Is the Court of the Gentiles a bad place to be?

annier · Jan 31, 2014

Gxg (G²);64943711 said:
Pretty much..

Seeing that aids in shaping the way Paul meant for Ephesians 2-3 to be taken when it came to Gentiles and Jews having the wall of seperation torn down. For there was never meant to be a wall in the first place and the Jews born in the time of Christ grew up assuming Gentiles had to be dirty/automatically seperate from them at all levels....but the Lord still worked with Gentiles often. And when Christ died, it wasn't so much a matter of making it possible for Gentiles to be accepted before the Lord as if they hadn't been before....an ontological perspective.

Rather, it seems more sensible to say that Paul noted that His death had a symbolic impact where what He did for all mankind by His death/blood shed was meant to take away the ideology of Gentiles having to be afar....opening the door for the Holy Spirit (at Pentecost) to fall on all and others bringing Gentiles together with the Jewish people who'd respond to the work of Christ and show Gentiles the true extent of how concerned Christ was for them being together with the Jews - thus ending the Wall of Seperation that existed. Of course, His blood shed and sacrifice/resurrection opened up the door for ontological changes in how men relate to God - but in the practical, the Wall of Seperation doesn't seem to be something Paul was ever meaning to convey as if it was meant to be developed or a representation of how God established things in the Temple era.

speaking of walls:
What I am thinking of is the original separation,( later a wall) between the people and the priests. Was that wall there because the people sinned and broke the covenant in the first place? How do you see this? Levi in keeping the covenant was joined to the priesthood. Do you think the people would have been joined if they had kept the covenant?

Messianic Jewboy · Jan 31, 2014

annier said:
speaking of walls:
What I am thinking of is the original separation,( later a wall) between the people and the priests. Was that wall there because the people sinned and broke the covenant in the first place? How do you see this? Levi in keeping the covenant was joined to the priesthood. Do you think the people would have been joined if they had kept the covenant?

I think so because all the things after were a result of the golden calf. God before the golden calf that Israel would be a nation of priests...

kcmonseysr · Jan 31, 2014

talmidim said:
Hi kcmonseysr,

...and welcome. As you are well aware, the points you bring up a source of great contention. Two thousand years of man's rescripting of the Gospel message has seen to that. But you seem sincere and ask good questions; both qualities I particularly enjoy.

If I may, I would take a brief stab at an answer. Forgive me in advance if it is a bit generic.

The subject of circumcision has been debated here ad nausium. There are many arguments as to what the term means and how it is used in scripture:

One argument is based on the term being taken literally; a physical mark made in the foreskin of the penis according to the manner and methods laid out in Torah.

One argument is based on the term being taken figuratively; a reference to a highly ritualized tradition of conversion to Judaism that includes physical circumcision, among other elements.

One argument is based on the thought that certain references are made within highly stylized forms of midrashic hyperbole.

There is a hybrid argument (probably most accurate), that is founded on the belief that references to circumcision in New Testament writings, are a combination of the three cases and can only be discerned through contextual means by a person well versed in history, scripture and the practices and traditions of ancient Judaism.

There is also the term, "of the circumcision" that refers to certain Jews that were proponent of the second argument listed above.

Your question indicates you are unfamiliar with the topic and the debate. I only posted all of that to let you know that this is a complex issue that might require a little study on your part if you really want to understand all of the ramifications of your question. I would suggest that you start with a simple search (perhaps in eSword?) for the word 'circumcision' in the Tanakh (Old Testament) and brush up on the basics.

The second part of your post enters some even more contentious ground. That would be the whole, 'faith, grace and law' debate. I won't presume to lecture you, but I would advise an open mind and a circumspect approach.

Don't get caught up in the arguments. Instead, embrace the questions. When you fully understand the depth of the questions you ask, you will be able to make a more reasonable judgement for yourself as to the arguments offered.

Concerning Passover:
The short answer is that no, you do not have to be circumcised to attend a Passover seder. A Seder is not a sacrifice, so physical circumcision is not required. Instead, it is an instructive retelling of the events of the Passover story replete with props, Q&A and interactive immersion into the historical, scriptural and spiritual significance of the actual event.

I'm sure that there are many Seders hosted in your area. Reach out to your local Messianic synagogue for more information on the when and where. You may also wish to participate in a traditional Jewish Seder at some point too. I recommend it.

Keep in mind that the public versions are presented before the actual Passover and, though complete productions in and of themselves, are considered rehearsals for the actual date. The actual Passover is the one that is celebrated at home with family and guests. If you are unfamiliar, there are certain social and cultural conventions to be observed. Make sure to inquire. This is a most edifying and gratifying experience, so care should be take not to spoil it by offending your hosts.

Concerning the rest:

The short version is that some people insist that faith and grace are either all that is necessary or that the former (faith and grace) has replaced the latter (the law).

Another camp contends that the former and the latter are not mutually exclusive and in fact are different components of the same concept; selection through grace and obedience through faith.

There is another camp that contends that the first position is for Gentile believers and the second is for Jewish believers.

