“The scepter shall not depart from Judah… until Shiloh come.” Genesis 49:8-10 This prophetic statement was included in a blessing given by Jacob, just before he died, to his third son Judah. The blessing began “Judah, thou art he whom they brothers shall praise”, and continued the bestowal of the Messianic lineage by divine selection rather than by natural birth rite. Judah had no special moral qualifications for this blessing. He had conspired with eight of his brothers to kill his half-brother, Joseph. He had illicit sexual relations with his daughter-in-law, Tamar. He was not the oldest like Reuben. He was not the favorite like Joseph. And yet the scepter, the symbol of rulership, was given to him.
The Lineage of Judah
“Shiloh” is a Hebrew word literally meaning “whose right it is”, or in practical application “the one whose right it is “. It was used by the prophet Ezekiel Ezekiel 21:27 warning about the invasion of Babylon. He spoke of the Shiloh who would reverse Israel’s troubles, who would put an end to the disciplinary punishment allowed by God through the instrument of invading and contentious neighbors. Perhaps a similar disciplinary condition is being imposed on Israel now by political forces that threaten to drive Israel into the sea.
The Talmudic literature associates Shiloh with the hoped-for Messiah. Jewish rabbis and scholars in the Middle Ages, commenting on the promise given to Judah, explain that it was Jacob’s intention to reveal to his sons on his death bed what would happen in the end times, for Jacob says, “Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days.” Genesis 49:1 He rebukes his oldest sons, Reuben and Simeon, first for their misdeeds and then delivers his message to the next oldest, Judah:
”Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father’s children shall bow down before thee. Judah is a lion’s whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art gone up: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be. Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass’s colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes: His eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth white with milk.” Genesis 49:8-12
Here we have a depiction of a Shiloh who is praised and successive generations bow before him. He is like a lion’s whelp to be respected at all cost. He stoops down from his high position, reminiscent of the Messiah’s descent into the world of fallen man. Like a crouched lion, he waits strategically to act. In other words, he is like an old lion who, as time goes by, becomes inactive; but in the right situation he will be roused quickly, reminiscent of Messiah’s return. He has a foal and an ass’s colt, reminding us of the Gospel Messiah’s humble entrance into Jerusalem on a donkey. Wine, symbolic of both blood and the spirit of God, is used for washing garments, symbolic of purifying the flesh. His eyes are red because he is filled to the full with wine, symbolizing the complete measure with which he is filled with the spirit of God.
“The scepter”, the ruling lineage of Messiah, “shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from beneath his feet” refers to the succession of Jewish kings who will descend from Judah. “until Shiloh (the one whose right it is) come”, refers to the hoped-for Messiah, the ultimate selection from the lineage of Judah, to whom all the people will be gathered. Note, the use of the expression “until Shiloh come” instead of “until Shiloh comes” does not mean Shiloh is plural; it is an older form of English used to mean “shall come”, placing the emphasis on a distant futuristic event rather than something the is expected to happen any day.
These images of Messiah were recorded by Jewish scribes into the Torah scrolls no later than the return from Babylonian captivity, and yet they foretell historical events far into the future with graphic accuracy. Even if we were to suppose that the Gospel descriptions had been forged to agree with prophecy, we would still be hard-pressed to explain the Gospel Messiah’s charismatic attraction that people from all over the world have had since the first century onward. And we would be even more hard pressed to explain why the historical and archeological records show Israel was ruled successively by kings descended from Judah until this Shiloh appeared on the scene in the first century.
One may argue that a potential break in succession of kings could have occurred when Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon blinded King Zedekiah and murdered all his children when he sacked Jerusalem. But there was another eligible heir, Jeroiachin, who was released from prison in Babylon. He was the ancestor of Zerubbabel who became Israel’s political leader at the end of the Babylonian exile.
The only other potential break that could have occurred is when the Romans in the second century BCE dismissed the rightful rulers from the line of Judah and installed lackey Hasmonean kings who were Levites. But even the land was called “Judea” then, meaning the land of Judah. In those days the real Jewish lawmaking body that was accepted by the Jewish people in there every-day affairs was the Sanhedrin, who were composed of descendants of Judah. The Hasmonean kings persecuted members of the Sanhedrin, killing 800 Pharisees at one point, but the Sanhedrin persisted as the lawmaking body of the people. This is all thoroughly documented in historical records.1,2
The Legacy of Moses
According to the Book of Genesis, long before the succession of Judean kings arose, Jacob’s 11 sons and family were relocated to Egypt to save them from famine. They were invited there by the missing son, Joseph, who had been sold off by his brothers and risen to become next in line to Pharaoh. This betrayal upon Joseph and his subsequent forgiveness towards his own people are often considered a foreshadowing of the Messiah.
According to the bible, the twelve tribes lived safely in an Egyptian quarter, expanding in population. When Pharaohs arose who had no sense of loyalty to them, they enslaved them. Four hundred years later the population of a million from the 12 tribes of Israel had had enough. They skipped town enroute back to the land promised to Abraham led by a Levite named Moses.
On their way out, each household under Moses’s direction sacrificed a lamb and spread the blood on their doorposts to keep the Angel of Death from entering in to kill the first born, as would occur throughout the rest of Egypt. Moses became a prophet and priest to them, allowing the Angel of God to rule through him.
The actual Exodus account is so well known that there is no point in going into further detail here. Archeological and historical evidence for the Jewish people residing in Egypt and escaping across the Red Sea, though somewhat controversial among scholars, does exist.3,4 Photos of chariot wheels and bones that have calcified under water near one proposed Red Sea crossing have been taken. The one shown here is gold rimmed and coral encrusted; it was shown to very closely resemble chariot wheels seen in ancient Egyptian depictions. All archeologists agree from many artifacts discovered that early Israelites lived in Canaan, became a predominant people and had a King named David, although they may disagree in how they got there.
In 1887 archeologists discovered “The Amarna Letters”, communications on clay tablets written by Egyptian rulers in Canaan to Pharaoh describing a Semitic group called the “habiru”, believed to be the Hebrew because of the similarity in sound.
“The Amarna letters between Egypt and Assyria, and the city states of Syria and Canaan, describe the disruptive activities of the habiru, painting them as a threat to the stability of the region.
Rohl’s theory is that the habiru of the Amarna letters are the Israelites of David. Findings indicated that the three years of drought, famine, and plague of the Amarna letters and those of David’s time may be same. Another theory is that Moses (an individual who is probably much closer to the period in which the Amarna letters are written than David) is ‘the rebel Mesh’ of amelut-sagaz-Mesh (habiru) of the Amarna letters.” 9
These “disruptive habiru” were reported in the Amarna letters to have started unrest in the mid-15th century BCE. This agrees with the dating of the Exodus in the bible Exodus 1-15 as having occurred 480 years after the dedication of Solomon’s Temple1 Kings 6:1. Therefore we have archeological evidence that the Hebrews began starting unrest in Canaan just about the time the bible says they crossed the Jordon into Canaan after their 40-year trek from Egypt.
