to be judged by unbelievers for keeping the commandments, which are a shadow, pattern, blueprint of the substance. We are to be judged by “the body of Messiah” (v 17). The festivals, new moons, and the Sabbath teach eschatology and the end times and they point to Messiah (Rom 10.4- the word “end” there is “telos” and it means “the goal or target” of the Law is Messiah, not the “end” of the Law is Messiah).

Rom 14.3-8 tells us how the Roman synagogues were made up of unbelieving Jews (called “weak” because they have not come to faith in Yeshua yet), believing Jews and believing non-Jews (called the “strong” in Rom 4.19-20, 10.2). This chapter deals with Jewish “halakah” or how to walk in the commandments depending on who you were (male, female, outside the land, Jewish or non-Jewish, etc) in that synagogue that Paul was dealing with. Apparently, non-believing Jews would not eat meat or wine from believing non-Jews in that congregation, which was a common practice in the first century and is still practiced by some even today. We know of many Jewish believers and unbelievers and non-Jewish believers in Yeshua who will not eat “common” food, which is defined as not according to strict rabbinical standards. This chapter is NOT about someone eating pork and others are not to judge them, like the pastor says. It is about the Jewish practice of not eating meat or wine from a non-Jew because it was “common.” Peter said as much in Acts 10.14 and God showed him in the vision, using the unclean creatures to symbolize the non-Jews, that it was acceptable to associate with non-Jews who had a Torah-based faith in Yeshua, which was contrary to the 18 Edicts of Beit Shammai who ruled the Sanhedrin. Peter still had a problem with this concept in Galatia when he withdrew from table fellowship with non-Jewish believers when people from Beit Shammai came to Galatia (Gal 2.11.15. Paul is merely dealing with a related problem in Romans. He is telling them not to get upset over the issue or look with contempt on others over food or drink. That is their opinion (v 1) and if that is what they want to do, God accepts the actions of the “weak” (those who do not have faith in Yeshua yet) and the “strong” (those who have faith in Yeshua). Remember they did not eat pork or the creatures not allowed in Lev 11, so that can’t be the issue in Romans. We are commanded to say something when we see others doing wrong, and eating creatures that God commanded not to eat is something that should be pointed out. The issue in Romans is about kosher meat, vegetables, and wine.

Mark 7.14-23 is a passage about Jewish halakah also and it plainly tells us that in v 3-5. Some believed that you had to ritually wash your hands before you ate. Jewish and non-Jewish people who follow the strict dietary practices of rabbinical Judaism still do it today. What Yeshua is saying is that these regulations are man-made (v 8) and that the food is clean (in place) even if one eats it without ritually washing their hands according to the traditions of the elders. He is simply making a ruling on their halachic practices, not saying a person can eat pork or unclean creatures of Lev 11. If this pastor thinks he is saying that then the “messiah” he has is a false messiah. Yeshua’s enemies would have pointed that fact out at his trial because that would have violated the Torah and would have been sin, but remember “they could find no fault in him” as he never taught that a person can eat pork, shrimp, lobster or any creature disallowed in Lev 11.

1 Cor 8.12-13 tells us about eating meat sacrificed to idols, and one needs to read the whole chapter to understand what Paul is talking about. Some thought that the “meat” was defiled somehow if it was offered to an idol and therefore unlawful to be consumed (v 7). There is no “divinity” in an idol, but there is only one God, so there is nothing that one “carries over” from a so-called idol. However, if a weak (one who does not believe that Yeshua is the Messiah or just a weak believer) sees you eating meat he knows was sacrificed to idols, you may be “defiling” his conscience and encourage him to do likewise (v 10-12) and that is what is forbidden. It was decided in Acts 15.28 that non-Jewish believers were not to eat meat sacrificed to idols, and that is based on the Torah in Lev 17 and 18, and that is the reason he is saying what he is saying in this chapter (1 Cor 8).

1 Tim 4.1-5 is saying that many will abstain from food God already allowed us to eat. This is not saying that you can eat anything you want. The key verse to understand what food Paul is talking about is in v 5, “for it (the food Paul had in mind) is set apart (to eat and what was allowed; it had a “kedusha”) by the word of God (in Lev 11.1-47 and Deut 14.1-22 we have a list of acceptable creatures we can eat) and prayer (the blessings before and after meals).” The only word of God Paul could be talking about is the Tanak and it tells you what to eat and not eat. The pastor of the Christian asking the question apparently has another list.

