Literary Motifs of Jewish Midrashim

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

According to rabbinic tradition Rahab was a harlot and Ruth converted to Judaism before she married Boaz. However, there is nothing in the canonical texts to substantiate this assertion about Rahab, and Judaism did not exist when Ruth lived. 

Rabbinic Judaism inaccurately claims Abraham as its founder. The Bible states that Abraham was Hebrew (Gen. 14:13), and his religious beliefs were largely set aside by Judaism. Prominent Jews admit this.

Rabbi Stephen F. Wise, former Chief Rabbi of the United States, wrote: "The return from Babylon and the introduction of the Babylonian Talmud mark the end of Hebrewism and the beginning of Judaism." This break came at least 1400 years after Abraham.

Many Jewish accounts of biblical persons do not align with the biblical data. They are the product of midrash, the rabbinic method of interpreting events that took place thousands of years before Judaism's early emergence c.580 B.C.

Certain literary devices are used to develop the Jewish narrative. One is the claim of famines that drive the Hebrew people into other lands. Abraham and Jacob go down to Egypt to avoid famine in Caanan. The family of Naomi left Bethlehem and went to Moab to avoid famine in Judah. While famines were a common problem in the Ancient Near East, they do not explain the wide dispersion of the early Hebrew. Hebrew people lived in the Nile Valley, Mesopotamia, Moab, Canaan, and Anatolia before the Israelites left Egypt. The Moabite Hebrew were kin to Abraham. They share a common ancestor in Terah, Abraham’s father and the great grandfather of Moab, Lot’s son.

Another device is jealousy among brothers. Though the Genesis story does not explain why Cain killed Abel, midrash supplies the explanation that he was jealous. Likewise, Joseph’s treatment by his brothers is explained as an act motivated by jealousy. In Joseph's case this is the best way to explain how he ends up a high official in the court of the Egyptian King. Analysis of the kinship and social structure of the early Hebrew, however, suggests that he was sent to Egypt to serve Potiphar, his maternal uncle. This happened with Jacob who was sent to serve his maternal uncle Laban.

Jewish writers often use the device of twins to obfuscate the two-wife marriage pattern of the biblical Hebrew. By this means a wife is excluded from the narrative. Isaac's sons Esau and Jacob were likely the firstborn sons of two different wives, but that reality would be a great inconvenience if the writer wishes to focus attention only on Rebekah. Likewise, Tamar's twin sons were probably Judah's sons by two different wives.

The device of levirate marriage is also used to obfuscate the birth order and lineage of Hebrew sons. The story of Tamar exemplifies this. The biblical data suggests that she was Judah's second wife. (Just Genesis: Was Tamar Judah's Wife?)

Midrashim often employ the device of slavery to explain why a prominent Hebrew is not living in the land of Israel or has left Canaan. It is used to explain why Joseph was in Egypt, why Daniel was in Babylon, and why Mordecai and Esther were in Persia. In the sixth century B.C., Judean noblemen were taken as captives to Babylon, and Babylon was conquered by the Persians who took captives to Susa. These events have been historically verified. Midrash embroiders historical events to convey a theological message.

Incest is another a literary device of midrashim to denigrate the descendants of a Hebrew clan. This is the case with Lot and his daughters by which the Ammonites and the Moabites were to be excluded from the promises made to their common Hebrew ancestors. The late Michael Heiser noted that to "uncover the nakedness" of a male relative is to have sex with his wife (Lev. 18:7, 14, 20:20-21). Thus, Noah's son Ham is accused of incest with his father's wife. That woman was not necessarily Ham's mother because the early Hebrew rulers had two wives. Reuben, Jacob's firstborn son by Leah, is dismissed as Jacob's proper's heir because he slept with one of Jacob's concubines (Gen. 35:27). Likewise, David's son Absalom is dismissed as David's heir because he slept with his father's concubines (2 Sam. 16:22). 

Reuben probably did sleep with Bilhah, his father's concubine. That was a way to usurp Jacob's authority. This is described in Genesis 49:3-4: “Reuben, you are my firstborn, my might, and the first fruits of my strength, preeminent in dignity and preeminent in power. Unstable as water, you shall not have preeminence, because you went up to your father’s bed; then you defiled it—he went up to my couch!”