The Amarna Letters were discovered in the ruins of the ancient Egyptian city of Amarna. One of the criticisms of the historicity of the Exodus is that Egyptians kept good records in their archives preserved in their capital cities of what happened during each Pharaoh’s rule, and that there were no accounts of the Exodus in any of these archives. Thus, they contend, that either the Hebrews seemed to have vanished from the general archives or never existed. It seems to me that the Amarna Letters demonstrate that the general archives were not complete as previously thought, since there were no records in the general archives coinciding with the events recorded in the Amarna letters. The “good records” kept in the general archives may have been accurate in the limited information they contained, but they obviously did not contain everything.
What the archives do show is that in the 15th century BCE, Egyptians performed major building projects in the Nile delta region using forced labor, and there are inscriptions in tombs showing Semitic-looking people working on these projects.
According to the biblical account, part way through their long journey from Egypt to Canaan they began to complain about having to eat the same old manna every day (an addiction to the flesh). So God sent them birds to eat, which attracted poisonous snakes that bit them and would have killed all of them, except that Moses lifted up a snake on a stick, and all who saw it were healed. Hassidic rabbis who are part of the today’s largest denomination of Jewish people called “Chabad”5 still speak of this as a double miracle, that God would not only heal his people but do so using the instrument that made them sick. What is probably unclear to them, since they reject the Gospel (and do so as foretold for the sake of promoting and validating the Gospel by “proof by contradiction” as discussed in part II) is that this was a prophetic foreshadowing of the Suffering Servant Messiah being lifted up on a cross, taking the sins of the world upon him to be crucified, which most of us also recognize as symbolic of submitting man’s lower nature (ego) to a higher spiritual calling.
As Anny Vos pointed out in a recent post “Are There Really Codes in the Bible?” where she discusses the creation story in Genesis, the Hebrew words for snake (nachash) and Messiah (Machiach) both have a value by Gematria of 358, inferring a connection between the involution of the soul (brought about by the snake) and evolution of the soul (brought about by Messiah). If you will accept it, these are both instruments of divinity working through us in our fallen state of dualistic perception. This state is characterized by the premature knowledge of good and evil without the wisdom yet to be attained to transcend its consequences. I am simply intending to add a historical element to Anny’s allegorical explanation, that the nature of the purifying process of the Snake/Messiah, involution and evolution, enfolds through Israel’s biblical and literal history, pointing to a first century biblical and literal Messiah. My hypothesis is that a literal Gospel Messiah linked us through his Man-God connections to enable us to proceed on this path of personal transcendence. One might argue that an allegorical Messiah would be enough to push us symbolic-oriented Homo sapiens through the rift. I would submit that if that were the case, then it would have been unnecessary for there to be one single shred of historical or archeological evidence for fulfillment of Messianic prophecies. In fact, there would be no need for any prophecies at all.
Getting back to Moses, it seems almost too miraculous for the waters of a sea to part so dramatically at Moses’ bidding. We don’t expect such supernatural demonstrations in our material world. So perhaps this is just a story with an allegorical meaning. There are libraries full of allegorical meanings that are probably valid, and I live by some of them. However, there is also a little passage in this biblical account that says that God caused a strong East wind to blow overnight which then resulted in the sudden parting. One group of atmospheric engineers have done a study10 of whether it was feasible for an East wind in that area to have caused the sea to suddenly part and remain parted for a few hours and then suddenly recede. They claim that the biblical name for this sea in the bible, which in the original Hebrew is יַם-סוּף (Yam Supth), actually means “Reed Sea”, not Red Sea; and that one such area further downstream from the Red Sea is heavily populated with underwater reeds. The geography of this area is such that, according to their computer model they used (which is the same standard model used to predict coastal flooding during storms and hurricanes in the American Northeast) predicts that a wind blowing steadily at about 63 mph could indeed create those conditions. There are other scientific models that also predict a parting.
We also tend to think that walls of Jericho could do not come down when hundreds of thousands of soldiers in one accord march around it and blow trumpets. And yet this is what happened when the people of Israel crossed the River Jordon and sacked Jericho. Historical evidence of this, though controversial, has a substantial amount of legitimacy 3,4 which I discuss in a previous post “When the Walls Came Tumblin’ Down”. So there is some evidence that the Hebrews emerged from the Exodus across the River Jordon.
Meanwhile, while preparing to cross the Jordon6 into the land promised to the Jewish People through Abraham, Moses spoke prophecies that concerned Israel’s future. He also told them that when they come into the land, “The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken.” Deuteronomy 18:15 . The phrase “like unto me” infers that like Moses this new prophet will be rejected by his own people for a time and will not only be a prophet, but a priest who intercedes for the people. Moses was from the priestly tribe of Levites.
Some may consider his military commander, Joshua, as Moses’s successor as prophet and priest, but Joshua’s job was to obey the Angel of the Lord to win battles and distribute the land until the Jewish People had successfully occupied the land. Joshua was from the tribe of Ephraim, not Levi, and he was not a prophet who foretold the future.
The Messiah has a name in Hebrew, the same name the Jewish people use in place of the term translated into Greek as “Jesus”. That name is “Yeshua”, meaning “God grants salvation”, or “God saves”. It occurs in several passages of the Old Testament, such as “Behold, the Lord hath proclaimed unto the end of the world, Say ye to the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy salvation (Yeshua) cometh; behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him. Isaiah 62:11So In comparison, Joshua in Hebrew is “Yehoshuah” which is a variant of Yeshua and means “God is salvation”. Joshua’s name which is similar to Yeshua is a foreshadowing of the Messiah, but he is not the prophet like unto Moses who is a prophet and priest. Some other religious figures in history have claimed to be this new prophet, but they do not quality as a legitimate priest like unto Moses and are not simultaneously descended from Judah.7
As we know, the Gospel Messiah was a prophet. He was also a descendant of Judah. Descendants of Judah are eligible to be kings, but not eligible for the priesthood reserved for the Levites. How then could the Gospel Messiah be a prophet like unto Moses if he is not a Levitical priest? The Messianic prophecy in Psalms provides the clue, “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool… The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.” Psalm 110:1-4 The Messiah would assume the eternal priesthood that the scriptural figure Melchizedek fulfilled rather than the temporal Levitical priesthood which is a foreshadowing of the eternal priesthood. The Levitical priesthood discontinued when the second Temple was destroyed.
Conclusion
We have seen that the line of succession to the Messiah continued through Judah. The hoped-for Messiah was also identified as the “prophet like unto Moses” who would be raised up in the midst of his people. I should add that the rabbis during the Middle Ages also agreed with this.1 The hoped-for Messiah is thus expected by the Jewish People to be prophet, priest and king. He is also connected both allegorically and historically to the esoterically understood purification process of “hissing8 that leads to healing”.
