He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised, every male child in your generations

//According to the law, males in Israel had to be circumcised on the 8th day of their life. Here is the law again, this time in Leviticus:

And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. –Leviticus 12:3

But have you ever wondered why? What’s the big deal about going under the knife on the 8th day? Take a look at this verse, where Israelites were instructed to give their firstborn sons to God on the 8th day of their life:

You shall not delay to offer the first of your ripe produce and your juices. The firstborn of your sons you shall give to Me. Likewise you shall do with your oxen and your sheep. It shall be with its mother seven days; on the eighth day you shall give it to Me. –Exodus 22:29-30

And Joseph dreamed a dream, and he told it his brethren: and they hated him yet the more. And he said unto them, Hear, I pray you, this dream which I have dreamed: For, behold, we were binding sheaves in the field, and, lo, my sheaf arose, and also stood upright; and, behold, your sheaves stood round about, and made obeisance to my sheaf. And his brethren said to him, Shalt thou indeed reign over us? or shalt thou indeed have dominion over us? And they hated him yet the more for his dreams, and for his words.

//Joseph dreams of twelve sheaves of grain, representing he and his eleven older brothers. The older ones bow down to the younger. But the brothers aren’t impressed, imagining that Joseph is implying that he will one day reign over them.

Note that Joseph himself never interprets his dreams. He just relays them to his brothers and father, who interpret them. But did they understand them correctly?

Fast forward a few chapters to Egypt, when Joseph and his brothers meet up again. He has become a powerful influence, second in command, and the brothers come to Egypt looking for food to live through a famine. There, they bow before him:

And his brethren also went and fell down before his face; and they said, Behold, we be thy servants.

And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch … And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech.

//These are the descendants of Cain. Cain, you may recall, was the firstborn son of Adam and Eve. Cain killed Abel, his brother, so God gave Adam and Eve a third son named Seth to replace Abel.

Here are the descendants of Seth, from the next chapter: Noah son of Lamech son of Methuselah son of Enoch son of Jared son of Mahalaleel son of Cainan son of Enos son of Seth.

These two genealogies are surprisingly similar. Enoch and Lamech show up in both. Probably, Mehujael is Mahalaleel and probably Methusael is Methuselah. Enoch, the son of Cain, sounds surprisingly like Enos, the son of Seth.

And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen.

//When Abraham was told by God to sacrifice his son Isaac, he was instructed to go to Mount Moriah. However, this location is contested by some scholars, who argue (based on literary analysis of the original Hebrew) that Abraham was sent to a place named Jeriel, which is a few miles south of Jerusalem. These scholars suppose that the later substitution in scripture of Moriah for Jeriel  was based on their close proximity and Jeriel’s similarity to an earlier name of Jerusalem, Ariel. This led to the misperception that Abraham took Isaac to Mount Moriah in Jerusalem, or Ariel, instead of Juriel. Now read today’s verse again, which corroborates the conjecture: Abraham called the place of sacrifice Jehovah-Jireh, which sounds a lot like Jehovah Jeriel.

Mount Moriah is also famed for a second reason:

Now Solomon began to build the house of the LORD at Jerusalem on Mount Moriah – Chronicles 3:1

Thus did the Temple mount become associated with Abraham’s near-sacrifice of Isaac. Jeriel became Moriah, in scripture. But Jerusalem, where Mount Moriah was, was also known by another name: Salem. The two names, Jeriel and Salem, come together in this midrashic story (the teller relates Melchizedek and Shem):

Abraham called it Jireh: “And Abraham named that site Yahweh-Jireh”. Shem had called it Salem, as it is said, “And King Melchizedek of Salem.” The Holy One (blessed be He) said: If I call it Jireh, as did Abraham, Shem, a righteous man, will protest. If I call it Salem, as did Shem, Abraham, a righteous man, will protest. Rather, I hereby name it Jerusalem, according to what both of them called it–“Jireh-Salem.” (Gen. Rab. 56:10)

Now therefore, my son, obey my voice; and arise, flee thou to Laban my brother to Haran; And tarry with him a few days, until thy brother’s fury turn away; Until thy brother’s anger turn away from thee, and he forget that which thou hast done to him: then I will send, and fetch thee from thence: why should I be deprived also of you both in one day?

//Yesterday, I wrote about the reunion of Jacob and Esau, after Jacob steals the blessing and birthright. Jacob winds up giving both of them back.

Have you ever read the story of these two sons from their mother Rebekah’s viewpoint? This is Rebekah speaking in today’s verse, instructing Jacob to flee from Esau for a few days.

The LORD said to her, “Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you will be separated; one people will be stronger than the other, and the older will serve the younger.”

//In Rebekah’s womb, the brothers Esau and Jacob are squabbling, and she grows concerned. When she inquires of God what is happening, God explains that they will be opposed, and the older will become servant to the younger.

Indeed, as the boys grow, Jacob steals both Esau’s birthright and his blessing. He seems to be coming out on top, just like God predicted. When Esau complains, his father Isaac replies that the blessing given to Jacob is irrevocable:

Isaac answered Esau, “I have made him lord over you and have made all his relatives his servants, and I have sustained him with grain and new wine. So what can I possibly do for you, my son?”

When Jephthah came to his house at Mizpah, there was his daughter, coming out to meet him with timbrels and dancing; and she was his only child. Besides her he had neither son nor daughter.

