THE SWORD AND ISRAEL

The sword in the Old Testament seems primarily to reference the power of life or death. The holder may be righteous or unrighteous. The Bible pays witness to its frequent use. Its purpose seems to end only with the establishment of the Kingdom of Heaven on an Earth made new–transfigured, as it were.

Given this Biblical guideland, does it make sense for a people to surrender their swords? Such a situation usually occurs only when a people is DEFEATED, and they are forced to surrender their swords to their conquerors.

In the Bible what does Christ the King have to say about the sword? Consider:

Simon Peter, however, having a sword, drew it; and struck the servant of the High Priest, and cut off the tip of his right ear. The name of the servant was Malchus. Jesus, however, said to Peter: “Put the sword into its scabbard. Shall I not drink the cup which the Father has given me?”  [John 18: 10-11]

From this vignette we can understand a few basic points. One, the most prominent of the 12 Apostles, Peter, is armed with a sword and scabbard. We don’t know if he constantly, or even regularly, carries a sword. There is the possibility that he and the other Apostles “sensed” danger, and Peter decided to take his sword, or to take a sword, although he customarily would be unarmed. Second, there does not seem to be any objection by Christ to the fact that Peter bears a sword. The objection entered by Christ is that His assigned task of restoring Israel through His voluntarily offering of His life as an atoning sacrifice was in danger of an obtusely placed impediment introduced by His loyal servant, Peter.

Further, the Gospels make clear that Yahshua did not find fault with Peter for being a loyal servant. Consider:

Jesus answered: “My Kingdom is not from this world. If My Kingdom were of this world, then My officers would have fought, so that I might not have been handed over to the Judeans; but, however, My Kingdom is not here.”

It is usual for a king’s servants to protect him. That was probably the intention of the servants of Henry II, when they set off to kill Thomas a` Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury. There are, no doubt, thousands of such incidents in history. Even George Bush’s servants would attempt to defend him. The intent to defend is not, in and of itself, righteous.

Let us consider the assault upon Yahshua in the guise of an arrest a bit further.

Jesus answered him [Judas], “Friend, against whom have you come?” Then rushing on, they seized hold of Jesus, and arrested Him. Thereupon, one of those who were with Jesus, stretching out his hand, drew his sword, and struck the officer of the High Priest, cutting off his ear. Jesus, however, said to him, “Return your sword into its place; for those who take the sword, will fall by means of the sword. Or do you imagine that I am not able to call upon My Father, and He would even now provide Me with more than twelve armies of angels? How, then, could the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must come about in this way?” [Matthew 26: 50-54]

Yahshua does not express disapproval of the role of a soldier in a nation by this comment. He is telling Peter that He has a destiny which He has accepted and which must be allowed to go its course. Elsewhere, He advises that this was why He was born. There cannot be a restoration without this initiating sacrifice. Yahshua is also reminding Peter that he, too, has a destiny which was given to him by Christ: Go to the lost sheep of Israel with the Kingdom message; then go out into all the world. Peter was given a great role to play, but it wasn’t that of the soldier. Yet, Christ did not condemn the place of the soldier in society.

 In fact, there is even an inference in this passage that Heaven, itself, has a martial tone. Yahshua speaks of twelve armies of angels which might be sent to protect Him. What is that all about? While humans come up distinctly wanting in trying to divine the Divine, one can hazard an explanation. Until the Day of Wrath of The Most High is over, the requirement of a martial arm in Heaven will remain. Armageddon isn’t going to be a cake walk. The restoration of the world may require a celestrial sword.

Parenthetically, the reference to people who live by the sword, dying by the sword, seems to be almost a truism of the military life, at least in days gone by. Yet, it isn’t meant to be absolute. Everyone dies. There is nothing uncommon about “dying at the job.” What that may precisely entail may depend on the job. A fisherman may die at sea. A construction worker may succumb to accidental injuries. A farmer may die of heatstroke. A herder may die fighting a beast. Or rustler. A moneychanger to the blade of a thief.

Additionally, Esau was prophetically said to live by the sword. If, as I suspect, Esau is also the core element in what is called in Scripture the “Anti-Christ,” then Esau is ultimately destined to “live by the sword and die by the sword.” This will have its final act in the Great End-Time War. Therefore, it is possible that Yahshua was making a truly prophetic statement, rather than merely stating a kind of truism.