The historicity of the later period of Genesis and the remaining books of the Torah (Exodus through Deuteronomy) is somewhat controversial, but still plausible. At the very least, all bible scholars agree that the early Israelites lived in Canaan, that Canaan was occupied by Egypt during some periods, that the Egyptians were oppressive, and that the Israelites threw off their yoke to emerge as a dominant nation with David as there most popular king.
In part V we will explore the line of succession to King David through his father, Jesse; and discuss how the hoped-for Messiah would come to be identified paradoxically as both the “branch” and the “root” of Jesse.
This present post has appeared very near and during the traditional Passover from April 3 through April 11, 2015 when Jews around the world clean out the leaven from their homes as a symbol of spiritual purification and eat unleavened bread for a week. They will hold Passover meals in their households according to tradition, telling the story of the Exodus, a story of deliverance from slavery and oppression through the hand of God. The youngest male old enough to speak Hebrew will begin the story by asking his elders “Why is this night different than every other night?” And the elders will reply “Because once we were slaves in Egypt until Moses … “, and continue the story while they eat foods symbolic of events in the story, also partaking of ceremonial drink and song. My grandmother told me “This is a story you eat.” She should know; it took her an entire day to prepare the meal.
This is the same meal that Jesus partook with his disciples in Jerusalem just before his crucifixion, rising at the end of it and taking his followers to the next level:
Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I shall not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom. And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. Matthew 26:26-30
This “Last Supper” became the model for the Christian “Lord’s Supper” also known as “communion”. Here is a hidden meaning not well understood by mainstream religion. Jesus also says to do this “In remembrance of me”. Luke 22:19 Every time communion is given, it is to remember his sacrifice. The blood poured out is not only from his flesh and blood, but is also symbolic of his spirit that became known to indwell his followers after his resurrection. The spirit, the bible says, is given to believers as a “guarantee” Ephesians 1:14 of the New Covenant to come. Note carefully that it is not the New Covenant; it is simply a guarantee that it is to come.
Here is where the mainstream church gets it wrong. They believe the New Covenant is the New Testament, and all who adhere to the New Testament are now part of the New Covenant. However, what they are now a part of is a transition to the New Covenant, with the spirit given as a guarantee. The New Covenant happens later. It is described in Jeremiah:
Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, “Know the Lord,” for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. Jeremiah 31:31-34 (NIV)
Notice that there will be no evangelism or teaching people to know God. Everyone will know. His “law” is actually a translation of תּוֹרָה (Torah) meaning way or teaching. Everyone will have the divine way in their hearts. God will no longer be their husband. He will fully inhabit them and in many ways they will fully inhabit him. Israel and Judah, symbolic of a house divided, will now be under one roof, one new covenant, meaning humanly instituted divisions will be reunited. There will no longer be any denominational rivalry.
We do not have to be geniuses to realize that this does not represent the condition of Israel or the church today. What this does represents is a consummation of the transition that believers are now experiencing. We can speculate that this is a worldwide event in the future, perhaps at the end of the age of transition, when Jesus returns. Or we can speculate that it is a metaphor for an event to occur on a global scale inside each individual, perhaps a massive shift in consciousness.
At the end of the Passover meal, before Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans, Jewish people from around the world who would journey to Jerusalem for the Passover used to greet each other at the end of the meal, “Next Year in Jerusalem,” meaning they would be looking forward to seeing each other at Passover next year again in the same appointed location. The tradition continued after the Diaspora, more as an expression of hope that their homeland would be restored to them. When their homeland was restored to them in 1948, they realized that the Jerusalem they returned to also needed to be restored. So they changed the greeting to “Next year in the New Jerusalem,” perhaps thinking that the old city in all its splendor and the Temple in all its glory would one day be restored. Little do they realize how prophetic that greeting is, in the sense of its unintended allusion to the New Jerusalem in the Book of Revelation. Since I believe that the New Jerusalem is also allegorical, that it is a metaphorical image of a fulfillment of one’s evolution in consciousness, what is to stop any of us from being there by next year, and in all the years to come?
Happy Passover. Next year in New Jerusalem,
Robert
References
- “What the Rabbis Know about the Messiah, A Study of Genealogy and Prophecy” by Rachmiel Frydland. http://www.amazon.com/What-Rabbis-Know-About-Messiah/dp/0917842030
- The Hasmoneans and their State. A Study in History Ideology and the Institutions Electrum http://www.academia.edu/2362781/The_Hasmoneans_and_their_State._A_Study_in_History_Ideology_and_the_Institutions_Electrum_-_16_Krak%C3%B3w_2010
- 50 People in the Bible Confirmed Archaeologically http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/50-people-in-the-bible-confirmed-archaeologically/
- Archaeology Confirms The Biblical Account http://www.biblestudysite.com/arch.htm
- Chabad is a Hebrew acronym that means “Wisdom, Understanding and Knowledge”.
- The Hebrew word for Jordon is derived from a Hebrew word which means “descend”. In relation to this the Jordon River was a place where Jewish people were placed under water during baptism. According to the bible, after the Israelites crossed the Jordon and took possession of the land, they became corrupted by the influences of it, just as Moses had foretold.
- One false Messiah includes the 2nd century Jewish revolutionary, Simon bar Kokhba, who led a courageous but short-lived rebellion against the Romans. The Jewish King Hezekiah was also considered as a candidate for Messiah, many positive reforms having been made during his reign, but he did not fulfill the priestly requirement or attract the Gentiles, who eventually invaded. Many Jewish people have respect for Muhammad and some view him as a potential descendent of Jacob’s half-brother, Ishmael, although this is difficult to prove historically; however the Jewish People as a whole reject the claim that Muhammad was the “prophet like unto Moses” on the grounds that include him not being a Levite, nor a descendent of Judah and David.
- The Hebrew word for snake, nachash, means directly “hissing” and indirectly “biting”, “mesmerizing prior to striking” or “tempting”.
- http://www.historyfiles.co.uk/KingListsMiddEast/CanaanIsraelites.htm
- https://www2.ucar.edu/atmosnews/news/2663/parting-waters-computer-modeling-applies-physics-red-sea-escape-route
Robert,
Thanks for another post examining the possible literal events of the Bible. I decided to publish this series, even though it’s a little different than was this site originally stands for, because I think it is important for people to see both sides of the coin even though they may have strong opinions one way or another. It’s important that we are open-minded.
I still think the evidence points to allegory with some history mixed in, however, the Christ Within to me is the real meaning of the Gospel stories. The Old Testament speaks of same albeit through a different culture and time. I have looked at the Amarana Letters and even into the historical evidence for a Red Sea Crossing years ago, and to me their isn’t anything substantial to say these were literal events. In fact, I see the opposite. Of course I would have no problem if the Bible did turn out to be more literal than I believe.
I look forward to part 5.
