Peter Chamor #T

And when they drew near to Jerusalem and came to Beth′phage, to the Mount of Olives, then Jesus sent two disciples, saying to them, “Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find an ass tied, and a colt with her; untie them and bring them to me.  If any one says anything to you, you shall say, The Lord has need of them,’ and he will send them immediately.”--Matthew 21:1-3, RSV)

I observed in reading the accounts of Jesus's Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem that Matthew and John both specifically refer to the colt of a donkey, as did Zechariah in his prophecy..(Zech. 9:9)  Yet neither Mark nor Luke mention a donkey, referring to the animal only as a colt.  I wondered if there was any specific reason for the reference to the donkey, and why two of the writers ignored it.

First let us look at the term "colt."  It is technically applied to a male horse, whole, and under four years of age.  It is also used in reference to the male foal of a donkey or a camel.  So one reading Mark's account, for instance, might think "horse" or even "camel" either of which was used as a beast of burden.  Yet I think it is significant that the animal was a donkey.  Why?

There are numerous references to "chamor," donkey, in the scriptures.  But here is an interesting fact that I did not learn in Sunday School.  The Torah demands that the first-born male of mankind must be redeemed, that is the priest is entitled to him lest he is redeemed by way of sacrifice of a lamb or kid.  The priest sacrifices the animal,  and is entitled to certain portions as meat for himself.  This mitzvah is common  knowledge,  but the mitzvah peter chamor is less well-known.  Talmudic scholars insist that  the first-born male offspring of the chamor must be redeemed!  Now we know that a donkey is "unclean" according to the Torah, so what is going on here?  Talmudic scholars teach that the sanctity was imputed to the donkey as a reward for providing transport for the goods of the Hebrews as they fled Egypt.  Thus each first-born male belongs to God, represented by the Levitical order.  This animal may not be used for anything whatsoever unless he is redeemed, "bought back" by the owner by way of trading in a kid or a lamb!

The details are intense and quite interesting, but too much for this blog post.  Suffice it to say that when the peter chamor is completed, the sanctity of the animal is gone and thus he may now be used in the normal man/donkey relationship, i.e., as a beast of burden, or for leather, or hair, or whatever.
Now this is extremely odd in such a manner as to spark further curiosity, for this is the only instance in which sanctity disappears in redemption, for in all other cases, redemption imputes righteousness!
Well, talk to your friendly neighborhood kohen.  You will probably confuse him, too.

So back to Jesus in Jerusalem.  When Jesus told the disciples to inform anyone who questioned them that "The Lord has need of them," He was asserting his ownership, for an unredeemed colt of an ass belongs to the Lord!  Jesus chose to ride into Jerusalem on the same beast that was instrumental in effecting freedom of the Hebrews from Egyptian captivity, and now chamor is carrying the Redeemer of all mankind into His city!

It's a beautiful thing!

Why did Luke and Mark elide this detail while the other writers included it?  Fodder for another post. String Too Short to Tie: Gospel Writers and Colts (vanilla-ststt.blogspot.com) 

 Be blessed!

Sneaky Jesus #T

We have looked at the humor of Jesus on a couple of previous Sunday mornings.  As you read today's title you may have thought, "Vanilla is veering into deep waters, and perhaps waters he won't be able to navigate."  That's okay; I rather wondered about that myself.

Yet I submit that Jesus on occasion used a sort of subterfuge, not dishonesty, in the course of his interactions with others.  We see the earliest of these interactions when Jesus at age twelve, "sneaked" away from his parents, Joseph and Mary, at the time of Passover and let them head on home without him.  Jesus lingered in the temple to talk with and teach the scholars of the law.  When she found him, Jesus to his distressed mother said, "Don't you know that I must be about my Father's business?"  (Luke 2)

Yet the most striking of these incidents in my opinion is recorded in the Gospel of John chapter seven where we hear Jesus telling his brothers (who were not believers) at the time of the Feast of Tabernacles "Go on up to Jerusalem.  I will stay here for it is not yet my time."   Further he said, "It is always your time."  Shortly thereafter Jesus  goes into Jerusalem himself, undercover in a manner of speaking.