Heb 8.6-7, 9.9-10 and 10.1 tells us that this pastor does not understand the book of Hebrews. Hebrews is a contrast between this present age called the Olam Ha Zeh (of 7000 years) and how it has limitations, and the coming age called the Olam Haba. The things in the Olam Ha Zeh will pass away, but the things in the Olam Haba are eternal. Yeshua’s priesthood is according to the division or course of Melchizedek in the Olam Haba, and supersedes the Aaronic priesthood and is eternal, whereas the Aaronic priests die and have to be replaced, Yeshua doesn’t. So let’s deal with Heb 8.6-7, “But now (in the Olam Ha Zeh) he has obtained a more excellent ministry by as much as he is also a mediator of a better covenant (meaning “new” or “renewed” and this renewed covenant is associated with the Olam Haba, the renewed covenant in its fullness and perfection, as we see in Jer 31.31-34; we can only experience this covenant in part in the Olam Ha Zeh, but we will experience the fullness in the Olam Haba). For if the first (the covenant in the Olam Ha Zeh) had been perfect (this is not talking about the Torah because the Torah was perfect-Psa 19.7-10; Jam 1.25) had been faultless (with the people obeying it) there would have been no occasion for a second (the renewed covenant in the Olam Haba; God was going to circumcise the heart and people will be born from above).” The pastor stops there, but had he gone on to v 8, he would have seen that the problem was not the Torah, but it says, “But finding fault with them” (the people; they did not have a circumcised heart and the Torah was not written on their heart like it will in the Olam Haba. A true believer will have a desire to want to keep the Torah if they are truly born again). Heb 9.9-10 says, “which is a symbol (a tavnit or pattern) for the present time (the Olam Ha Zeh, this present age; the sacrifices and the offerings are the symbol of something greater). Accordingly, both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience (spirit, soul, mind, heart, intentions, thoughts), but only on food and various washings (of the priests at the laver; the sacrifices, etc) and regulations (ceremonies) for the body (the korbanot were ceremonies) imposed (in the Olam Ha Zeh) until the time of reformation (a new heavens and earth; the passing of the Olam Ha Zeh into the Olam Haba-Acts 3.19; a “reformation” means a reform, an amendment, a renewal, as in a renewed or reformed covenant in the Olam Haba, which simply is the Torah will now be written on a person’s heart or intentions). Heb 10.1 says, “For the Law (Torah) since it is a shadow (a tavnit, pattern, blueprint-same thing as in Col 2.17 above; Rom 10.4 says the Torah is the “end of the Law” in most translations, giving the impression that it has been done away with, but the word for “end” is the Greek “telos” meaning “goal or target of the Law”-Psa 40.7; John 5.39-47; Luke 24.27) of the good things to come (in the Olam Haba, the “fullness” or “perfect” of 1 Cor 13.9-13), not the very form of things (the substance), can never by the same sacrifices year by year which they offer continually, make perfect (to be restored to the original like we will be in the Olam Haba) those who draw near (Hebrew “korban” where we get the word sacrifices from; it means to “draw near” with “karav” meaning “near” as the root). In other words, the writer of Hebrews (who some believe was Paul) is making the case that the Torah is a shadow, blueprint, pattern, or picture in the Olam Ha Zeh of the spiritual (substance) in the Olam Haba. That doesn’t mean the shadow (pattern, blueprint, picture) has been done away with. If you did away with the shadow (Torah in the Olam Ha Zeh) there is no substance. You can’t have a shadow without the substance. They both exist at the same time! I know there is the substance in the Olam Haba because there is a shadow in the Olam Ha Zeh! The Temple, the sacrifices, the priesthood, the festivals, the services, and the prayers there are valid. The Scriptures never taught they took away sin. The first-century believers went to the Temple daily because that was what God told them to do in the Scriptures. Paul offered animal sacrifices and came out of a Nazarite vow thirty years after Yeshua’s resurrection, and after he wrote the book of Galatians (Acts 21.15-26, 24.14-18). Hebrews was written to Jewish believers (that’s why it is called “Hebrews”) as a homiletic midrash (teaching) on Psa 110 as a basis to show that Yeshua as the Messiah is superior to angels, Abraham, Melchizedek, Moses, and any other biblical character or entity. It also contrasts the superiority of the Olam Haba (world to come) and the Olam Ha Zeh (this present world) and that the New or renewed covenant is superior in the Olam Haba than the covenant at Sinai because it was limited in its application, function, and priesthood, but it was not done away with. Paul validates the Temple and its services in his writings, and Hebrews was written in the context of Yom Kippur, and he was advising the Hebrews not to forsake the believers (10.19-25, and to not forsake Yeshua (10.25-39) despite all the pressures and persecution they were experiencing, and to remember all the sufferings Yeshua went through (12.1-7). This book is written in the present tense in Greek when talking about the Temple and the priesthood, so they were valid in the first century. This book does not nor did it ever teach that the Torah was done away with because the author went out of his way to talk about the validity of the festivals, sacrifices, and services. Even the elementary principles of the faith in Heb 6 are connected to the Temple, the services, and Jewish eschatology and concepts. If this Christian and his pastor believe that Yeshua did away with all this, Yeshua himself doesn’t believe it because when he returns he is going to build another Temple, with animal sacrifices, restore the Sabbaths, the priesthood, and biblical festivals in the Messianic kingdom (Isa 66.19-21; Ezek 40-48; Zech 14.16-21) and a proper walk in the Torah. The Christian who went to his pastor is blind and the pastor is a “blind leader of the blind” and they should not be followed or listened to. We are not to “toy around” with false teachers and prophets that tell us that the “law has been done away with” when it comes to trying to obey the Lord or eating non-kosher meats and creatures. We are to “contend earnestly for the faith (body of doctrinal truth found in the Torah) which was once for all delivered (past tense) to the saints (this completely rules out Christianity because this faith or bodily truth was already in existence when this was written, so it preexisted Christianity).”