NOTE TO SOS READERS:
I have sold my house FINALLY, but the new house won’t be built till July. Jess and I and the kids will be living with my grandparents for a few months until the new house is finished. I haven’t wrote in a while because of all these events, but once the new office is set up in the house I will be back.
Robert, I will also address some of these topics in the future, with evidence of why the Biblical writers preferred a Christ Within as opposed to anything literal.
Blessings.
Josh,
Thanks for your comments. What I would like to posit is:
(1) Objectivity is very difficult to establish if you are annoyed at established faulty church practices and consciously or unconsciously looking for evidence to refute historicity which you consciously or unconsciously associate with those practices, even though there is not an actual direct cause and effect relationship between the two… faulty church practices and historicity. In short, you will seem to discover what you wanted to because of your undercurrent of bias. We need to separate the baby from the bathwater.
(2) The Armana letters do in fact (a) establish that Egypt was dealing with difficulties with the Jewish population within the Egyptian commonwealth and (b) that the supposed “lack of one shred of evidence that Egypt had any dealing with Jews” has been once and for all debunked , exposing the predisposed bias of the scholars and authors who have tried to “disprove” historicity. Their hypothesis is indeed now highly suspect. As you yourself have said to me , accepted scholarship during any time period is usually totally overturned within 100 years.
(3). The historicity of the Exodus is not on trial here. It matches the biblical history already established. Even if it were on trial, it is assumed fact until proven otherwise beyond a shadow of a doubt. So far there is enough historical evidence, though not complete as yet, to generally substantiate that biblical history is validated by literal history (excluding some very obviously intended metaphorical passages such as the creation story). Speculations about conspiracies to falsify history have no bearing on this case and cannot be proven. It is shear hearsay and circumstancial. If you were the court Judge, you would have to strike such testimony from the records, unless you are a biased Judge, in which case you would be obligated to recluse yourself from the case. But if you are the prosecutor, then you are obliged to present what evidence you have to try to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that historicity is guilty of falsehood, then allow your arguments to reviewed by an impartial jury, and then abide by the decision of the jury. If you are trying to be an expert witness for the prosecution, then you need to do better than saying you researched this and found not one shred of evidence to support historicity. You need to state how you determined this and that you did so without bias, and then your testimony would have to be weighted by the jury with the testimony of an entire school of scholars and expert witnesses that strongly disagree with you. You would also have to face rigorous cross-examination by the defense as to your qualifications, personal biases and pre-motivations that might put your testimony in doubt.
(4) In summary, historicity of the Exodus is supported by the Amarna letters together with several other pieces of evidence presented in this part IV, and its historicity is supported by general historicity presented in parts I, II, and III, and with many parts still to come that will wrap of this case with amazing cumulative insight.
(5) In fact, historicity is very, very plausible. It does not have to be perfect. It is innocent until proven guilty. And so far, there is insufficient objective proof that would stand up in court to obtain an objective negative verdict. Until then, we would do best to tentatively abide by the court, even if we still don’t feel like it. As for future evidence, one way or the other, we must be open to investigating it and scrutinizing the bias and motivations of its presenters, without the interference of hearsay conspiracy theorists.
(6) So far I have shown that skeptical opinions are merely opinions and have in several cases been overturned by later evidence. Some of that evidence comes from archeological finds that are dug up in places that were not explored or inaccessible before. Imagine what may hidden beneath the currently inaccessible areas in Jerusalem.
Robert,
I can appreciate your position here, and I still do look forward to part 5. It will be interesting to see how you wrap it up, and it also might be interesting to see if anyone else has evidence contrary of either position.
Josh,
Thank you for the acknowledgement. Pprart 5 is planned but not yet written. I’m going to take a little pause for a few months on this particular topic and come back to it. Part 5 will begin to cover part at least part of the period the prophets under the period of the descending kings. There is some way to go after that. The wrap up is not in part 5.
In this part IV, I have introduced the concept of the New Covenant as radically different than that embraced by the mainstream church. It is an experience beyond the traditional acceptance of Christ in the Gospel age and up-building of the religious institutions of the church on earth, which are still largely corrupted. That age is just a transition to a more advanced age when there will be no judgmental distinctions among men, an age of higher consciousness throughout the world. This is the mystical fulfillment of identification of the greater self as the inner Christ which most SOS readers have already tasted on an individual basis, and to which we continue to aspire.
Josh,
I would also add, that this series of posts in no way discredits “the Christ Within”, but posits that the Christ Within is the diamond in the golden setting of the historicity that supports and validates it, that gives us certainty that “this” diamond is “THE” diamond.
Historicity is not the other side of the coin. It is the rest of the coin in which the inscriptions of higher wisdom are written and preserved.
It is just as misleading to divide allegory from historicity and insist historicity invalidates allegory (as the mainstream church has done), as it is to insist that allegory invalidates historicity (as some but not all esoterics have done).
I submit, that when you eliminate the hearsay, circumstantial evidence, opinions of non-experts, bias of purported experts, and the tendency of counterculture to overgeneralize its complaints of the culture it counters, what you are left with is a foundation of historicity supporting the allegorical. The war between them is a rumor. It might be temporarily useful to some people at their stage of spiritual evolution because to allows them to drown out the confusing voices and side effects, so they can focus on the allegorical which was previously masked. However, some people need the historical to latch onto until they are mature enough to start comprehending the allegorical. They are at the first and lowest level above non-spirituality. But I submit that the “most” mature and “most” compassionate level of spirituality embraces the complementarity of the historical with the allegorical. It is this very challenge that propels the spirit to disengage with counterculture, which was a temporary shelter, and engage with the deepest wisdom, purity, and compassion.
Hello Robert,
This is again a very interesting article, although I must admit that I find it difficult to keep a complete overview with so many posts about this subject.
You know that I agree with you about the subject of historicity although not necessarily in every detail.
I do have a question: You write that Judah is Jakob’s third son, but he is not. He is the fourth. The third son is Levi.
Levi has a very special place among the sons though as his descendants are not counted as one of the twelve tribes but as the priests and Levites for all the tribes. Does that have to mean that Levi does not even count as a son of Jakob anymore? In that case there would only be eleven sons. I cannot imagine that to be so.
I do remember however that prof. Weinreb mentioned Judah specifically as the fourth son which had a special meaning, which I unfortunately do not remember.
Further you mention that Judah had no special moral qualifications for the blessing he receives from his father.
However, he did go through the process of recognizing and admitting that what he and his brothers had done to Joseph was wrong, had drawn his conclusions and made himself responsible for Benjamin when they went back to Egypt. When Benjamin was taken prisoner for allegedly having stolen the silver cup, he offered to take his place with all that it entailed and in this way proved that he had learned his lesson. If this is not standing the test, then what is? Joseph certainly seems to have come to this conclusion.