All camps believe that studying the Hebraic context of the scripture can only enhance the disciples understanding of these critical issues.

I hope you have found this information helpful.

Blessings,
Phillip

Philip,

Thanks much for the interest and the info. It will take me a little time to digest it. Meanwhile, I await my 15th post, following which I think (I hope) that I may be allowed by the website to respond to your private message. :clap:

Yahudim · Jan 31, 2014

No worries. Glad I could help.

Do what so many have done. Compose a sentence. Post each word individually.

kcmonseysr said:
Philip,

Thanks much for the interest and the info. It will take me a little time to digest it. Meanwhile, I await my 15th post, following which I think (I hope) that I may be allowed by the website to respond to your private message.

visionary · Jan 31, 2014

visionary · Jan 31, 2014

visionary · Jan 31, 2014

Something

visionary · Jan 31, 2014

visionary · Jan 31, 2014

This?

visionary · Jan 31, 2014

You better start your own thread for that though...lol wouldn't want those rabbit droppings all over someone else's thread.

Yahudim · Jan 31, 2014

With the notable exception of this one, Vis?

visionary said:
You better start your own thread for that though...lol wouldn't want those rabbit droppings all over someone else's thread.

Gxg (G²) · Jan 31, 2014

mpossoff said:
...all the things after were a result of the golden calf. God before the golden calf that Israel would be a nation of priests...

Definitely think that is reasonable, as the Golden Calf incident had a flow to it..

With the Levites, when they set themselves apart during the Golden Calf incidence, God blessed their dedication...and in reward for their dedication, God replaced the first borns with the tribe of Levi. "

"Consecrate yourselves today to the LORD, that He may bestow on you a blessing this day, for every man has opposed his son and his brother" (Exodus 32:29).

Now behold, I Myself have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel instead of every firstborn who opens the womb among the children of Israel. Therefore the Levites shall be Mine, because all the firstborn are Mine. (Numbers 3:12-13).

The Levites then took on the duty of serving God.

"At that time the LORD separated the tribe of Levi to bear the ark of the covenant of the LORD, to stand before the LORD to minister to Him and to bless in His name, to this day" (Deuteronomy 10:8).

That service included serving the priests.

"And I have given the Levites as a gift to Aaron and his sons from among the children of Israel, to do the work for the children of Israel in the tabernacle of meeting (Numbers 8:19).

The other Levites who were not sons of a subordinate ministers appointed in the Mosaic Law for the service of the Tabernacle and of the Temple.

Although it was the case that originally the firstborn sons were to have been the priests of the Jewish nation, who would serve in the Tabernacle and in the Temple and be the spiritual leaders (as a result of how God spared the Jewish firstborn during the Plague of the Firstborn in Egypt and “acquired” them and designated them for this special role), the making of the golden calf after the giving of the Torah and worshiping it led to the Lord drastically changing plans....and since those noteworthy to not have participated in this act was the tribe of Levi...what occurred at this time was that the firstborn lost their special status, and it was transferred to the Levites. We can see n the Torah’s description of the induction of the Levites as they began their new role (Numbers 8:16–18) where God tells Moses: “For they [the Levites] are wholly given over to Me from among the children of Israel; instead of those that open the womb all the firstborn of Israel I have taken them for Myself . . .”

Thankfully, as the Lord had plans for the Israelite nation and the world, he honored what he said by using the Levites as illustration of what He wanted for all - and then inaugurated that via Christ, who did not come through the line of Levi but went back to the order of how things were outside of him....as seen in
Melchizedek, king in Genesis (Gen 14:18) who performed some priestly functions long before the full service Levitical priesthood was established by God ( (Ex 29:9, Num 25:13 and Jer 33:18) and whose priesthood was a type for others who walked it out - from David (who was prophet/priest and king - more shared here and here in #47 ) to Yeshua son of David, as seen in Heb 7:17 when the author of Hebrews shows Ps 110:4 about Jesus and explains on the ways Christ brought things full circle by not coming thru the Levitical priesthood to accomplish things (as shared in #59 and #64 ).

annier · Jan 31, 2014

Gxg (G²);64944745 said:
Definitely think that is reasonable, as the Golden Calf incident had a flow to it..

With the Levites, when they set themselves apart during the Golden Calf incidence, God blessed their dedication...and in reward for their dedication, God replaced the first borns with the tribe of Levi. "
"Consecrate yourselves today to the LORD, that He may bestow on you a blessing this day, for every man has opposed his son and his brother" (Exodus 32:29).

Now behold, I Myself have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel instead of every firstborn who opens the womb among the children of Israel. Therefore the Levites shall be Mine, because all the firstborn are Mine. (Numbers 3:12-13).

The Levites then took on the duty of serving God.
"At that time the LORD separated the tribe of Levi to bear the ark of the covenant of the LORD, to stand before the LORD to minister to Him and to bless in His name, to this day" (Deuteronomy 10:8).

That service included serving the priests.
"And I have given the Levites as a gift to Aaron and his sons from among the children of Israel, to do the work for the children of Israel in the tabernacle of meeting (Numbers 8:19).