Midrash tends to point to God or supernatural intervention as an explanation for why things happened. An example is Joseph’s declaration to his brothers: “Now therefore be not grieved, nor angry with yourselves, that ye sold me hither: for God did send me before you to preserve life. For these two years hath the famine been in the land: and yet there are five years, in the which there shall neither be earing nor harvest. And God sent me before you to preserve you a posterity in the earth, and to save your lives by a great deliverance.” (Gen. 45:5-7)

Another example is Mordecai’s declaration to Esther: “Think not with thyself that thou shalt escape in the king's house, more than all the Jews. For if thou altogether holdest thy peace at this time, then shall enlargement and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place; but thou and thy father's house shall be destroyed: and who knoweth whether thou art come to the kingdom for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:12-14)

Countless sermons draw on Jewish interpretations to make theological points about God, covenants, and biblical archetypes. Therefore, those who attend church and synagogue are familiar with the Jewish narratives. When the earlier contexts of the widely dispersed Hebrew clans are presented, many become confused, resistant to new information, or even outraged. Nevertheless, understanding the social structure and historical contexts of the biblical Hebrew clarifies relationships and events that are obfuscated by Jewish explanations coming long after the time of the early Hebrew (4200-2000 BC). For example, as the firstborn son of Rachel, Jacob’s cousin wife, Joseph would have been sent to serve his maternal uncle. This is a feature of the marriage and ascendancy pattern of the Biblical Hebrew. That explains why Joseph was in the household of Potiphar in Egypt. In Genesis 41, Joseph is described as 'ebed. The word is derived from the verb ʿbd, meaning "to work” and it can apply to a slave, a servant, and a nephew who serves his uncle. Jacob, the son of Isaac's cousin wife, also went to serve his maternal uncle.

It is hoped that the readers of this blog will pursue the historical realities that are presented in the canonical texts. Understanding the social structure and historical contexts of the biblical Hebrew clarifies relationships and events that are often muddled by Jewish explanations coming long after the early Hebrew (4200-2000 B.C.).

Related reading: Was Tamar Judah's Wife?; The Earliest Known Site of Horite Hebrew Worship; The Oldest Known Religion; The Substance of Abraham's Faith; The Hebrew were a Caste; Just Genesis: Contextual Incongruities in Genesis; The Hebrew Hierarchy of Sons

The Canonical Texts on Bad Guys

 

Schottenstein Edition of the Babylonian Talmud (Talmud Bavli).

All my enemies whisper together against me; they imagine the worst for me, saying, “A vile disease has afflicted him; he will never get up from the place where he lies.” Even my close friend, someone I trusted, one who shared my bread, has turned against me. (Psalm 41:7-9)

Gossip and rumors are the work of people who invest in "who's worse than me" thinking. Making someone out as the bad guy gives perverse pleasure to some people. It happens in Bible interpretation also. The Israelites are posed as righteous though they regularly disobeyed and committed evil acts. The Deuteronomist's advocacy of genocide against non-Israelites is reprehensible, yet many attempt to justify it on the basis of the good guy-bad guy fallacy. In reality, both righteous and evil persons are found in every society, community, and population. God's covenant with the Israelites does not permit them to destroy places and images sacred to their Hebrew ancestors, to level settlements of Hebrew clans other than Jacob's, or to commit genocide. 

Some biblical figures are posed as evil though the biblical data does not support that view. Cain is labeled bad and Abel good. Noah is described as righteous, yet he curses his descendants after falling into a drunken stupor. Ham is labeled bad and Shem good, yet their descendants intermarried (caste endogamy). Esau is the bad guy and Jacob the good guy. The pattern reveals the influence of the rabbis who contributed to the Talmud. Midrash often imposes an interpretation contrary to the data found in the canonical Scriptures.

The Talmud is the source of many "bad guy" portrayals, some of which enter the New Testament writings. We note that the author of Hebrews cast Esau as "immoral" and "irreligious" in Hebrews 12:16, yet Esau, Isaac's proper heir, is said to be the recipient of blessings in Hebrews 11:20.