I do not think that the Amarna Letters can prove or disprove anything concerning the historicity of the exodus (which in itself I do not deny) as what you write about are purely theories of certain scholars. I have read other theories in a book by Immanuel Velikovsky which places the Amarna Letters in the period of the kings of Israel, one of the correspondents being Ahab, who corresponds with pharaoh Akhenaten. He came to that conclusion by comparing documents from different cultures from the time of the exodus onwards, which he did very painstakingly with lots and lots of references. He also bases his findings on the historicity of the Bible (which he just takes for granted) and whether he is right or not, I found his book Ages in Chaos fascinating. I do not consider any theory that anyone whatever has constructed to be a proof of anything.
You write that Joshua is not a prophet and a priest like Moses but his name, Jehoshua Ben Nun, which literally means “son of fifty” does point to a state of higher awareness. Whatever he is, he is not just someone who only has to fight battles.
As far as prophets go, I do not believe that they necessarily foretell the future but more that they show in what direction a person or a people are going and what will be the consequence of that if they continue to do so. It is a warning (in the case of negative predictions) that should be heeded and that only will come true if no positive action is taken. I have heard it said that such a prophecy that comes true is a failed prophecy. Remember Jona, who did not like it at all that the king of Nineve listened to his prophecy, which had as a result that this city was not destroyed! I have read somewhere that this king was supposed to be a reincarnation of the pharaoh of the exodus, who proved to have learned his lesson and did it right this time.
I wish you very happy holidays. Did you celebrate the Seder last night? Mah nishtanah halailah haze mi kol ha lailot? I still remember though it has been ages since I attended a Seder in a private home.
Love,
Anny
Anny,
Thank you so much. These are wonderful comments. Regarding keeping up with the overview, because of your feedback about this I will make it a point to provide an overview in Part V.
You are quite tight. My error. Judah was the fourth son, not the third. Thanks for pointing that out. I will emphasize that correction in part V, and look up the significance of the “fourth” son. Judah is the one who changes his ways, and King David is an example of one of his descendants who characterizes this same kind of repentant purification.
The Levites have always been considered one of the 12 tribes. Even though they were not given an area of land like the other tribes, they were given several cities of their own throughout the commonwealth of Israel. They were set aside to serve the other tribes as full time priests, so there was no need for them to have land for agriculture. However, Joseph’s tribe was spit into two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim (named after the son’s of Joseph) as a reward of a double portion for Joseph’s redemption of Jacob’s family when they came to Egypt. So the Levites served 12 other tribes. In Revelations, when the 12 tribes of Israel are sealed as the 144,000, the tribe of Dan is missing and replaced by Levi. There is certainly a hidden meaning here if anyone is interested in researching it. My resource is http://www.gotquestions.org/twelve-tribes-Israel.html.
As for the relative time periods for the Amarna tablets versus the Exodus, you are correct in the traditional dating of the tablets being 12th century (1300’s BCE) and Exodus being earlier in the 13th century (1400’s BCE). However there are more recent calculations on the dating of the Exodus as having occurred in the 11th century (1200’s BCE), which would be a later than the dates of the Amarna tablets and the abandonment of the city of Amarna. This new dating is highly likely. My resources for this information are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amarna_letters and http://www.viewzone.com/exodus.html. I respect that you usually do not rely on or review internet references, but I have included them here for anyone else to have confidence that I am not making this up.
This all raises again the issue that I addressed to Josh’s comment. The Exodus is not on trial. And if it were, claiming the historicity of the Exodus before an impartial jury would be found “innocent” (established to be true within a reasonable doubt) and not guilty. Within the range of uncertainties and breadth of diversities regarding scholarship on this issue, the historicity of the Exodus is very highly likely, even though there have been some doubts expressed within the limits of available scholarship. There is certainly no “proof” that the Exodus was not historical, only some doubts which I have now addressed. Statements such as “there is not one shred of evidence for the Exodus being historical” are simply not true. Such statement’s are close minded.
The argument that there are no records of the Jews in Egypt is thus a serious fallacy based on older fringe beliefs of skeptics that are no longer relevant, even though they may have become the rallying call of today’s skeptics who want to validate their own belief systems by discrediting that the bible as entirely non-literal and non-historical.
After embracing the same skepticism for more than a year, and then tracing its roots and taking a more accurate look, I now find that there is simply no longer any justification for this kind of complete skepticism, absolutely no objectivity involved in it. I entertained the iconoclastic ideas of a subculture and its authors because I sensed something wrong with the traditions I has been taught, and these new ideas offered some explanations and also pumped me up with a certain amount of pride and identification with the subculture telling the rest of the culture they had it all wrong. I find some of this to be a new form of egotism priding itself in being non-egotistical. I am also concerned that some members of this subculture often isolate themselves into their familiar and comfortable corners. This is understandable if they want to become free from being conditioned to wrong ways they were taught… for a temporary incubation period. But I think it is unhealthy to remain that isolated for more than a year or two. That is my current conclusion.
Superimposed on that are good things that I have gathered from eastern religions, which Brad has described as coming to the conclusion that our knowledge is skewed from what our greater reality really is, a reality we can only understand more completely by concluding that we know nothing for certain through our usual intellectual processes. It’s all just a best guess. But there is a certainty, wholeness, and peace that comes from quieting the mind,
Best Guess
Our intellectual processes provide us with a best guess approach to understanding reality, and it misses some aspects of it through the partial unreliability of word labels , as Brad has pointed out. But it should not be underrated. Best guesses have propelled mankind out of the cave and onto the moon, with Mars now in sight. We have some leisure now in which to ponder the missing aspects, instead of being consumed with survival. The best guesses are reliable foundations from which the higher consciousness can spring forth. Historicity and literalness are not “always” deceptive as the counter culture schools of esoterica often espouse. For the most part, they are the “reliable” foundations from which the esoteric wisdom can spring forth instead of wandering into pseudo-esoteric offshoots that have no connection with practical living.
It does not make sense to me to tune in to greater wisdom, get mad about corrupted versions of former wisdom masking the greater wisdom, and then dropping out of the world. The people in the 1970’s who tuned in and dropped out of the world have all had to eat their own words and drop back in. I think we need to get over our anger about the greater wisdom being masked, and stay in the world, and continue tuning in to the greater wisdom. I think the modern campaign to discredit “everything” literal and historical is a deceptive distortion of greater wisdom that will lead its adherents into fixating on a new delusion.
If we look at the development of religious and philosophical wisdom, we will find that it takes some twists and turns, but (ignoring the obvious corrupted portions of it) it does not generally turn on itself. It progresses, building reliably on the structure it originated from.
When we make time to be quiet. what we experience does not invalidate our existence, it enriches it.
Anny,
Se if this rings a bell. Judah’s name is formed from Jahweh with a dalit (Grammatical value 4) added to it. This is mentioned in the Mishna.
Jewish prophets have always fulfilled the dual role of warning against sin and its consequences while at the same time foretelling that solution to man’s propensity for sin in the redemption by Messiah, which marks the ascension of man through diligently following the divine presence externally which in turn leads man into reuniting with the internal aspect of that presence within.