The other Levites who were not sons of a subordinate ministers appointed in the Mosaic Law for the service of the Tabernacle and of the Temple.

do you see Ephesians addressing this?

Gxg (G²) · Jan 31, 2014

annier said:
do you see Ephesians addressing this?

No- as said earlier in #237, Ephesians seems to be addressing the reality of what Christ's death signified for the Gentiles instead of speaking to the situation of the Levites - books such as Hebrews speaks more specifically to that reality, as well as I Peter to a good degree.

Although the seperation that the Levites had from people in King Solomon's Temple was transformed by all believers becoming priests of the Lord/able to come before Him, it seems Paul was not thinking of Solomon's temple when it came to the "dividing wall" scenario - the Temple of King Herod was already far from what King Solomon's temple was and thus Paul in Ephesians was speaking to that present scenario.

On three courageous journeys, Paul and his associates established local assemblies in scores of Gentile cities. And one of the most prominent of those churches was Ephesus. It was established in A.D.53 on Paul's homeward journey to Jerusalem...but Paul returned a year later, on his third missionary trip, and stayed there for three years, preaching and teaching (Acts 19:1-20) - and at another time, Paul met with the Ephesians elders and sent Timothy to serve as their leader (I Timothy 1:3)...and later met again with the elders of the Ephesian church at Miletus (Acts 20:16-38)

Not written to counteract heresy or to contront any specific problem, Ephesians is a letter of encouragement...for in it Paul describes the nature and appearance of the Church. Most of the Ephesians were Gentiles - and even though Christ died for them as well as Jews, it was the case that they didn't really understand the depth of their inheritance in the Lord or the Father.....and thus, Paul took time in Ephesians 1 to note how extensive their riches were in Him....noting how believers in Christ have been showered with God's kindness (Ephesians 1:3-8), chosen for greatness (Ephesians 1:9-12), marked with the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 1:13-14), filled with the Spirit's power (Ephesians 1:15-23) and freedd from sins's curse/bondage (Ephesians 2:1-10) while being brought near to God (Ephesians 2:11-18).

With places such as Ephesians 2:11, the rite of circumcision was applied to all Jewish male babies and thus this physical act ("done in the body by the hands of men") was a clear mark of distinction between Jew and Gentile, in which Jewish people naturally took pride.

And when it came to the "dividing wall", it seems Paul was speaking of the 1st century innovation with the wall made for the Court of the Gentiles - the "dividing wall" being an allusion to the barricade in Jerusalem temple area that marked the limit of how far a Gentile might go (even though there were other groups of Jews who were present in the area with him)....for the Gentiles were limited more so than the Jewish people. ...and Paul used the "dividing wall" dynamic to describe the total religious isolation Jews and Gentiles experienced from each other due to how they view one another.

Again, other Jews were not allowed to move forward into the inner courts of the temple as the Gentiles were (as Josephus pointed out that 13 stone slabs with writing in both Greek and Latin were placed at intervals on the barrier, warning Gentiles not to enter). In Josephus's words, "There was a partition made of stone... Its construction was very elegant; upon it stood pillars, at equal distances from one another, declaring the law of purity, some in Greek, and some in Roman letters, that no ' foreigner should go within the sanctuary" (Wars, 5.5.2).

The dividing wall had great significance for Paul, who was arrested in Jerusalem for reportedly bringing a Gentile into the inner court of the temple (as seen in Acts 21:16-30) when it came to Paul making a fulfillment of a Nazarite vow. For Paul and other Jewish followers of Christ recognized that the GOd who had previously resided in the temple had entered humanity in the person of Jesus, the Messiah.

Jesus' death on the cross and his resurrection had in effect broken down the dividing wall, effecting spiritual unity between Jew and Gentile in light of how it demonstrated that both JEW and GENTILE needed reconcilliation/a way of connecting to the Lord fully and that one would never be superior to the other - as all of humanity's sins caused Christ to go to the Cross.....and thus, others seeing that would see why it was WRONG for Gerntiles to be pushed out/viewed as less by the Jews when it came to worship. Paul knew that all people have been granted access to God through saving faith in Jesus Christ.

Jews and Gentiles alike could be guilty for spiritual pride - Jews for thinking their faith and traditions elevated them above everyone else, Gentiles for trusting in their achievements, power or position....but both were humbled before Jesus since Paul pointed out that Jews and Gentiles alike were unclean before God/needed to be cleansed by Christ (Ephesians 2:11-13) . While Gentiles and Jews often kept apart from one another - Jews considering Gentiles beyond God's saving power/without hope and Gentiles resenting Jewish claims - Christ revealed the total sinfulness of both Jews and Gentiles....and then he offered his salvation to both.

The "dividing wall" and what Christ did with it was a matter of showing how only Christ breaks down the walls of prejudice, reconciles all believers to God, and unifies us in one body...his cross meaning to be the focus of our unity. So long as the temple that Jesus experienced in the 1st century, there was angry resentment between Jews and Gentiles, caused by the Jewish laws that favored the Jews and excluded the Gentiles - but Christ died to end that system ..took the two groups that had been opposed to each other and made them parts of himself according to Ephesians 2:15-18.