A comment posted at the Facebook group The Bible and Anthropology is instructive. Dave Anderson wrote: "Jacob acted horribly in this story. Esau has been out hunting for food for the benefit of his family, his brother has food but refuses to give it to him unless he makes an unconscionable contract. A proposal Esau must have taken for a joke. And defrauding his father with a cheap trick to steal the birthright? And after all that Esau forgave his brother. It's clear to me who the good guy in this story was."

Some New Testament writers were influenced by the Talmud in the way they present certain Old Testament characters: Cain, Esau, Korah, and Balaam are examples. Cain is remembered as a murderer, but Moses and David are not. Esau is posed as wicked though he forgives the deception of Jacob and welcomes him back to Edom. Moses’ half-brother Korah is remembered only for his challenge to Moses’ authority and not for his ritual purity, and Balaam becomes the archetype of a foolish false prophet.

Much of the argument developed by the writer of the book of Hebrews relies on rabbinic thought, not on historical realities. In Hebrew 7:14, the writer recognizes that the Messiah is from the tribe of Judah and a descendant of David, but he seems unaware that both Judah and David are descendants of an ancient caste of ruler-priests. He states that the former priests did not take oaths (Heb. 7:20-28) and yet there are historical documents that attest to oaths of office among the Horite and Sethite Hebrew priests. These oaths of office declared their loyalty to the High King who they served, and such oaths were declared before the high priests of the various royal temple complexes. Temples played an important role in resolving legal and personal disputes. 

In an oath taken before a priest of the Temple of Hathor on Dec. 6, 127 BC, a royal servant Petasatet declared his innocence in the case of cloth theft. An oath was taken as a solemn appeal to divine authority represented by the high king. One type asserts a truth and is by nature a declaration such as that of Petasatet. A second type makes a promise pertaining to future actions. (See John A. Widson, “The Oath in Ancient Egypt”.)

 
The writer of Hebrews admits that many of the religious practices of the early priests are not familiar to him. Of the Ark of the Covenant, the mysterious manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, he explains, “Of these things we cannot now speak in detail.” (Heb. 9:5) The primary influence on his thought appears to be the Talmud, the texts that defined Jewish identity by the time of Jesus. The Talmud encourages Jews to place it above the authority of the Hebrew Scriptures. Consider this: “My son, be more careful in the observance of the words of the Scribes than in the words of the Torah." (Talmud Erubin 21b) "He who transgresses the words of the scribes sins more gravely than the transgressors of the words of the law." (Sanhedrin X, 3, f.88b)

Even Jesus' closest disciples had to be shown that Abraham and their Hebrew ancestors believed in God Father and God Son. John explains, “At first his disciples did not understand all this. Only after Jesus was glorified did they realize that these things had been written about him and that these things had been done to him.” (John 12:16, cf. Luke 18:34) 

The same illumination took place on the road to Emmaus. The disciples said to each other, "Didn't our hearts burn within us as He talked with us on the road and explained the Scriptures to us?" (Luke 24:32)

The Messianic Faith of Abraham is not Judaism

Judaism and the religion of the ancient Hebrews should not be regarded as equivalent since they have different historical contexts. Judaism does not represent the faith of Abraham the Hebrew. Jews recognize that what Abraham believed and what is believed by Jews today are not the same. Rabbi Stephen F. Wise, former Chief Rabbi of the United States, explains: "The return from Babylon and the introduction of the Babylonian Talmud mark the end of Hebrewism and the beginning of Judaism.”

Rabbi Morris Kertzer (American Jewish Committee) has written, “The Talmud is the very foundation of Jewish life. It is taught to Jewish children as soon as they are old enough to read.”

SUNY history professor, Robert Goldberg, writes; “The traditional Jew studies Talmud because it communicates ultimate truth—truth about God, truth about the world, and most important, truth about how God wants the holy community of Israel to live.”

When we set aside the disputations of the rabbis and read the canonical texts objectively, we recognize that all these biblical persons are sinners in need of redemption and forgiveness. In I Samuel 24:4-12 we read that David refused to kill King Saul when he had the opportunity to do so because he would not raise his hand against God's anointed. Yet later, David arranged the death of Uriah, one of his own leading warriors.