Jonah is about God trying to enlarge the heart of a prophet to see the bigger picture of his traditional enemy – a nation of backward people who would repent if given the instruction. After all is said and done, Nineveh was eventually destroyed by the Medes after the Book of Jonah was written, just like the prophet Nahum foretold some time before its destruction.
You write: “Judah’s name is formed from Jahweh with a dalit (Grammatical value 4) added to it.”
This is interesting. I never noticed that before. There is even more that points to the four, as the dalet is inserted as the fourth character in the name Jehudah. Add that to the fact that he is the fourth son, then the four is obviously a theme around this son. You might expect him to be the son who symbolizes the physical body as the world of matter is also called the fourth world, but he is not.
His name contains the elements of both thanks and praise. However, in this name you can also read: Jod (10) – hod – hé (5). Hod means ‘glory, majesty’ and the jod and the hé of course point to the name Jahweh again. It is the glory and majesty of Jahweh, and that does point to Judah being the symbol of the spirit, the divine spark in man, that is descending into this fourth world, into this physical body.
When looking at this register of the births of the sons of Jacob in Genesis 29 and 30, I suddenly noticed that they could be divided into three parts too, just like the register of births leading from Abraham to Jesus in Matthew 1. Three sets of four sons in this case.
• The first four sons are all sons of Leah: Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Judah.
• The second four sons are the sons of two women, the maids of Rachel and Leah, because neither wife could bear children at the time: first Dan and Naphtali as the sons of Rachel’s maid, and then Gad and Asher as the sons of Leah’s maid.
• The third four sons are the sons of Leah and Rachel themselves again: Issachar and Zebulun as Leah’s sons (with Dinah as an aftermath thrown in as only daughter) and finally Rachel’s two sons Joseph and Benjamin.
So there is one set of four and two sets of two times two, with Leah and Rachel alternating: Leah four, Rachel’s maid two, Leah’s maid and Leah herself together four and Rachel two.
• Four – two – four – two.
There must be a meaning there somewhere but I do not see it yet.
It needs the female element though to end up with thirteen = ahava, love and echad, one, oneness.
Then you mention sin.
Somehow I have got some aversion against this word as I think it has been interpreted in the wrong way in Christianity and has been used by the churches in a way that gave rise to judgement and fear. Personally I see it more as temporarily straying from the path, taking a wrong turn or rather, taking a path that does not directly lead to the aspired destination.
Sin is chata in Hebrew, 8-9-1. Numbers which are all positive in themselves and point to the birth (9) of the new world of the eighth day (8) and return to oneness/unity (1) again; together they have the numerical value of eighteen, which is chai, of course, life. Just like the nachash and the mashiach they are very closely connected.
Sin is inherent to life, and a means to get experiences, which of course have consequences which will teach us to turn back to the right way again. If we would never take wrong turns, we also would not grow in conscious awareness, I believe, as we would always stay in oneness and unity.
Do not think that I want to promote ‘sin’, it is just that it is almost impossible to have the necessary experiences without taking wrong turns on your path from time to time. It is part of the descending process.
Prophets are there to keep us from straying too far from the path but if we do not listen, we will just have to face the consequences, also if we do listen initially but then revert to whatever we were up to. Then the original prophecy still stands, even if there is a second one to remind us.
But I believe that all that will happen is that we will face the consequences of our own deeds and not a terrible judgement by God, Who is after all Unconditional Love but does allow us to face whatever we created. We should remember however that all this is not real anyway as it is just a game and a world of illusion, so no Real destruction can happen to us at all and there is no judgement.
Anny,
I totally agree with you on all counts, especially judgment, which has an alternate definition of guidance and discipline, as David says in psalm 23, “Thy rod and thy staff”, are metaphorical symbols from the shepherd who protects the sheep and keeps them from straying into areas of danger. God appointed ‘Judges” including Deborah, who were gifted in discerning the spirit, to direct the people
I have another comment from yesterday for you that has been delayed because of the cited references, awaiting moderation. It should arrive soon.
Hello Robert,
Thanks for your last two replies.
I will very much appreciate an overview of the first four articles in your fifth one, especially if that will not be published immediately.
I also appreciate your explanation about the tribes. I did know that Joseph’s descendants formed two tribes and that Levi’s descendants served as priests and Levites for all of Israel, so I assumed that the Levites were not considered a tribe anymore as they always write about the twelve tribes. Should it not really be thirteen then, if the Levites are still considered to be a tribe? Thirteen is my favourite number, as you must know by now, but of course the link to the 144.000 is lost then. Or it is twelve plus one, like Jesus and the disciples are seen as twelve plus one. The one being of higher awareness already and the twelve having to ascend to that state in order to finally become thirteen = echad = one and ahava = love.
As far as proving or disproving anything at all is concerned, I have become kind of allergic to it. Apart from the fact that often it is not possible at all, it often also means wanting to prove someone else wrong and that certainly belongs to duality in my view and we should start to refrain from that. I prefer to be convinced of my own truth on the basis of what I feel in my heart and to respect the truth of other people as their truth. I do not consider anyone’s truth to be absolute yet, including my own, and in my opinion everyone should be allowed to find his or her own way without being judged by others, and also without judging others who go a different way.
Judging as meant in this latest comment is of a different order altogether. That is giving directions to the people by someone who has a higher consciousness already. Like Debora and Samuel and like a shepherd to the sheep. Indeed it also involves protection. In Dutch we have two different words for judges. An ordinary judge we call ‘rechter’ but the ‘shoftim’ that followed Joshua are called ‘richters’ or ‘richteren’ in the old-fashioned way. That does indeed mean ‘to give direction’.
Love,
Anny
Hello Robert,
Rereading this comment of mine, I just now discovered another element pointing to the number four regarding the person Judah. Counting from Abraham, as in the register of births in Matthew 1, the register of births leading to the birth of the Messiah/Christ, Judah is also the fourth name on this list.
In your comment to which I replied you wrote: “Judah is the one who changes his ways, and King David is an example of one of his descendants who characterizes this same kind of repentant purification.”
Both are names on this list and their names and numbers point to these actions.
Judah, who symbolizes the incarnating spirit, is the fourth son and the fourth generation and even more ways are used to point to the four of the fourth world of matter into which he is incarnating, while his name also contains the glory of the Majesty of the incarnating spirit.
He more or less shows us the way through the involution / evolution cycle by taking full responsibility for all his actions later on in the story.
David is the fourteenth name and generation on this list and everything about him points to the number fourteen. It is the numerical value of his name as the total sum of 4-6-4. These characters point to the balancing and integrating function of the principle of David. Every set of opposites in this fourth world has to be brought into balance and integrated.
Fourteen is also the numerical value of the word ‘jad’, which means ‘hand’ and is the symbol of the action that has to be taken, and the number fifty, that symbolizes the higher awareness that will be the result of this process and all this action, is the letter nun, which is the fourteenth character of the Hebrew alphabet.