Hope that makes sense...

Gxg (G²) · Jan 31, 2014

annier said:
What I am thinking of is the original separation,( later a wall) between the people and the priests. Was that wall there because the people sinned and broke the covenant in the first place? How do you see this? Levi in keeping the covenant was joined to the priesthood. Do you think the people would have been joined if they had kept the covenant?

I think that there was far more going on to the choosing of Levi beyond his obeying the covenant.

The reason I say this is because of three main things...based on Exodus 32:

Exodus 32
When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and said, “Come, make us gods[a] who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who brought us up out of Egypt, we don’t know what has happened to him.”

2 Aaron answered them, “Take off the gold earrings that your wives, your sons and your daughters are wearing, and bring them to me.” 3 So all the people took off their earrings and brought them to Aaron. 4 He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool. Then they said, “These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.”

5 When Aaron saw this, he built an altar in front of the calf and announced, “Tomorrow there will be a festival to the Lord.” 6 So the next day the people rose early and sacrificed burnt offerings and presented fellowship offerings. Afterward they sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry.

7 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt. 8 They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf. They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.’

.................19 When Moses approached the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, his anger burned and he threw the tablets out of his hands, breaking them to pieces at the foot of the mountain. 20 And he took the calf the people had made and burned it in the fire; then he ground it to powder, scattered it on the water and made the Israelites drink it.

21 He said to Aaron, “What did these people do to you, that you led them into such great sin?”
22 “Do not be angry, my lord,” Aaron answered. “You know how prone these people are to evil. 23 They said to me, ‘Make us gods who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who brought us up out of Egypt, we don’t know what has happened to him.’ 24 So I told them, ‘Whoever has any gold jewelry, take it off.’ Then they gave me the gold, and I threw it into the fire, and out came this calf!”

... 25 Moses saw that the people were running wild and that Aaron had let them get out of control and so become a laughingstock to their enemies. 26 So he stood at the entrance to the camp and said, “Whoever is for the Lord, come to me.” And all the Levites rallied to him.27 Then he said to them, “This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: ‘Each man strap a sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbor.’” 28 The Levites did as Moses commanded, and that day about three thousand of the people died. 29 Then Moses said, “You have been set apart to the Lord today, for you were against your own sons and brothers, and he has blessed you this day.”

One, one of the main things to consider with the choosing of the Levites was the very makeup of leadership at the time. Others have noted that knowing who wrote the story can make a big deal in understanding why certain things are emphasized...for the recorder of scripture noted them specifically at the exclusion of others who may've not fallen into immorality. Moses, according to Exodus 5, was descended from the tribe of Levi - and thus, it doesn't seem surprising that his kin would rally to him solely.

Two, something else to consider is the fact that there were others besides the Levites who were righteous. In Exodus 32:26, Moses called for all those who were for the Lord to come to him. The Scripture specifically mentions the Levites as coming to him, but we can safely assume that those of the other tribes who still put their faith in the Lord also came to him. We can also safely assume that those people who did not come to him had chosen to worship the egyptian gods and goddesses rather than worship the one God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Everyone focuses on Moses and yet not many focus on the other leaders who were present BEFORE the Golden Calf ever happened..

Exodus 24:13-18

13Then Moses set out with Joshua his aide, and Moses went up on the mountain of God. 14 He said to the elders, “Wait here for us until we come back to you. Aaron and Hur are with you, and anyone involved in a dispute can go to them.”15 When Moses went up on the mountain, the cloud covered it, 16 and the glory of the Lord settled on Mount Sinai. For six days the cloud covered the mountain, and on the seventh day the Lord called to Moses from within the cloud. 17 To the Israelites the glory of the Lord looked like a consuming fire on top of the mountain. 18 Then Moses entered the cloud as he went on up the mountain. And he stayed on the mountain forty days and forty nights.

It's not a mistake to realize (if going through Exodus/seeing the sequence of events that occurred prior to Exodus 32 when all of Israel served the Golden Calf ) that Aaron's fall was a big deal when Moses was gone for so long. For Moses had told the leadership that it was to be both Aaron AND Hur in charge while he was gone. And although you see previously where Aaron AND Hur were the ones supporting Moses in Exodus 17:11-13/Exodus 17 by keeping his hands up during the Amalekite attack, you never see Hur present in the Exodus 32 account when Aaron let things get out of control with the Golden Calf.

I've long wrestled over wondering if Hur had either been silenced by the majority because Aaron did not enforce before others the fact that Hur was a CO-Leader that needed to be listened to - or if Hur had also kept silent during the episode because he felt the people would listen to Aaron more than him due to Aaron being Moses's brother/closer somewhat....or if perhaps Aaron had made decisions when Hur was elsewhere entirely ( perhaps praying for the people or doing another task) and Aaron decided to handle the situation alone - thus falling because he had no accountability from his co-leader/other staunch ally of Moses who could've helped him remember his duty in the face of the group trying to control him....