This is one of the most misunderstood portions of Scripture in the Tanak, Gospels and Epistles, so let’s get to the heart of the matter. Jephthah (Hebrew “Yiftach” meaning “he will open or release”) did not offer his daughter as a burnt offering, and here is why. In Judges 11.31 where it says, “it shall be the Lord’s and I will offer it up as a burnt offering” needs to be understood. The “and” there can mean “or” which would then mean, “it shall be the Lord’s or I will offer it up as a burnt offering.” He did not offer her as a burnt offering, but she was dedicated to the Lord.

In the Mishkan, and later in the Temple, women or men could dedicate themselves to the service there. Samuel was dedicated in this way by his mother in 1 Sam 1.22-28 to serve there. Eli was a high priest and he had two sons who would lay with the women who served at the doorway of the tent of meeting in 1 Sam 2.22. In Luke 2.37 we learn of Anna who never left the Temple, serving night and day with fastings and prayers. So Jephthah dedicated her to serve in the Mishkan as a “spiritual olah” who was totally dedicated to Yehovah. She never married and remained totally focused on God. So here are nine reason why she was not sacrificed.

First of all, in the Torah, you cannot sacrifice a person. The misunderstanding of these verses comes from a translation of the Hebrew letter “Vav” there to “and” and not “or.” By using “or” it changes the whole meaning. Secondly, you cannot offer to God something that was forbidden, like a deer, camel and especially a person. Third, sacrificing children was an abomination to Yehovah in Lev 20.1-3. Fourth, there is no precedent for such a thing. Fifth, no father by his own authority could put an offending offspring to death in Deut 21.18-21, much less an innocent one.

Sixth, there seems to have been a class of women devoted to the Yehovah and would serve the needs of the Mishkan and later the Temple (1 Sam 2.22, Exo 38.8, Luke 2.37). Seven, the word in verse 40 for “commemorate” in the NASB is “l’tanot” in Hebrew meaning “to celebrate.” They would not be celebrating the death of a young girl sacrificed by her father. Eight, Jephthah’s sorrow is due to the fact he would have no descendants, she was his only child (Judges 11.34-36). And lastly, it is possible she could have been redeemed from his vow by money, based on Lev 27.1-5, although the Scriptures are silent about whether or not this was done.

As a result of the above, Jephthah’s daughter was not killed as a korban olah, but there are those who are taught this and believe she was. But, as we have seen, this is based on a misunderstanding and lack of knowledge of the Torah and the Hebrew language.

Deut 8.11 says, “Beware, lest you forget the Lord your God by not keeping his commandments and his ordinances and his statutes, which I am commanding you today.” As Israel went through life, they were not to forget the Lord by NOT keeping the commandments. Notice he says if you don’t keep the Torah you have “forgotten” or you never knew the Lord. There is a term for this in the Scriptures and it is called “lawless” (“Nomos” in Greek is the term for the Torah, “Anomos” means no Torah or Torah-less and it is the word used in Matt 7.21-23; 1 John 2.3-4). We are not to diminish the Lord or his word.

Deut 8.12-16 tells us that just as Israel went through trials, they saw the Lord’s hand in it “in the end.” We will see the Lord’s hand in our lives as we look back. The reason he does this with Israel, and with us, is “to confirm his covenant” which he swore to the fathers. That’s why he leads us away from Replacement Theology assemblies most of us have been familiar with. This was so we could learn his commandments and to confirm the covenants. Yehovah is still working the plan out with us.

Deut 8.19-20 tells us that every generation must hear the voice that spoke these commandments, and recognize that voice. If Israel ever forgets the Lord by following other gods, the Lord will surely destroy them like the nations he destroyed before them. When someone says, “Don’t keep the commandments” they are really saying, “Don’t listen to the Lord.” Is that the speech of a servant of God? No, he is spitting on the “shadow” and if you spit on the shadow, you spit on the substance. When asked, “Should we obey the Lord?” they will say, “Yes.” But if you ask them “Should we obey the Torah” then they will say “No, we don’t have to obey that.” That is what “forgetting the Lord” means. And that “voice” in your heart should match the words of the Lord found in the Torah, the Prophets, the Writings, the Gospels, and the Epistles.