There does seem to be a sanction given by Christ to the bearing of arms in this corrupt and dangerous world. No human can expect that angels will rush forward in formidable rank and file to defend his just cause. We are going to have to do this ourselves. consider:

He [Yahshua] answered them, “But now, whoever has a purse, let him take it, and likewise a bag; and he that has no sword, let him sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you, that which was written must be completed in Me: THAT HE WAS ALSO RANKED AMONG THE OUTLAWS;  for indeed, what has been written about Me will have fulfilment.”

“Master, see!” said they, “there are two swords here.”

“That will do,” was His reply. [Luke 22: 36-38]

Certainly, Yahshua is not here equating the carrying of a sword with being an outlaw. Contemporary proponents of “sword” control might, but not Christ. Here Christ is by means of imagery relating to His Apostles the soon-to-transpire events in the Mount of Olivet, where He would be approached as if He were a thief or robber.

Further, in this section where he advises His Apostles to buy swords, He is told that the Apostles have two. He replies that this is enough. My view is that Yahshua is advising here that any community of Israelites should delegate about 1/6th of its young manpower to defense of the community. Say what? If the Apostles with Christ have two swords and if there are twelve Apostles, then 1/6th of the Apostles are armed. Christ said that it is enough. Enough said!

Throughout our understanding of the Israelite communities through history, they have been armed. When Christ said to His Apostles that two swords were enough, He was not saying that it was wrong to have more swords. He seems to be implying that this is the minimum level for the safety of their community. God’s Covenant People have not been imitators of the “Jains.” Nor should we be, today. Some of our shepherds should command swords and staves, less the sheep succumb to the ravening wolves and lions. Such an end is not the Will of the Most High. Let us be righteous. And let us be armed. It is the Christian thing to do.

Note: The Farrar Fenton Bible referenced in this blog.

All rights reserved. Gobigfoot, 2007.

TRAVELS WITH YAHSHUA: GALILEE

There is a widespread understanding of Yahshua, the Christ, as devoting his ministry to the Jews in the Holy Land. If one listens to many of the most prominent voices sounding Christian themes in America, then one certainly would infer that Yahshua [Jesus] was devoting himself to “preaching to the Jews.” Yet, this phraseology is not only incorrect but also very misleading. Why?

Any attentive reading of the Gospels will render a clear understanding that Yahshua’s ministry was overwhelmingly concentrated in Galilee. Interestingly, it is in Galilee that the tribe of Benjamin was concentrated. This tribe had traditionally been the “lightbearing” tribe. The symbolic quality of this tribal task could not be easily missed. All of Yahshua’s initial twelve Apostles were Benjaminites, excepting Judas Iscariot, who was a Judahite. When Judas Iscariot was replaced, his replacement was a Benjaminite. Is all this without import?

Although born in Judea in Bethlehem and, thus, amid the majority of Judahites extant in the Holy Land, He soon was removed to Egypt for His safety. The leadership of the Judahites was held by “converted” Edomites [seed of Esau], such as King Herod, the High Priest, other priests, and perhaps the leaders of the Temple Guards. For this reason, perhaps, the murder of the Israelite babes in Bethlehem was not so difficult; they weren’t kinfolk. When Joseph returned to Judea, fearing Herod’s son, he continued into Galilee, where Yahshua [He who comes in the name of Yah] was brought up to manhood.

Other than events related to the Temple at Jerusalem, such as Passover, selected festivals, or some mandatory tax, Yahshua did not go to Judea. We do read that, in the days of Yahshua, John the Baptist preached the coming of the Kingdom. John the Baptist seemed to be located near the Jordan River in Judea and to mostly dwell in the wilderness, along with his followers. It was to John the Baptist that Yahshua ventured into Judea on one occasion. Where had He come from? Galilee.

Further, the Bible tells us that sometime not long thereafter, Yahshua was tempted by the Devil. The area in which this occurred suggests the environs in which John the Baptist generally inhabited. If so, then this would likely make this set of temptations ones that occurred in Judea. Hence, another ill seems to favor Judea–the Devil. When the word “fear” occurs in the Bible, relative to Yahshua’s ministry, it seems to relate to Jews and Judea. John the Baptist was imprisoned there and later beheaded. There seems to be something “bad-wrong” about Judea. There seems to be a righteousness problem in Judea. After the Devil “tested” Yahshua unsuccessfully, the Christ left this area. Where did He go? GALILEE! And along the way Angels tended to Him.