And as Aaron was at one point designated to be Moses's speaker when Moses didn't want to speak ( Exodus 5:1-3, Exodus 7:1-3, Exodus 7:18-20, Exodus 8:4-6 , Exodus 9:11-13, etc. ) - it does seem that Aaron may've chosen to think too highly of himself/saw himself as "Number 1" in charge...and ignored having Hur involved since experiencing facing Pharoah with Moses may've caused him to think he had a better grasp of the situation than his discernment really pointed to.

And I do wonder if perhaps the Lord saw this coming when the Lord wanted Moses to handle the job initially and was angry when Moses refused and God pointed out Aaron as someone to help ( Exodus 4:13-15/Exodus 4 ) ..for it doesn't seem Aaron did well by himself and would perhaps do poorly because of a tendency to take things on by himself rather than rely on godly accountablity.

Amazingly, after many perished because of the Golden Calf Incident and the Lord used Aaron's line to lead the people in true worship, those from the line of Hur were used for making physical symbolism of God's prescence - as Hur from the line of Judah) is also mentioned as the grandfather of Bezaleel, designated by God to be the principal creator of the Tabernacle and the Ark of the Covenant ( Exodus 31:1-3, Exodus 35:29-31, Exodus 38:21-23 ). God remembered Hur and honored him even when it seemed Aaron did not....and regardless of what the full background was, it is amazing what happens when you're given tasks to do as a team and you're stuck handling them alone since you either cave into pressure or you take more thnings upon yourself than warranted

Surely Hur must've been sparred during the Exodus 32 account - but in reading the text literally, it feels as if one must infer into the text that Hur was both innocent/sparred while others were killed...and I'm surprise Moses didn't mention Hur during the episode. And according to one Midrash, it seems that Hur was killed by the crowd after denoncing them for the Golden Calf[/url]..with the midrash infering this from the absence of any mention of Hur in the episode of the golden calf or elsewhere in the Torah.

So Hur's legacy is something that seems to not really support the idea that the Levites were chosen solely because they kept the Covenant - if we're to honor Hur, then we have to acknowledge that God saw others outside of the Levites keeping the Covenant and that the Levites were chosen for other reasons.....and it seems sensible that the author of the text of Exodus (likey Moses) noted the Levites for the sake of placing the focus on them due to the role they'd have in the future of stewardship of the Tabernacle - and preparing others to know one part of why things had changed.

Gxg (G²) · Jan 31, 2014

annier said:
Levi in keeping the covenant was joined to the priesthood. Do you think the people would have been joined if they had kept the covenant?

Personally, I think that the wall was just a reinenforcement of the concept of the priests being seperate from the people - and that one of God's reasons for elevating them had ZERO to do with the Levites's actions present during the Golden Calf...and more so with God honoring them on behalf of their ancestors (as shared before).

For clarity...

Prophecys/declaring blessings in scripture are powerful...and yet they are also limited as well if the Lord doesn't agree with it.

In example, Simeon and Levi had a sister who was raped--and given up in marriage to the rapist when he later came to love her. That's not something to easily get over. Surprisingly, Jacob was silent initially (Genesis 34:5-8)-and waiting for his son's reactions.

Although Dinah had been defiled by the rape, in theory her honor and the family's honor could be restored if the man married her (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)...but this would be complicated by the prince of Shechem having a Hivite identity.

When Jacob accepted the marriage proposal, Jacob's sons, showing their true heritage, answer decietfully as Jacob did in Genesis 27:25....with the sons becoming tricksters by proposing circumcision as their condition for acceptance....and when the men of Shechem were in pain from the procedure, they went up/murdered the entire town of Shechem due to their sister's defilment ( Genesis 34:24-26/Genesis 34:29-31Genesis 34 ), causing the entire nation of Israel to have to move/take another journey....a journey that Rachael would not survive after giving birth to Benjamin. Jacob already had a strong distaste for his sons by Leah--and it's possible that what Levi/Simeon did only highlighted that further.

But what's clear in the text is that he was furious about the violence they did toward an entire nation. He noted to them how the attack was foolish since it would cause Israel to be in bad rapport with other nations around them....and Jacob was fearful because of how small Israel was.

Levi and Simeon, however, were not concerned. For they were Leah's children and as such are responsible for their sister Dinah. They chose to exact revenge and rescue Dinah. Although the brothers despoil the city, their brutality served to restore the family's honor, but is unwise.....and yet they didn't care since they felt as if they did justice--and so, just as they weren't concerned about the dangers that could come upon a nation so few in numbers (Israel), so Jacob later cursed them with being without a nation at all...scattered amongst the others.

Genesis 49:4-6

7 Cursed be their anger, so fierce,
and their fury, so cruel!
I will scatter them in Jacob
and disperse them in Israel.

Some have actually noted where it was a curse meant to not only punish them...but to restrain them from ever having alot of power since they were so violent. Perhaps Jacob felt that scattering them would prevent another occurrence like Shechem from happening again.