//One of the more troubling, and thus passionate, debates among scholars is whether or not Israelites at one time sacrificed children to their god, Yahweh. The practice is roundly condemned by the prophet Jeremiah, and the book of Numbers indicates that a person guilty of human sacrifice is to be stoned. Yet verses in the Bible seem to indicate it was an acceptable practice at one time. I addressed this in a two-part series some time ago:

http://www.dubiousdisciple.com/2013/08/exodus-2229-30-did-god-command-child-sacrifice-part-i-of-ii.html

http://www.dubiousdisciple.com/2013/08/micah-67-did-god-command-child-sacrifice-part-ii-of-ii.html

However, outside the story of Abraham and Isaac, we find no examples of it happening, except this one in today’s verse. Jephthah, victorious in battle, vows to give God the first thing that meets him as he returns home. It turns out to be his only daughter.

This story is significant because Jephthah knows God expects him to complete his vow. He knows that his daughter is an acceptable sacrifice to God, though he wishes dearly it were not the case (see v. 35). Even his daughter recognizes that God expects her to be sacrificed (v. 36).

If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn: But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his.

//This interesting law was apparently established to protect the true firstborn’s inheritance. The firstborn was to receive a double portion in his inheritance. Even if a man’s first son comes from a wife that he hates, he must give that son preference.

Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

//In the Old Testament, Abraham had two children: Isaac, who became the father of the Jews, and Ishmael, who became the father of the Arabs. So we have the Jews, the “children of promise,” and we have the Gentiles, the son of a bondswoman (an illegitimate wife).

Abraham, according to God’s instruction, sends Ishmael and his mother off into the desert with nothing, and gave everything to Isaac.

When the king of Moab saw that the battle had gone against him, he took with him seven hundred swordsmen to break through to the king of Edom, but they failed. Then he took his firstborn son, who was to succeed him as king, and offered him as a sacrifice on the city wall. The fury against Israel was great; they withdrew and returned to their own land.

//This story in the Bible presents a theological puzzle. Moab is losing a war against Israel, so the king of Moab makes a strategic decision: he sacrifices his son on the city wall, in view of everyone. This turns the tide, and Moab routs Israel.

The intended answer is probably hidden in the word “fury.” The “fury” against Israel was great. This translation stems from the Hebrew word qetseph which can imply the wrath of God … or of another god. For example, see this cry to God in Psalms 29:24:

Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age: and he made him a coat of many colours. And when his brethren saw that their father loved him more than all his brethren, they hated him, and could not speak peaceably unto him.

//Here’s a confusing story. Why did this coat of many colors irritate Joseph’s brothers so much? They were so incensed about this coat that they could not even speak a friendly word to him.

One day Joseph came to his brothers out in the wilderness, wearing this offensive coat, and the first thing they did was strip him of it. Then they threw him in a pit and sold him as a slave.

What’s the big deal about a coat?

Here’s the deal. When Elijah was ready to leave this earth, he threw his mantle over Elisha to designate Elisha as his successor. When Aaron and his descendants were ready to step down from the high priesthood, they passed on their special apparel as a sort of ordination of the next guy in line. When Jacob in his old age made a special coat to give to Joseph, he may have been doing more than demonstrating concern or affection; he may have been designating Joseph as the primary beneficiary. If this is so, then he was pulling the birthright from all the older brethren and choosing a youngster.

“Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: ‘When either a man or woman consecrates an offering to take the vow of a Nazirite, to separate himself to the LORD …”

//In Bible times, there existed a means of donating a boy or girl to the service of God. Presumably, this meant cultic service at the Temple. A Nazirite could be either male or female, as today’s verse indicates, and did not require one to be of the lineage of Aaronite priesthood. Anyone could be a Nazirite. Numbers chapter 6 indicates the rite of passage, and how the vow is offered. In particular, one agreed not to drink any wine, not to shave one’s hair, and not to touch that which is unclean, like corpses.

Yet few took this opportunity, at least as a lifelong dedication. We have two Old Testament examples–Samson (Judges 13:7) and Samuel (1 Samuel 1:11). In the New Testament, we have John the Baptist (Luke 1:15).

But was Jesus a Nazirite? Maybe. Jesus was a Nazarene, but there is much confusion over what this word means. Matthew, in verse 2:23, claims that Jesus hailed from Nazareth, and thus fulfilled the Biblical requirement that he would be a Nazarene. But the word “Nazarene” might stem from the word “netzer,” meaning a branch or off-shoot, referring presumably to the claim that Jesus would be a descendant of David. Or it can mean Nazirite.

By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God

//How do we know, when we hear instruction from another, that it comes from God? In the book Unfettered Spirit, Robert Cornwall presents three rules to help us critically examine any instruction we may hear. I thought these rules to be interesting enough to repeat. Three verses from Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians will highlight the three rules.

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.

//I recall as a child wondering about this verse. What could possibly be comforting about the rod and staff? Who likes getting beat with a rod?

For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

//To fully understand today’s verse, you must put yourself back in the time of Paul, an age when virtually everyone was concerned about evil spirits. The “angels” in today’s verse clearly refers to evil angels, not good ones. Likewise, “principalities and powers” do not refer, as you might think, to political powers, but to spiritual beings. Principalities and powers are particularly evil beings, very commonly referenced as such in ancient literature.