David was angry with Saul for hunting him like a criminal because David had served Saul with respect. Though David refused to lay his hand on God's anointed, he saw Saul as his enemy and sought God's aid in bringing about Saul's destruction. David expressed his hatred in Psalm 109. 

C.S. Lewis wrote: "Psalm 109 is as unabashed a hymn of hate as was ever written. The poet has a detailed programme for his enemy which he hopes God will carry out. The enemy is to be placed under a wicked ruler. He is to have 'an accuser' perpetually at his side: whether an evil spirit, a 'Satan', as our Prayer Book version renders it, or merely a human accuser - a spy, an agent provocateur, a member of the secret police (v. 5). If the enemy attempts to have any religious life, this, far from improving his position, must make him even worse: 'let his prayer be turned into sin' (v. 6). And after his death - which had better, please, be early (v. 7) - his widow and children and descendants are to live in unrelieved misery (vv. 8-12).

What makes our blood run cold, even more than the unrestrained vindictiveness, is the writer's untroubled conscience. He has no qualms, scruples, or reservations; no shame. He gives hatred free rein - encourages and spurs it on - in a sort of ghastly innocence. He offers these feelings, just as they are, to God, never doubting that they will be acceptable: turning straight from the maledictions to 'Deal thou with me, O Lord God, according unto thy Name: for sweet is thy mercy' (v. 20)." (C.S. Lewis, Christian Reflections)

When we focus on the canonical texts alone, the good guys do not always seem righteous, and the bad guys often appear righteous. There is no cause for spiritual pride, and no justified claim to moral superiority. Before God's righteousness all are filthy beggars. Two days before he died, Martin Luther wrote, “We are beggars, it is true.”

Related reading: War in the Old Testament; Abraham's Faith Lives in Christianity; The Talmud Versus the Doctrine of the Lord

Judaism is Not the Faith of Abraham

Alice C. Linsley


The Apostle Paul wrote a great deal about the Messianic Faith and how it is expressed in the promises made to Abraham the Hebrew. Paul stresses that those who follow Jesus Messiah have been made partakers of those ancient promises (Galatians 3:7-9). He exposes as a false teaching the Judaizers' insistence that the Messianic Faith requires adherence to the laws of Judaism.

Many misconceptions surround the person of Abraham. He is not the founder of Judaism. He was not a Jew. He is identified as "Hebrew" in the Bible and the Hebrew were a caste of priests and rulers with deep roots in antiquity. The English word Hebrew and its variants 'Apiru, Abru, Hapiru, Habiru, appear in texts that date to before Abraham's time. Abraham's faith was received from his Hebrew ancestors. The oldest known site of Horite Hebrew worship at Nekhen dates to 4000 BC, about 2000 years before Abraham.

Many people think that Christianity emerged out of Judaism, but the core belief of the Messianic Faith is that the son of God would take on flesh, be sacrificed, and rise again. This belief was already evident among Abraham’s Horite Hebrew people before 3000 BC. They believed in God Father (Ra or Ani) and God Son (Horus or Enki). Jews reject the very idea that God has a son. Yet the Scriptures say that it is impossible to be saved unless one believes that Jesus is the son of God (Genesis 3:15; Proverbs 30:4, Hosea 11:1; Luke 1:35; John 3:14-17; John 6:40; John 6:69-70; John 20:31; 1 John 5:13). This is why the Apostle Paul speaks of believers being grafted into Abraham, not Judaism. Judaism is not the faith of Abraham the Hebrew.

In Galatians 3, he identifies Abraham’s Seed as Jesus Messiah. In verse 29, Paul explains, “If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s descendants, and heirs according to the promise” made to Abraham.

The Bible provides a great deal of significant anthropological data about Abraham the Hebrew. It also provides information that enables us to identify Abraham's territory between Hebron and Beersheba. In Abraham's time, this region was ruled by the Horite Hebrew and was called Edom. The Greeks called it Idumea, meaning “land of red people.” You will recall that Esau of Edom is described as red, and David, who had Edomite blood, also is described as ruddy or red.

Some of the Horite Hebrew rulers of Edom are listed in Genesis 36 (shown on the diagram above). The great antiquity of the Horite Hebrew of Edom is verified in Genesis 36:31, “These are the kings who ruled in the land of Edom before any king ruled over the Israelites.”