But the curse itself seemed to be reversed for good on some parts later. The tribe of Simeon was eventually absored into Judah, from where the Kingly/Messianic line would come forth. Situated at the brink of the Negeb desert and entirely surrounded by Judah, there is no trace of boundary descriptions for them in the time of Joshua's giving out territories. All they were given were certain towns--and Simeon's towns were listed in two districts, which are closely related to the second part of Judah's first district, the northern Negeb around Beer-sheba ( Joshua 19:1-3 / Joshua 19 )..and even more closely related to the Simeonite towns in I Chronicles 4:28-32.

Although they had no benefit of having their own extensive territory, they were protected at all times by one of the greater nations---and included with them through eventual adoption.

To give more thoughts, on what occurred with Simeon's fate, there was a book I read earlier years ago (recommended by another Messianic Jew) entitled "Arabs in the Shadow of Israel: The Unfolding of God's Prophetic Plan for Ishmael's Line" by Dr.Tony Maalouf, it was very insightful studying up on the bloodlines that the scriptures note---and showing how many of them blended (such as Ishmael's line and Easu's as well, for example) and why they often did so through the act of adopting members into the tribe....and making them one of the people just as it often occurred in Middle-Eastern/African culture. More on what he said on that can be seen here, including discussing where other tribes from the Israelite culture adopted others/blended for the sake of survival (as what occurred with the line of Simeon).

With Levi's line, THE Lord took a curse placed upon them and made it to be where the Levites would have the HIGHEST position in the community--with some of the greatest leaders in Hebrew History (Moses, Exodus 2:1-3 and Aaron, Exodus 4:13-15 ) leading and the Levites scattered throughout Israel as the landless tribe of priests/holy men ..ushering in the very prescence of the Lord/being the nearest to Him ( Numbers 2:32-34 /Numbers 2, Numbers 3, Numbers 4, Numbers 8 , Numbers 16:7-9/ Numbers 16, Numbers 17:7-9 , Numbers 26:58-60, Numbers 35, Deuteronomy 27:8-10 , Joshua 8:32-34 , Joshua 13:32-33 , Joshua 18:6-8 , 1 Chronicles 15:14-16 , 1 Chronicles 23:13-15 ).

Whereas Levi himself wasn't holy/set apart, the Lord ensured that his descendants would be otherwise...and while not revoking all aspects of Jacob's curse, He seemed to work around it for his benefit.

<B>Interestingly enough, with the Levites, it was not the case that they didn't necessarily walk in the same violence as did their ancestor Levi---for with the Golden Calf issue, it has always amazed me to see what occurred when they were given power again:

Exodus 32:27-29

</B>

28 The Levites did as Moses commanded, and that day about three thousand of the people died. 29 Then Moses said, You have been set apart to the LORD today, for you were against your own sons and brothers, and he has blessed you this day

And Moses prophetically blessed the Levities before he died in Deuteronomy 33:6 , giving them a glorious destiny (counter to what Jacob said on his deathbed). ..and Simeon was blessed as well.

And with Levi/Simeon being redeemed by the Lord later, the Lord was showing His redeemptive side..

But his choosing them to be His stewards was never the main goal that the Lord had in mind. His heart was always for having a NATION of Kings and Priests. And thus, thru the mess-ups of the people, he had to set up a system of showing them the consequences of sin and preparing His people in the future for what the Israelites weren't ready for in their time - but it also gave opportunity to tie up loose ends.

annier · Feb 1, 2014

Gxg (G²);64945399 said:
I think that there was far more going on to the choosing of Levi beyond his obeying the covenant.

The reason I say this is because of three main things...based on Exodus 32:

Exodus 32
When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and said, Come, make us gods[a] who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who brought us up out of Egypt, we dont know what has happened to him.

2 Aaron answered them, Take off the gold earrings that your wives, your sons and your daughters are wearing, and bring them to me. 3 So all the people took off their earrings and brought them to Aaron. 4 He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool. Then they said, These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.

5 When Aaron saw this, he built an altar in front of the calf and announced, Tomorrow there will be a festival to the Lord. 6 So the next day the people rose early and sacrificed burnt offerings and presented fellowship offerings. Afterward they sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry.

7 Then the Lord said to Moses, Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt. 8 They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf. They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.

.................19 When Moses approached the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, his anger burned and he threw the tablets out of his hands, breaking them to pieces at the foot of the mountain. 20 And he took the calf the people had made and burned it in the fire; then he ground it to powder, scattered it on the water and made the Israelites drink it.

21 He said to Aaron, What did these people do to you, that you led them into such great sin?
22 Do not be angry, my lord, Aaron answered. You know how prone these people are to evil. 23 They said to me, Make us gods who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who brought us up out of Egypt, we dont know what has happened to him. 24 So I told them, Whoever has any gold jewelry, take it off. Then they gave me the gold, and I threw it into the fire, and out came this calf!