He returned to His childhood hometown, Nazareth in Galilee. Then He visits other towns in Galilee, fulfilling Scripture en passant.

His first miracle occurred at Cana in Galilee. Consider:

On the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. [John 2:1-2]

Parenthetically, I cannot behold this line without thinking of Yahshua’s terrible death, His body still in His tomb for three days, and then His glorious resurrection. For it is as a “new Man” that he is free to “re-marry” Israel, the castaway former wife. When a man marries, he becomes a “new man.” The old way is over. Yahshua’s mother symbolized for me the Judahites and the disciples the Israelites [their ministry was to be "the lost sheep of Israel]. For as Mount Sinai was the site for the original “marriage” of Yahway to the children of Israel, so Jerusalem was the site for the “eternal marriage” of Yahshua Christ to all Israelites. And the “miraculous” wine of Cana became the “miraculous” blood of Christ. We are purged not by water but by Christ’s Blood. Thereafter, we became proper partners for this mystical union.

Because of the word “called” there is a sense of Godly predestination which aims at restoration of the “fallen down and dispersed.”

In this passage the Bible also tells us that “He manifested forth his glory.” All of this is to indicate that He is the Light of Israel. At both this marriage ceremony and upon His resurrection, he shown with a sort of fitting splendour. Was He not the true Radiant Groom?

Another thing the reader of the Gospels notices is that, while He preached and healed throughout Galilee, crowds of people from Judea, Jerusalem, Syria, etc., journeyed to behold Him.

Most of the important sermons, lessons, parables and the demonstrations of Yahway’s power working through Yahshua by numerous signs and wonders occurred in Galilee. Christ instructed His disciples while in Galilee to seek out the lost sheep of Israel. After he finished instructing them, He Himself visited their towns, teaching and preaching. Since His disciples were Galileans, excepting Judas Iscariot, Christ must have been preaching and teaching in Galilee. Further, although Judas was a Judahite, his hometown was apparently amongst the Benjamite area of Galilee.

There were Pharisees & Scribes & synagogues scattered all over the Holy Land, including Galilee. They seem to represent that same unrighteousness found in Judea. They are almost always antagonistic toward Christ, albeit careful, usually, to wear a mask.

There is every reason to suppose that Yahshua usually was some 75 miles away from Jerusalem during his time in Galilee. Since that is where He is to be found, that is where the agents of the High Priest went to spy and try to “trip up” the Christ.

The Transfiguration occurred in Galilee. I believe that this relates to the splendor, to the union restored, to the partaking of the glory of The Most High through Christ the Groom, and the beautiful raiments, jewels ,etc., bestowed on The Bride (Israel) as expressions of an inexplicable, awesome love. He gave up His life for us! This is both the true character of the Groom and the way to the “house” which He has prepared for His Bride.

Now, parenthetically, many men have “trouble” with such imagery. Yet, the husband & wife union is the best metaphor for indicating the approximate spiritual union of Christ and Israel.

Now, even a perfunctory scan of the Gospels should establish for all that the ministry of Yahshua was aimed overwhelmingly at the people of Galilee, rather than at those of Judea. There wasn’t even an attempt by Christ to be “even-handed” in allocation of His ministerial time. Why?

The answer was given by Yahshua himself: I am the Good Shepherd; and I know My own, and My own know Me.  And as thoroughly as the Father knows Me, I also know the Father; and I lay down My own life on behalf of the sheep [Israelite remnant from the Southern Kingdom]. And I have other sheep [divorced Northern Kingdom plus 200,000 of Judahites removed to the area north of Assyria] beside these, which are not of this fold. Those also I must gather; and they will listen to My voice; and they will become one flock, one Shepherd. [John 10: 14-16]

Christians should be aware that the term “sheep” in both Old and New Testaments is used exclusively in conjunction with Israelites, when referencing humans, or a people. Therefore, both folds referred to in John 10: 14-16 should be understood to be Israelites. However, this does not mean that non-Israelites “need-not-apply.” To the contrary Christ is their hope also. However, the Way of Yahway must proceed according to prophetic markers, which establish His truth and the wisdom and merit of those who perceive and embrace it.

Note: Farrar Fenton Bible translation employed. As always, I’m indebted to the extraordinary Sheldon Emry.

All rights reserved. Gobigfoot, 2007.