Deliberate or out of ignorance?

[Thummim]

In the Psalm of Moses it is stated "So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom." I dwell on the days of creation and the order that they are given in. In the Genesis account of creation, wouldn't it be better to put the third day fourth, and the fourth day third? Why does the author plant the earth before he creates the sun, moon and stars? Does the author believe that the earth was planted before the sun was created? Deut.33:14 says "And for the precious fruits brought forth by the sun, and for the precious things put forth by the moon," Here we inherit conflict with the order of the days. Does the author believe that the sun is created after the earth is planted? Malachi refers to this unrighteous sun in Mal. 4:2, "But unto you that fear my name shall a sun of righteousness arise." What has it to do with the name of YHWH? Assuming that the author knows that he's created an unrighteous sun, the question becomes, why? We know that the heavens are to be "dimmed". Many prophets comment on this event. My belief is that the author intends to fill his "image of GD" with the name of GD. Are we really created in the image of GD? Just what does that mean? Do we look like GD? -so GD has a body like ours? To understand the tanakh, it helps to search out the author. Do not let the author remain invisible. An author is bound by a set of rules. He can't write the middle of his story until he writes the beginning. There is a sequence to his story that he must maintain. He must also seed his work with the necessary knowledge to promote understanding. If you read the tanakh like a novel, you will be able to see the author at work. If the author writes that YHWH is interested in the names that Adam gives to things, he likely has an important name on his mind. Could it be, "what name will I give to my GD?" A person can create a god of wood, stone or metal. Such gods were common in the authors time. Yet, no doubt, these gods were unsatisfying to the author. He wanted a real connection to his GD. One cannot "join" with wood, stone or metal. A person can however "bear" the name of GD. To breath in the name of GD into the image of GD would be a way of becoming "one" with GD. Is the name of YHWH a complete name? would the author have given his GD an uncircumcised name? If the fourth letter were removed from the sacred name, would the author leave a testimony? Perhaps creating an unrighteous sun destined to fall from the heavens indicates that the fourth letter has been removed from the name of GD. If Yahudah is the parent name of YHWH, then we can see how the author has breathed the name of his GD into his "image of GD". If one bears the name of GD, can he touch death? Can he be any less then righteous when his name is linked to his Eloheem? Can the people of such a name be any less than a nation of priests? We are at the beginning of understanding the name of YHWH with this foundation. Now we have to search out the name of Yahudah to confirm this thesis. Deut.12:5 says, "But unto that place which the LORD your GD will choose out of all your tribes to put his name there, even unto his habitation shall you seek, and thither shalt thou come." Is the name of that tribe Yahudah? Yahudah without it's fourth letter is Yhwh. Nu.6:27 states, "And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them." Mal.2:2 says"If you will not hear, and if you will not lay it to heart, to give glory unto my name, saith the Lord of hosts, I will even send a curse upon you, and I will curse your blessings. Remember that Malachi makes mention of an unrighteous sun in the fourth chapter of his book. If we take a look at the 38th chap. of Gen, we read the only book devoted to the generations of Judah. Judah is clearly the root of Jesse concerning these generations. Perhaps raising a banner in the name of GD (Ps.20:5) is what is being spoken of when the root of Jesse becomes an ensign to which the nations gather. The nations gather to the name of YHWH. Anyhow the 38th chap. of Gen. sets up a situation where a breach occurs in the house of Yahudah. Ismael, Esau, Reuben and Manasseh loose their blessings to younger siblings. Inserted between the 37th and the 39th chapters of Gen. is the account of this breach. Logic says that the second born(Zerah) who has a red thread tied around his wrist saying that he is firstborn should have the blessing. Is Zerah a shoot from the stump of Jesse? Is this a reason for the name of YHWH looking a whole lot like the name of Yahudah in it's spelling? Is this a reason for David and Solomon being called sons of GD?(same name) All the house of Yahudah recieves this blessing in Hosea 1:10. Anyhow, to me , the order of creation seems breached. I could go on for hours connecting the name of YHWH to the name of Yahudah. Perhaps I'll write more on this connection of names later. I'm afraid that nobody will want to read this if I make it any longer. ...Michael

[Edited by Thummim on 02-11-2001 at 10:06 AM]

[Sandy]

Hi Thummim
There many contradictions in the Old Testament, of which you have pointed out.

It makes one wonder if there are two separate and distinct YHUH's being presented.

One that is angry most of the time and demands blood and sacrifice.