The Messianic tradition upon which the Church stands is revealed in the Bible. It is the tradition of the Horite Hebrew who believed in God Father and God Son. The Horite Hebrew are called “Horim” by Jews, which means parents or ancestors. Jesus lived in a Jewish context which did not recognize him as the fulfillment of the expectations of the Horim. This is because by Jesus’ time, Judaism was only tangentially related to the faith of Abraham.

Certainly, early Christian worship was patterned on the synagogue, with scripture readings, prayers, homilies, and days of feasting and fasting. The east-facing altar is patterned on the Horite Hebrew temple, as are church furnishings such as the tabernacle and the lamp. However, Christianity alone affirms that Messiah is the Son of God. Judaism and Islam reject the very idea that God has a son.

Judaism is the elaboration of rabbinic thought over 3000 years, and though it claims Abraham as its founder, Abraham was not a Jew. Prominent Jews readily admit this.

Rabbi Stephen F. Wise, former Chief Rabbi of the United States, wrote: "The return from Babylon and the introduction of the Babylonian Talmud mark the end of Hebrewism and the beginning of Judaism." This break came at least 1300 years after the time of Abraham the Hebrew.

For Jews, the greatest authority is the Talmud. Consider SUNY professor, Robert Goldberg’s explanation: “The traditional Jew studies Talmud because it communicates ultimate truth—truth about God, truth about the world, and most important, truth about how God wants the holy community of Israel to live.”

The Rabbis are trained in argumentation and the Talmud is a record of their disputations. One drawback is the tendency of the rabbis to debate minutiae and esoteric matters. Over time the Messianic Faith of Abraham - the main thing - became peripheral. The Talmud came to be of greater authority than the Hebrew Scriptures.

The Talmud encourages this. Consider this Talmudic exhortation: “My son, be more careful in the observance of the words of the Scribes than in the words of the Torah." (Talmud Erubin 21b), and this: "My son, give heed to the words of the scribes rather than to the words of the law." This also, "He who transgresses the words of the Scribes sins more gravely than the transgressors of the words of the Law." (Sanhedrin X, 3 f.88b)

In a 2007 NOVA interview Rabbi Shaye Cohen (Professor of Hebrew Literature and Philosophy at Harvard) admitted that Abraham was not a Jew, and he explains that, nevertheless, the narrative of Judaism presents him as the first Jew as a place to start. In other words, the narrative of Judaism ignores the biblical data about Abraham’s ancestors in Genesis 3, 4, 5, 10 and 11. It is in those early chapters that we find the anthropologically significant data about the origin of the Messianic Faith among Abraham’s ancestors.

Related reading: The Hebrew Were a Caste; The Substance of Abraham's Faith; Where Judaism and Christianity Part Ways; The Social Structure of the Biblical Hebrew; Hebrew, Israelite, or Jew?; The Earliest Known Site of Horite Hebrew Worship; Another Look at Genesis 3:13-15

Are Rabbinic Interpretations of the Bible Accurate?

Alice C. Linsley

A great deal of misunderstanding can result from the mechanical reproduction of previously published ideas either because those ideas are taken out of context or because they are based on factual errors. The manner in which authors sort and select data, without verifying the source or checking the facts, can lead to distorted interpretations. This problem must be anticipated in Bible interpretation where it is common to rely on what the rabbis have written.

As the Bible is viewed as a Jewish religious text, it is natural to seek rabbinic guidance. American Christians tend to read the Old Testament through rabbinic sources. Many seminaries and pastors use commentaries written by non-believing Jews. This is especially true among American Evangelicals. They appear to be unaware of the antecedents of Messianic expectation among Abraham's Nilo-Saharan and Saharo-Nubian ancestors. They also are generally unaware that Hebrew is an African language.

Rabbinic interpretations have influenced how Christians read the Old Testament from the start of the Church era. Sometimes the early Christians agreed with the rabbis' interpretations, but often they did not. The Church Fathers condemned Jewish attempts to discredit the testimony of the Apostles and many others. They also attempted, some more successfully than others, to refute rabbinic interpretations of the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, and rabbinic interpretations of Messianic passages, such as Psalm 101:1:

The Lord says to my lord:

“Sit at my right hand
until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet.”