... 25 Moses saw that the people were running wild and that Aaron had let them get out of control and so become a laughingstock to their enemies. 26 So he stood at the entrance to the camp and said, Whoever is for the Lord, come to me. And all the Levites rallied to him.27 Then he said to them, This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: Each man strap a sword to his side. Go back and forth through the camp from one end to the other, each killing his brother and friend and neighbor. 28 The Levites did as Moses commanded, and that day about three thousand of the people died. 29 Then Moses said, You have been set apart to the Lord today, for you were against your own sons and brothers, and he has blessed you this day.

One, one of the main things to consider with the choosing of the Levites was the very makeup of leadership at the time. Others have noted that knowing who wrote the story can make a big deal in understanding why certain things are emphasized...for the recorder of scripture noted them specifically at the exclusion of others who may've not fallen into immorality. Moses, according to Exodus 5, was descended from the tribe of Levi - and thus, it doesn't seem surprising that his kin would rally to him solely.

Two, something else to consider is the fact that there were others besides the Levites who were righteous. In Exodus 32:26, Moses called for all those who were for the Lord to come to him. The Scripture specifically mentions the Levites as coming to him, but we can safely assume that those of the other tribes who still put their faith in the Lord also came to him. We can also safely assume that those people who did not come to him had chosen to worship the egyptian gods and goddesses rather than worship the one God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Everyone focuses on Moses and yet not many focus on the other leaders who were present BEFORE the Golden Calf ever happened..

Exodus 24:13-18

13Then Moses set out with Joshua his aide, and Moses went up on the mountain of God. 14 He said to the elders, Wait here for us until we come back to you. Aaron and Hur are with you, and anyone involved in a dispute can go to them.15 When Moses went up on the mountain, the cloud covered it, 16 and the glory of the Lord settled on Mount Sinai. For six days the cloud covered the mountain, and on the seventh day the Lord called to Moses from within the cloud. 17 To the Israelites the glory of the Lord looked like a consuming fire on top of the mountain. 18 Then Moses entered the cloud as he went on up the mountain. And he stayed on the mountain forty days and forty nights.

It's not a mistake to realize (if going through Exodus/seeing the sequence of events that occurred prior to Exodus 32 when all of Israel served the Golden Calf ) that Aaron's fall was a big deal when Moses was gone for so long. For Moses had told the leadership that it was to be both Aaron AND Hur in charge while he was gone. And although you see previously where Aaron AND Hur were the ones supporting Moses in Exodus 17:11-13/Exodus 17 by keeping his hands up during the Amalekite attack, you never see Hur present in the Exodus 32 account when Aaron let things get out of control with the Golden Calf.

I've long wrestled over wondering if Hur had either been silenced by the majority because Aaron did not enforce before others the fact that Hur was a CO-Leader that needed to be listened to - or if Hur had also kept silent during the episode because he felt the people would listen to Aaron more than him due to Aaron being Moses's brother/closer somewhat....or if perhaps Aaron had made decisions when Hur was elsewhere entirely ( perhaps praying for the people or doing another task) and Aaron decided to handle the situation alone - thus falling because he had no accountability from his co-leader/other staunch ally of Moses who could've helped him remember his duty in the face of the group trying to control him....

And as Aaron was at one point designated to be Moses's speaker when Moses didn't want to speak ( Exodus 5:1-3, Exodus 7:1-3, Exodus 7:18-20, Exodus 8:4-6 , Exodus 9:11-13, etc. ) - it does seem that Aaron may've chosen to think too highly of himself/saw himself as "Number 1" in charge...and ignored having Hur involved since experiencing facing Pharoah with Moses may've caused him to think he had a better grasp of the situation than his discernment really pointed to.

And I do wonder if perhaps the Lord saw this coming when the Lord wanted Moses to handle the job initially and was angry when Moses refused and God pointed out Aaron as someone to help ( Exodus 4:13-15/Exodus 4 ) ..for it doesn't seem Aaron did well by himself and would perhaps do poorly because of a tendency to take things on by himself rather than rely on godly accountablity.

Amazingly, after many perished because of the Golden Calf Incident and the Lord used Aaron's line to lead the people in true worship, those from the line of Hur were used for making physical symbolism of God's prescence - as Hur from the line of Judah) is also mentioned as the grandfather of Bezaleel, designated by God to be the principal creator of the Tabernacle and the Ark of the Covenant ( Exodus 31:1-3, Exodus 35:29-31, Exodus 38:21-23 ). God remembered Hur and honored him even when it seemed Aaron did not....and regardless of what the full background was, it is amazing what happens when you're given tasks to do as a team and you're stuck handling them alone since you either cave into pressure or you take more thnings upon yourself than warranted

Surely Hur must've been sparred during the Exodus 32 account - but in reading the text literally, it feels as if one must infer into the text that Hur was both innocent/sparred while others were killed...and I'm surprise Moses didn't mention Hur during the episode. And according to one Midrash, it seems that Hur was killed by the crowd after denoncing them for the Golden Calf[/url]..with the midrash infering this from the absence of any mention of Hur in the episode of the golden calf or elsewhere in the Torah.