David symbolizes the same process as Judah, only from the viewpoint of the phase of a lower part of the cycle, but in principle he undertakes the same kind of action as Judah did later on in his life.
Time and again the symbols in bible texts point to the same action that we all need to undertake. Every time it is the crucifixion of our ego all over again. That is how important it is.
Ann
I like the additional information about the numbers. I get the idea that some people would benefit more if they had a practicing understanding of Gematria enough so they could make these number associations themselves, as well as follow what you report.
I also have a considerable respect for people following their own path to enlightenment without being hindered by judgments of others or imposing judgments on others that would hinder them. Listening to and expressing differing opinions is a healthy way we can add insight that we as individuals might miss. It protects us from the paradox of becoming too self-absorbed in ways we choose to liberate ourselves from self. We are connected in our differing opinions for a purpose.
I find that people often follow a pendulum motion in which they discover an imbalance in their believes and swing the other way slightly out of balance to compensate. It is natural to impose judgment on the way we swung from, and an interesting paradox for us if we do this while we are trying to swing to the way that neutralizes all imposed judgment. I am hoping some people who have been passionately critical about historicity and literalness will come to realize where they are in that paradoxical process. My goal is to find the middle balancing point of the pendulum, neither too far one way or the other. It does no good to escape a lion by swimming across a river and encountering a bear waiting for you on the other side.
Anny,
Another consideration in formulating an axiom of mutual acceptance and toleration of other’s beliefs, is defining under what conditions this applies and under what conditions this does not apply. At the extreme, some beliefs are pernicious, especially the distortions of religious systems that are embraced by terrorists and dictators. Then there are less extreme cases.
Anny,
Forgot to mention that “til Shiloh come” in Hebrew calculates to a Gematria value of 358, same as Maschiach.
Hello Robert,
Re your three comments of April 7th:
As far as the Gematria that I use is concerned, that is very largely intuitive with me, based on a few principles that I learned long ago from prof. Weinreb and of course some knowledge of Hebrew and the Bible itself.
It is very much associative as well. Someone once said about me that I think in an analogical instead of linear way. It means looking at a word from all sides and following all associations and then seeing something light up sometimes.
Like when you wrote about Jehudah being the name Jahweh with a dalet inserted, then first of all I started checking in what position it was inserted and what could be deduced from that. And what else could be seen that way and I found the word ‘hod’ and what could be deduced from that. And then you brought David into it and I suddenly saw the respective positions of both names in the birth register of the Christ, because I knew that about David already, with all that it entailed, and I knew my biblical history well enough to know that Judah would be there in fourth place without having to look it up. And I went from there.
I have no idea whether any rabbi ever came to the same conclusions that I did but that does not really matter to me as I am not trying to convince anyone to believe anything but simply share my truth. And if that is of help to even only one person, then I am delighted. And the people to who this does not appeal should just follow their own path. In fact, everyone should.
I very much agree with you when you write: “Listening to and expressing differing opinions is a healthy way we can add insight that we as individuals might miss. It protects us from the paradox of becoming too self-absorbed in ways we choose to liberate ourselves from self. We are connected in our differing opinions for a purpose.” We do not have to let what others have learned define our truth but it certainly is of great value to listen and see what is there that might give us new ideas about our own path. Even it is something that we might disagree with very much, it may give us new ideas.
Yes, finding the balance is what it is all about. I like your example of the bear on the one side of the river and the roaring lion at the other side. This is what the name (principle) David is all about (4-6-4). Besides, however ‘right’ we may think we are about any given subject, once we start judging those who have an opposite opinion, we enter the field of duality again and that is the wrong direction in this day and age of the beginning of ascension towards oneness and unity again.
As far as the second comment: “Another consideration in formulating an axiom of mutual acceptance and toleration of other’s beliefs, is defining under what conditions this applies and under what conditions this does not apply. At the extreme, some beliefs are pernicious, especially the distortions of religious systems that are embraced by terrorists and dictators. Then there are less extreme cases.”, is concerned, I am aware of that too.
However, I believe that judgement is not the answer here. Which does not mean that we should not do anything about it though but we should do that in a positive way and judgement in the sense that I meant before is not positive.
These extreme distortions of religious systems with all that it entails you can see as darkness. Darkness however is only absence of light. In order to chase away the darkness we should not bring on another type of darkness in the form of judgement, condemnation or war but we should bring light into the situation, and once there is light, there is no more darkness. We should not fight against something negative but turn towards something positive to bring a change into the situation.
I think it was Einstein who said already that we cannot solve a problem at the level of the problem but we have to go to the level of the solution. Or something like that. I have also heard it said that the answer to every problem is Love. And I believe that it is true. Not that I am too great at finding practical solutions to anything whatever, I must confess, but there are other people who are and we should support them as well as we can.
“Forgot to mention that “til Shiloh come” in Hebrew calculates to a Gematria value of 358, same as Maschiach.” I did not know that! That is very interesting and gives it very much a place in the whole ‘nachash – messiah’ concept. The factor of tense and excited waiting in between those two phases.
Anny,
You have wonderful insights from you intuitive perspectives. I am learning from you about reacting to opinions I perceive as un-balanced or excessive, to react in a positive way to them, to assert a solution on a higher level than the problem, as both Einstein and Jesus have taught us.
I forgot to mention that the Star of David can be considered a geometric figure composed of 13 points. At the top centered on the page is one point. Just below centered on the page is a row with 4 points. Below that, centered is a row with 3 points. Below that is a centered row with 4 points, and below that is a centered row with 1 point. (1-4-3-4-1) = 13. When you look at it closely, it has 6 points in a hexagon on the outside, 6 points in a hexagon on the inside, and one point at the center of the Star. From my perspective, the Star is a cipher for the future, when Israel will be spiritually mature and express the love symbolized by 13, the numerical value of the Hebrew word for love. I think it will take a long, hard road to get there. The Book of Revelations indicates that before then, a large part of the population will go into captivity. The other part will be the remnant who will see the light and be saved by divine providence.
The political climate in Israel today is roughly split into liberals who want to keep negotiating and giving concessions to the Palestinians on the West Bank, and conservatives who have given up negotiating and grabbing land and expanding settlements as a self-protective measure.
…………….*
…..* # # *
………# @ #
…..* # # *
…………….*
Try again,
…………….*
…..*…..#……#……*
…….#….. @….. #
…..*…. #…. #……. *
…………….*
I like this idea of the Star of David being a geometric figure composed of 13 points (and also your rendering of it in the comments underneath). It gives it so much added value yet again and all comes back to balance and harmony, love and unity. Because when your vision comes true and Israel will finally express the love that is symbolized by 13 then they will also finally be One once more and no longer divided about everything.
It is fear that makes people revert to all these measures you describe and fear has never brought a solution to anything yet.