And Psalm 110:4. The Rabbinic community has made many inflammatory accusations against the Christian interpretation of this verse.

The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind:
“You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek.”

Some rabbis insist that Christians tampered with the passage. One contemporary Rabbi has written: “Psalm 110 represents one of the New Testaments’s most stunning, yet clever mistranslations of the Jewish scriptures. Moreover, the confusion created by the Christianization of this verse was further perpetuated and promulgated by numerous Christian translators of the Bible as well…The story of the church’s tampering with Psalm 110 is so old that it begins in the Christian canon itself.” (The treatise on Jewish Objections vol.111)

Rabbi Singer said, “No Jew who had even a superficial knowledge of the Jewish scriptures would have ever found Jesus’ argument compelling, let alone a conversation stopper.”

But if David wrote the psalm, then Jesus' question is well considered: If the Messiah is merely David’s son, as was universally agreed, how can David call him his Lord? If David wrote this, what was his source? He believed in the coming of Messiah based on his Edomite heritage. Edom was where the Horite kings ruled and where Abraham's territory extended between Hebron and Beersheba. The Horites had long expected a Righteous Ruler to overcome death and lead His people to immortality. They were a caste of ruler-priests who were devotees of Horus and his mother Hathor-Meri, the patroness of Horite metalworkers.

It appears that David drew on the Horite Hebrew tradition. His father was a great Horite ruler whose territory extended from Bethlehem in Galilee to Ramah. Ramah was the home of Samuel's Horite father. It was Samuel who anointed David in Bethlehem and for a time the Ark rested in Bethlehem. The Bethlehem of Obed, Jesse and David is specifically associated with the Horites in I Chronicles 4:4 which names Hur (Hor) as the "father of Bethlehem." David's sons are called "priests" in II Samuel because they were of the Horite ruler-priest bloodline. This is Jesus' bloodline through Mary.

It was universally agreed that the Messiah was the "son" or descendant of David, and according to the prophet Micah He would come from Bethlehem, David's royal city. Bethlehem of Galilee was known as a fruitful place and therefore called Bethlehem "Ephratha." This is the Bethlehem of David's ancestors Ruth and Boaz. It was a region known for fruit and grain. It was connected to the royal house of Tyre. Tyre was one of the ancient seats of wisdom. Hiram I of Tyre helped David build his palace. Tyrian craftsmen also helped Solomon build the temple. The rulers of Tyre were considered to have roots in ancient Eden.

The prophet Ezekiel traces the rulers of Tyre back to Eden. "Son of Man, raise a lament over the king of Tyre and say to him: Thus says the Lord God: You were the seal of perfection, full of wisdom and flawless beauty. You were in Eden, in the Garden of God; every precious stone was your adornment... and gold beautifully wrought for you, mined for you, prepared the day you were created." (Ezekiel 28:11-18)

Jesus went to Tyre and there His true identity was recognized, according to Mark's Gospel (cf. Matt. 15:21). Hiram I, David and Jesus share a common Horite ancestry that extends back to Eden. The Horites believed that the promised Seed of the Woman would be born of their ruler-priest lines and they expected Him to visit them. In Mark 7:24, this expectation was fulfilled when the Son of God visited Tyre. Mark explains that there Jesus “could not pass unrecognized.”


The Riddle Jesus Posed to the Jews

Then He said to them, "How is it that they say the Christ is David's son? For David himself says in the book of Psalms, 'The LORD said to my LORD, "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet."  (Luke 20:21-45; Mark 12:35,36)

How can David's son/descendant also be called David's Lord? This was the riddle that Jesus posed to his disclaimers.

“Psalm 110 represents one of the New Testament’s most stunning, yet clever mistranslations of the Jewish scriptures. Moreover, the confusion created by the Christianization of this verse was further perpetuated and promulgated by numerous Christian translators of the Bible as well…The story of the church’s tampering with Psalm 110 is so old that it begins in the Christian canon itself.” (From here.)