Another that is loving and merciful and does not delight in blood and sacrifice and tells us:

• Micah 6:6-8
  6) With what shall I come before YHUH, And bow myself before Elohy Most High?
  Shall I come before Him with burnt offerings, with calves, sons of a year?
  7) Will YHUH be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousand rivers of oil?
  Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
  8) He has declared to you, adam, what is good;
  And what does YHUH ask of you, but to do justice and loving kindness, and walk humbly with your Elohy.

[Thummim]

I think it's best to think of animal sacrifice as a fine for having commited sin. The flock of animals that one possesses becomes a wallet in ancient times. There are no banks. The penalty for sin is the value of the animals that you give to YHWH. It however may not be possible to barter away the debt. YHWH must be willing to forgive the transgression. This is why I say that repentance is more than the altar. It's not slaughter, but rather paying the fine levied against oneself. The fines are established in the torah. The sacrificed animals are given to YHWH (the fire) or into his service. The animals are not innocent. Where does it say that the animals are innocent? They are to be free from defect. You don't give to YHWH the least valuable animals you have. That would be giving pennys for dollars. The fines serve a duel purpose. They feed the priesthood. Somehow this has become slaughter to everyone. Slaughter is what is done at slaughter houses. The blood contains the life of the animals. It is returned to YHWH by pouring it out at the base of the altar. Can you ever buy off YHWH? Ten thousand rivers of oil will not buy him off! By the way, do you think the third day of creation is switched with the fourth day on purpose? The author of the tanakh knew that the sun made the seasons work.(Deut.33:14) If the author of the tanakh deliberatly planted the earth before he created the sun, he must have done it for a reason. What was his reason? ...Michael

[Sandy]

That's very interesting, Thummim, and I can easily see what you are saying. So how do the offerings given by Cain and Able fit into the picture?

You asked:

If the author of the tanakh deliberatly planted the earth before he created the sun, he must have done it for a reason. What was his reason?

Actually, I have no idea. I would love to hear what you have to say about it.

[Thummim]

There is nothing wrong with presenting an agricultural offering to YHWH. This is what shavuot is all about. Agricultural firstfruits are to be given to YHWH as a mitzvah. These are not rejected by him. However an animal from the herd is more valuable. The author wants to show a reason for Cains actions. The real concern of the author in telling this story is that Cain is the first firstborn. Cain cannot be the progenitor of the line of Abraham. This story is how the author deals with Cain and how he introduces the plight of the firstborn. Cain is to Seth as Ishmael is to Isaac, as Esau is to Jacob, as Reuben is to Joseph and as Manassah is to Ephraim. Even David and Solomon are not firstborns. This brings us to the story of Zerah and Perez. Perez at first seems to have overcome Zerah and gained the right of the firstborn. The midwife ties a red thread to his wrist and declares, "this one came out first". But how does the firstborn supplant the firstborn? So Zerah has a just claim to whatever "right" is in dispute. How then does this breach get mended? Well, isn't this the line of Judah? Who carries the line of Yahudah? Isa.46:3,4 states,"Hearken unto me, O house of Jacob, and all the remnant of the house of Israel, which are borne by me from the belly, which are carried from the womb: And even to your old age I am he; and even to your hoar hairs (white hairs) will I carry you: I have made, and I will bear; even I will carry, and will deliver you. Two chapters later Yahudah repeats this in Isa.48:1, Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Yahudah,---How does Yahudah give birth to his father and brethren?
Perhaps the one to whom the right belongs (Gen.49:10-until shiloh come)is one from the line of Zerah. This is the only opening to a claim on this line that I can find. If you remove the 4th letter from the name of Yahudah, you are left with the letters y-h-w-h, the letters in the name of GD. They are in the same order. Biblical hebrew uses no spaces so that writing Yahudah without the fourth letter leaves the tanakh exactly the same. INTERESTING? As a testimony of the name of YHWH, wouldn't it be nice to have the heavens declare the glory of YHWH? Remove the fourth day from this account of creation (Isa.60:19,20, and the light of the first day of creation becomes your light. The sun no longer sets. It's easy enough to understand. To those who revere the name of YHWH, a righteous sun arises. (Mal.4:2) Salvation here, comes not by sacrifices but by the name of YHWH. O YHWH Adonai, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! who has set thy glory above the heavens. Ps.8:1 ---really!--- ...Michael

[Sandy]

Very nice Thummim. Let me ask you one more question. Where, how or why do you think offerings and sacrifices originated?