Letting go of fear and return to Love is the only answer. That will bring light into the darkness and then there will possibilities to overcome the problems, when both peoples learn to see each other as brothers and sisters instead of enemies and start caring about the needs of others as much as about their own.
Anny,
A beautiful and profound statement. 13 back to you.
Why is Levi included, and Dan and Ephraim not included in the 12 tribes who witness to the world in Revelation 7:5-8
Here is the best answer so far that I have found:
“We may look first to the first tribe mentioned in the list of Revelation, which is the Tribe of Judah. this is interesting because Reuben should have been first, but we will remember from Hebrew history that Reuben lost his position of first because of his gross immorality and thus it was given to Judah.
Genesis 49:8-10:
(8) Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father’s children shall bow down before thee.
(9) Judah is a lion’s whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art gone up: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up?
(10) The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.
Genesis 49:3-4:
(3) Reuben, thou art my firstborn, my might, and the beginning of my strength, the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power:
(4) Unstable as water, thou shalt not excel; because thou wentest up to thy father’s bed; then defiledst thou it: he went up to my couch.
This shines light onto the subject, showing us the history of the people was being adhered to in this particular list. Other list have other names, and in other orders, and this is because God is communicating something different in those list, but this list deals with the history of the people.
We may accordingly remember that Dan was the first tribe to fall to idolatry after Israel was led into the promised land.
Judges 18:30-31:
(30) And the children of Dan set up the graven image: and Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Manasseh, he and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the day of the captivity of the land.
(31) And they set them up Micah’s graven image, which he made, all the time that the house of God was in Shiloh.
Dan is also where the calf was set up when Israel was split as a nation after Solomon.
1 Kings 12:27-30:
(27) If this people go up to do sacrifice in the house of the LORD at Jerusalem, then shall the heart of this people turn again unto their lord, even unto Rehoboam king of Judah, and they shall kill me, and go again to Rehoboam king of Judah.
(28) Whereupon the king took counsel, and made two calves of gold, and said unto them, It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.
(29) And he set the one in Bethel, and the other put he in Dan.
(30) And this thing became a sin: for the people went to worship before the one, even unto Dan.
If you were paying attention to the text above (not included here), then you saw that the golden calves were established under the king Jeroboam, who just happens to be of the tribe of Ephraim.
1 Kings 11:26:
(26) And Jeroboam the son of Nebat, an Ephrathite of Zereda, Solomon’s servant, whose mother’s name was Zeruah, a widow woman, even he lifted up his hand against the king.
This just so happens to be the other tribe which is not included to be a witness for God in the end days.
The list given in Revelation is a list of the 144,000 witnesses in the last days. These tribes lost their witness because of sin.
…. The Twelve Tribes on Three Different Lists
Genesis 29-30……..Numbers 1………Revelation 7
Reuben…………………Reuben………….Reuben
Simeon…………………Simeon…………..Simeon
Levi……………………………………………..Levi
Judah…………………..Judah,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Judah
Dan……………………..Dan
Naphtali………………Naphtali………….Naphtali
Gad……………………..Gad………………..Gad
Asher…………………..Asher………………Asher
Isaachar………………Isaachar…………..Isaachar
Zebulun………………Zebulun……………Zebulun
Joseph………………………………………….Joseph
…………………………..Ephraim
…………………………..Manasseh…………Manasseh
Benjamin,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Benjamin………….Benjamin
The answer above, and other proposed answers are from http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/4756/why-is-the-tribe-of-dan-missing-from-revelation-75-8
Thanks for your explanation. I get it now.
The fact that Dan had been taken out had temporarily slipped my mind, which is why I ended up with thirteen tribes.
The fact that Ephraim had been taken out as well and Joseph had been put back in in Revelations has never registered with me, I must admit. Although I do have some problems with the combination of Joseph and Manasseh both.
Manasseh is part of Joseph and if Ephraim is taken out then only Manasse is left. So either Manasse is counted twice or Ephraim is not taken out but called Joseph, so the tribe is not taken out but it lost the right to its own identity.
Anny,
Yes. I also noticed that Joseph was put back in to replace Ephraim, which seemed odd at first. So I inquired and came up with part of the answer. The different lists apply to different applications, The first list in Genesis is of Jacob’s sons. The second list in Leviticus is about apportionment of land. The third list in Revelations is about spiritually virgin-like representatives being elected as witnesses to the world.
Dan still has an identity and a positive reputation throughout the bible. Sampson is the hero from Dan who sacrificed his earthly life to bring down the temple of the Philistines who tricked him. Dan is not mentioned in the list of 144n,000 witnesses because of the role the tribe of Dan played in entangling all Israel in idolatry. But Dan’s birth rite, land inheritance, and honor due to Sampson are forever preserved in the identity of this tribe.
Joseph’s land inheritance is split between his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh in Leviticus. The tribe of Ephraim succumbs to gross idolatry, worshipping the Golden Calf, and leading the entire Northern Kingdom of Israel back into gross idolatry, for which they were taken captive and scattered by the Assyrians. And yet the prophets Jeremiah (Jer 31:20) and Hosea (Hosea 8) announce that God relents from destroying and erasing Ephraim and the other tribes of the Northern Kingdom from the face of the earth, like Sodom and Gomorrah. God dispenses grace and mercy on them, instead of the deserved punishment he warned them about. He also promises to re-gather them to their land in the last days. The treatment of Ephraim is an example of God’s
grace that is given to ultimately refine and not annihilate his people. Ephraim means “fruitful” so that wherever this tribe was scattered, it likely became a fruitful transplant among the nations.
So I think because of Ephraim’s role in leading the idolatry, the part of that tribe’s witness in the 144,000 was placed back under the banner of Joseph.
I have also heard that the names of the tribes are significant in understanding the hidden meanings of the three lists.
Hello Robert,
Thanks for your explanation. It makes sense. It seems that there are hidden meanings to be found everywhere and in everything. I hope we will be able to figure these out as well some time. It is interesting that there can be so much meaning in lists of names! And in names as such.
Love,
Anny
Passover. About to leave the imprisonment.
Prepare, throw out the lesven, cut the crap, go back to the essentials.
Eat Jesus’ Flesh, drink his Blood, immerse yourSelf in his Being, draw that Inside.
Acknowdge the Seed Inside and feed and protect it. Recognize the inherent connection with All, the connection is not lost, it is within us, in every cell and fiber of our physical body. But we cannot serve two Lord’s, duality versus unity. Make up your mind.
All the rest, is my opinion, leavened. Talking around the subject, hoping to hit an accord.
This is my coinage
. .
The logic in this seems very faulty to me?… Why if it’s all about “crucifying the ego” on this blog is everything interpreted to be about the self instead of a literal Lord Jesus? Wouldn’t crucifying the ego really be believing on Jesus to save you instead of believing it’s up to you to figure it out and that you even can? Isn’t that pride/ego to believe it’s even possible that you can save yourself? How are you going to save yourself?