So Hur's legacy is something that seems to not really support the idea that the Levites were chosen solely because they kept the Covenant - if we're to honor Hur, then we have to acknowledge that God saw others outside of the Levites keeping the Covenant and that the Levites were chosen for other reasons.....and it seems sensible that the author of the text of Exodus (likey Moses) noted the Levites for the sake of placing the focus on them due to the role they'd have in the future of stewardship of the Tabernacle - and preparing others to know one part of why things had changed.

This brings me to the Third reason why the Lord saw the Levites - and that reason was one that had ZERO to do with the Levites's actions present during the Golden Calf...and more so with God honoring them on behalf of their ancestor.

So are you concluding it had zero to with their being joined to the priesthood then?
And do you not see anything in Ephesians about the priesthood?

Gxg (G²) · Feb 1, 2014

annier said:
Was that wall there because the people sinned and broke the covenant in the first place? How do you see this? Levi in keeping the covenant was joined to the priesthood. Do you think the people would have been joined if they had kept the covenant?

Part of God's Sovereignty, IMHO, is the fact that the Levites needed to be set in place in order to illustrate the reality of God using temporary means/systems to bring His people to Him while also preparing them for the future when His original purposes come to fruition and the people can handle it.

And this seems to be present nowhere else than in the life of Yeshua when seeing how he was called the Son of David (as a Messianic Title) and was expected to restore the Davidic Kingdom in new ways...with it not being surprising to see Him act as David did.

David did substantial changes to the Levitical system when it came to Temple Worship and administration - and he also did things that priests did.

David was a KING and a PRIEST ---and as the Lord made clear to his people in Exodus ( Exodus 19:5-7 ) that he intended for Israel to be a NATION of KINGS/PRIESTS, one must wonder if the only way to accomplish that was to have others patterned after the type of King/Priest David was.....as that's exactly what Christ --the SON of David and the fulfillment of the prophecy of the seed of David (2 Samuel 7:14-16), confirmed in Matthew 1 and other places ( (Matthew 15:22, Matthew 20:30, Mark 10:47, Mark 12:35-37, Acts 4:12, etc ) ---did when he came down and made us into a nation of Kings and Priests.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+5:10&version=NIV1984

Revelation 5:10
You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth.”
Revelation 5:9-11

Revelation 20:6
Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.
Revelation 20:5-7

The same promise the Messiah gave to Israel when he delivered them was repeated once again in the End of all things.....with the Lord noting that His people will NEVER perish due to their nature as priests of God just as Yeshua is.

So the wall between the Levites and others was allowed in the same way a teacher allows a set-up to develop in one part of the classroom they make for students while having other stations set up as well - each station being visited in order to show a larger lesson at the end of the class...and likewise, the Lord allowing the Levites to be set up while also having it already the case where other non-Levites were also utilized for priestly service and using Yeshua as he did was all to show GOd's people the work it takes to show Him in control of our redeemption...

annier said:
So are you concluding it had zero to with their being joined to the priesthood then?

And do you not see anything in Ephesians about the priesthood?

As said before in #255 when I explained the background of Ephesians (in the event you missed it), the priesthood was not what St. Paul had in mind when it came to Ephesians 2-3 based on the fact that the Wall of Seperation was a 1st century innovation made to the temple enforced by the Jewish people and something that had a context....and the priesthood dynamic was already covered more extensively in other places, be it Hebrews 7-10 or I Peter 1-3.

The Levites being joined to the priesthood required them being seperate from the people and a wall was practical - as intended with Solomon's temple and the Tabernacle with what they utilized. But the seperation itself was far greater than a matter of "Well, they chose to obey me so that means that they are covered and are to be seperate" - there was an larger purpose God wanted to illustrate with the people....as well as redeemptive purposes for the Tribe of Levi on behalf of their ancestor for preventing Jacob from joining with the Cannanites as he wasn't meant to and for rightly defending their sister (Daughter of Leah - the wife Jacob happened not to love or honor even though she was his first wife - more shared in #257 ).

mercy1061 · Feb 1, 2014

annier said:
So are you concluding it had zero to with their being joined to the priesthood then?
And do you not see anything in Ephesians about the priesthood?

I think the levites were chosen to do a special task instead of the firstborn, not that the firstborn were rejected. Lets not forget that it was Aaron a levite who led Israel astray. I also think that David was a priest, but not with full priestly duties. Much in the same way, not all levites performed all the duties of the high priest. There are different levels of the priesthood, all are elgible to serve as priest but not all are priests. David did eat the bread that belonged to the priest, of course all jews that wandered in the wilderness were allowed to eat holy bread.

mercy1061 · Feb 1, 2014

annier said:
So are you concluding it had zero to with their being joined to the priesthood then?
And do you not see anything in Ephesians about the priesthood?

For example, a person may work on a job as a teacher, then promoted to an assistant principal, again promoted to assistant superintendent, again promoted to superintendent, etc. At each level the duties or job description is different, but all are educators employed in the field of education. Although the teacher is who the students see every day, the teacher works for the superintendent.

Is the Court of the Gentiles a bad place to be?

annier

Guest

Senior Veteran

Christian Zionist

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

annier

Guest

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

annier

Guest

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Newbie

Newbie

Similar threads