The ruling Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah and the division took place when our Lord was manifested at His Baptism, in His Galilean ministry, and during His passion. He fulfilled all the signs of Messiah: feeding the people, calming wind and waves, healing the lame, giving sight to the blind and raising the dead, yet the ruling Jews refused to believe. They rejected the tradition of their own Horim (Horite Hebrew ancestors) who knew that the ultimate sign of Messiah's identity would be the third-day resurrection and an empty tomb. This is why Abraham's ancestors were buried with such care and their tombs sealed. They believed that the salvation of the people depended on a Righteous Ruler, who having overcome death, could led his people to immortality. The third-day resurrection was regarded as the most definitive sign whereby Messiah would be identified. The Jews knew this and therefore took great precaution to see that Rome sealed the tomb and posted a guard.

The Jews have spun a myth that Abraham was the first Jew. This is historically, anthropologically and linguistically inaccurate. Even Shaye Cohen, the leading Jewish scholar at Harvard, admits this in his interview with NOVA. To avoid the reality of Abraham's Nilo-Saharan ancestors, the rabbis begin Jewish history with the calling of Abraham. But it just doesn't work. Since Abraham was Habiru (Hebrew) and not a Jew, the central narrative of Judaism shifted to Moses, and we came to think of Israel as having two different origins. However, Moses's family was Horite. That has been confirmed through analysis of Amram's marriage and ascendancy, which is distinctively Horite Hebrew.

The prophets were right to condemn Egyptian polytheism. The Horites were not polytheistic. They believed in a single Creator whose son was Horus and they spoke of the Father and Son as equals. So it is that Christianity emerges from a tradition much older than Judaism. In this sense, the core of the Christian faith is the oldest known religion. It took the Apostles a while to sort this out since they were brought up in post-exilic Judaism which is very far from the faith of Abraham and his Habiru ancestors. However, after the Resurrection, the Apostles recognized Jesus as Messiah and began to insist that unless one believed that He is the Son of God one cannot be saved. From that point, the division of Christianity and Judaism was inevitable. Rabbinic animosity toward followers of the Christ intensified after the destruction of the Temple, for which Christians were blamed. The Sanhedrin relocated to Jamnia and from there the campaign to paint Jesus as a fraud began in earnest.

When we consider the Horite beliefs concerning the Righteous Ruler we find close parallels. His mother was to be overshadowed. Because her animal totem was the cow she is shown in Nile temples holding her infant child in a stable. A Horite ceremony involved the priests bringing gifts and setting them before the Child. Another ceremony involved two days of mourning for the death of Horus and on the third day the priests cast grain into the fields as a sign of new life. When telling his disciples of His impending death, Jesus identified Himself as Seed or fallen grain in John 12:24: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit."

As for Jesus' I Am designation, consider how Horus describes himself in the Coffin texts (passage 148): "I am Horus, the great Falcon upon the ramparts of the house of him of the hidden name. My flight has reached the horizon. I have passed by the gods of Nut. I have gone further than the gods of old. Even the most ancient bird could not equal my very first flight. I have removed my place beyond the powers of Set, the foe of my father Osiris. No other god could do what I have done. I have brought the ways of eternity to the twilight of the morning. I am unique in my flight. My wrath will be turned against the enemy of my father Osiris and I will put him beneath my feet in my name of 'Red Cloak'." (Myth and Symbol in Ancient Egypt by R.T. Rundle Clark, p. 216)

Here we find the words of David in Psalm 110:1 - The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet."

Ultimately, the great divide centers on the question Who is Jesus? The rabbis have not been open-minded on this question. They have given ignominious names to Mary and her Son. In the Talmud Mary is called "Charia" which means dung or excrement. Yet they grant that she was of the ruler-priest lines. Sanhedrin 106a say, “She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters.” Jesus is called "Jeschu" which means May his name and memory be blotted out. His Hebrew name is Yeshua, which means Salvation. Sanhedrin 43a says that Jesus the Nazarene was executed because he practiced sorcery.


Related reading: The Substance of Abraham's Faith; Destruction of the Temple: Rabbinic Interpretations; Messianic Jews and the Antecedents of Judaism; Who Were the Levites?; The Talmud Versus the Doctrine of the Lord; Answering Rabbis Objections to Yeshua

.