[Thummim]

Hi Sandy, Offerings and sacrifices are godly things. I suppose the (one GD) had to have his. It's not the best answer, but the one that makes the most sense to me. Worshiping YHWH came into existance in a world full of gods. I imagine that most gods had their offerings and sacrifices. There is little else you can do for them. YHWH is different. He comes with a set of mitzvah. What gods seek to make their peoples a righteous people? YHWH is not only about himself, He makes himself a parent to his people. Worshiping a GD through his name is a very unique idea. He ceases being an idol. His only image is that of the people who serve him. With the proper name this people could get really close to their Eloheem. I love how the name of YHWH fits into the name of Yahudah. The name of YHWH is a beautiful idea. This Eloheem is worshiped by calling upon his name. It's already believed that the heavens cannot contain him. His house is built for his name. His name becomes his right arm. The righteous run into it and are safe. I will take the cup of salvation and call upon the name of YHWH.(Ps.116:13) Salvation does not belong to offerings and sacrifices, but also to his name. Christians see the central idea of this GD's salvation belonging to the sheding of (innocent) blood. This idea is rather gentile to me. Does YHWH curse Cain for sheding innocent blood? How then does he decide that only innocent bloodshed can expiate sin? The central idea of christianity is flawed. Sheding innocent blood only makes a person guilty. It defiles the land. If YHWH wants to expiate sin, it's the blood of the transgressor that is shed by him. This idea that YHWH would require innocent bloodshed to clear the debt of the guilty is not supported by the tanakh. This seems like the intermingling of another faith with the faith that comes from the tanakh. Offerings are either fines or gifts. They are easier to understand this way. ....Michael

[Sandy]

Thummim and everyone, do you think Cain and Able new a world full of gods?

Do you think the English word "god" is equivalent to the Hebrew word "elohim"?

What is the difference between "Elohim" and "El"?

[Thummim]

Cain and Able are the creation of the author. The author knew a world full of gods. Eloheem is plural and better fits a diety that refers to himself as a plural. (Let us make man in our image). I do not think that YHWH should be refered to as (g-aw-d). However, I do think that, for the most part, being understood is more important than how the diety is referred to. YHWH is my Eloheem. This plural tag is right for a diety who shares his image and name with his people. I think of christianities treatment of JEWs to be equivalent to it's treatment of their Eloheem. If they find out that the name of YHWH is a circumcised version of the name of Yahudah (JEW), won't that sour in their bellies? How can this people, who bear the name of YHWH, be so persecuted with so many christians around? You would think that these proselytites of the JEWish diety would be falling all over themselves to distroy any enemy that the JEWish people have. Instead, christians have shown themselves to be the greatest enemy of the JEWs. I've heard that both Hitlers and Himlers mothers wanted them to be priests? Now wouldn't that have made the church more antisemitic? ...Michael

[Sandy]

You stated:

...the name of YHWH is a circumcised version of the name of Yahudah (JEW)...

But where does that leave Israel? Yahudah is a part of Israel. Even though they separated themselves from Israel YHUH says he is going to make them one again.

I am not sure that the Jews are necessarily Yahudah. And even though the Hebrew scriptures tell us a special ruler will come out of Yahudah (because of David), they do not tell us that Yahudah is the servant. They tell us YHUH'S servant is Israel.

• Genesis 29:35
  And she (Leah) conceived again and bore a son and she said, This time I praise (UDH) YHUH. So she called his name YAHUDAH (YAH is praised).

[Thummim]

Deut. 12:5 states that YHWH shall put his name in only one tribe. To the place of this tribe you are to bring your offerings. It is the name of Yahudah that is in "breach". The firstborn does not supplant the firstborn.(Gen. chap.38) I suppose that it is through this tribe that YHWH attaches himself to his people like a girdle. Moreover he refused the tabernacle of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim: but chose the tribe of Judah, the mount Zion which he loved. Ps.78:67,68 The rock of David (Judah) I believe, bears the name of YHWH. (Ex.28:21) This is part of the allegorical nature of the tanakh. If so, then David could call YHWH his rock. Thummim means "to complete or make whole". Could it be referring to a letter cut out of the name of Yahudah? Does the high priest really link the name of YHWH to the children of Israel through the name of Yahudah? (Nu.6:27) Again, it is the tribe of Yahudah that gives birth to all tribes.(Isa.48:1) How does Yahudah do this? Is there more to the tanakh then people realize? ...Michael

[Sandy]

Thank you Thummim for pointing out Deuteronomy 12:5. As many times as I have read it, I never saw that. I now see the same thing being said in verse 14.

I am not sure I understand what you mean when you say:

Does the high priest really link the name of YHWH to the children of Israel through the name of Yahudah? (Nu.6:27)

I am getting the feeling that you may think YHUDH is really the name and not YHUH or as you use it YHWH

I do not see his name as being Yahudah, but as YAHUAH.
Yahudah carries his name as "YAH is praised".

Your wrote:

the tribe of Yahudah that gives birth to all tribes.(Isa.48:1)

I am not sure about this. I question the translation. When I look at the Hebrew characters the given translation does not seem to fit.

And I do think there is more to the tanakh than most people realize.

[Thummim]

Even in the JEWish Publication Societies translation it states "And have issued from the waters of Judah" Isa.48:1. I read the hebrew to say the same thing. The footnotes of the JPS notes, [emendation yields "loins"] concerning Judah. So Judah does give birth to the house of Jacob. What this means is open to interpretation. Nu.6:27 from the JPS says, "Thus they shall link my name with the people of Israel, and I will bless them." There seems to be some connection made between the people of Israel and the name of YHWH, [Yod,Hey,Vav,Hey]. Danial says in Dan.9:19 that the city of Jerusalem (Judah) and its people bear the name of YHWH. Jeremiah says in Jer.14:9 "and your name is attached to us" JPS. YHWH says in 2Chr.7:14 "my people who bear my name"JPS. YHWH again in Isa.43:7, "all who are linked to my name"JPS. Ps.89:25,JPS, 89:24 KJV speaking of David, states "My faithfulness and steadfast love shall be with him; his horn shall be exalted through my name." Ps. 22:22 says, I will declare thy name unto my brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise you. Yahudah means praise Yah as you have stated. Ps.45:17 says, "I will make thy name to be remembered in all generations: therefore shall the people praise thee for ever and ever". Remember that YHWH is to be remembered as YHWH for ever unto all generations. Ex.3:15 The connection between the name of YHWH and his praise is everywhere within the tanakh. I don't believe that YHWH chose his name as much as I believe that the author did. I think he wanted a connection to his Eloheem for himself and his people. I really believe that the name of the root of Jesse (Judah) is the name from which YHWH's name comes. To borrow something written by Zechariah, In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as GD, as the angel of YHWH before them. (Zech.12:8) Mi.4:5 says "For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of the LORD (YHWH) our GD for ever and ever. These verses go on and on. You list many of them on your web site. It's the connection to the name of Yahudah that I'm emphasizing. How much of the tanakh is written by the tribes of Ephraim? I believe that if a person can be created in the image of YHWH, he can also bear his name. Now what odds do you think you can get that the name of GD would match the letters in the name of Yahudah letter for letter and in the same order omitting the daleth? The name of GD could have been anything the author might have randomly chosen. And do you think that the author would have given his GD a name that was uncircumcised? I don't want to offend anybody, but I don't think that the tanakh was written by any GD. The author is god to his book. ...Michael

[Sandy]

In your opinion then how does that fit with the fact that we have more than one author of the Hebrew Scriptures?

In Genesis chapter one you have ELOHIM only. In chapter two and three you have YHUH ELOHIM. Chapter four it is just YHUH. In chapters 5 - 10 it switches back and forth between YHUH and ELOHIM, which presents two versions of many things (the story of Noah for example) and they do not always agree.

Two creation accounts (Genesis 1 & 2) The first by ELOHIM, the second by YHUH ELOHIM.

In chapter six you have THE ELOHIM and the SONS OF THE ELOHIM.

In Lamentations you have ADONY alone about the same number of times that you have YHUH alone.

In Ezekiel you have ADONY alone about the same number of times as you have ADONY YHUH.

[Thummim]

How many ways do you or I refer to our Eloheem? An author is free to refer to his GD in many ways. Yet the name of YHWH is special. It comes as a mitzvah in Ex.3:15. I've read that there are those that say that each author of the tanakh has his own way to indicate the Most High. It may mean that there are many authors of the book, and it may not. When I say that the author is god to his book, I mean that he is free to move his pen in any direction he wants. It's a part of the evolution of his thoughts. This statement though, I use in a very general way. I speak not only of the writing of the tanakh, but also of any other book. I realize that the tanakh has many authors. Yet I believe that book was assembled into a work by certain authors between Nebuchadnezzar and Alexander. I understand what you're getting at. How do so many authors keep to a single theme concerning the name of YHWH? Basically I think that they have added to an Idea. If my gods name were four fifths of my own name, I would feel some elation over it. I present my evidence for others to evaluate. I have a great interest in linking the name of YHWH to the name of Yahudah. I believe that doing so will give back the authority of the tanakh to all Yahudeem. A thief hates to see the owners name on what he has stolen. You can usually ask an author what his book is about and have his explanation excepted. Not so with the tanakh. JEWs are often considered ignorant of their own book and gentiles are constantly trying to explain it to them. ...Michael