I think Jesus's use of the phrase "it is not yet my time" is interesting.  I think this is similar to the statement by the boy Jesus to his mother in the temple when he said, "Don't you know that I must be about my Father's business?"  Or yet the occasion at the wedding feast in Cana when he told his mother his time had not yet come.  In each of these three instances Jesus knew what those surrounding him did not.  I think he knew that it was not yet time, but yet I think he did not know exactly when that time would be, that he would recognize it when it came.

So we go with him to Jerusalem where we see him inserting himself into the crowd.  Then as the feast progresses Jesus appears in the Temple and begins to teach and testify of himself, that he is sent from the Father.  There were some who would have taken him but none laid a hand on him "because his time was not yet come."

In the eighth chapter we see Jesus teaching on the Mount of Olives where a woman taken in adultery was brought to him by the religious leaders, brought to him for confirmation of the stoning judgment.  Jesus, sneaky Jesus, said, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone," bent and wrote with his finger on the earth.  We know not what he wrote, but when he looked up the woman's accusers were gone.

Later in chapter eight Christ reveals the promise:

²⁸ Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
²⁹ And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.
³⁰ As he spake these words, many believed on him.
³¹ Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
³² And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. --(KJV)

Then finally as the unbelievers sought stones with which to pelt him, Jesus hid himself and slipped out of the temple even through the midst of the throng.  How's that for a disappearing act?

His time was not yet come.

City of David

Following the death of King Saul the kingdom split.  David became king of the Southern Kingdom, or Judah, while Ishbaal reigned over the Northern Kingdom, or Israel.  During this time, David’s capital city was Hebron.  After seven years of this rule, Ishbaal died and David united the kingdoms.  He reigned 33 more years.  David was an astute man, and knew that Hebron was not a good location for his governmental headquarters, for it was too far south of the Israelite portion of the kingdom.  And yet to choose Saul’s old fortress at Gibeah or Ishbaal's Mahanaim might have been seen as favoritism toward the North.  Thus he chose a  neutral location, a city hitherto unconquered by Israel.  David conquered the city.  Near the site of ancient and present day Jerusalem, the King erected The City of David.

Reading Old Testament history we find frequent references to Jerusalem.  Its importance to both Judaism and to Christianity, and later to Islam, is clear.  But lest we confuse David’s City with modern-day Jerusalem, let us attempt to gain some perspective.  The City of David was situated on the prominence between the Kidron Valley and the Tyropoeon Valley.  In extent, it measured approximately 600 meters, say 2000 feet running north and south, and about 125 meters, or 400 feet, east and west.  A bit of arithmetic gives us the stunning conclusion that the entire city occupied something less than 20 acres of land, modern standards.

I really do not know what the population of this city was during David’s reign.  Over the course of the 33 years it varied, given that supporters from outlying villages frequented the city for periods of time, longer or shorter, and too, David evacuated the city with his supporters during Absalom’s uprising.  I do know that David got into trouble with God over the issue of enumerating the people, and that would be the kingdom’s population, not the city only.  (2 Samuel 24)

We turn from the geopolitical lesson to the spiritual application.  I have often wondered why the taking of a census was such an abomination to the Lord.  But if one lives long enough, and makes an honest effort to learn, one may gain insights into some puzzling things.  This is one such thing in my thinking; and yet it is simplicity itself.  David, not unnaturally, wanted to know how many men he had, and given the bellicose nature of the people and the times that is quite understandable.  The problem:  God had promised to increase the people, to provide the necessary manpower.  David’s act of counting was a display of his lack of faith, and moreover, David's heart swelled with pride, as though the increase were his, and not God's, and thus the sin.

How often do we fall into error for failure to believe the promises of God, or for undue pride in accomplishments or possessions?

Solomon found the strictures of the city boundaries much too confining, and thus he extended the city greatly to the north and to the west.  Over time, the Tyropoeon Valley has filled in, I am told, and during the historical period between the testaments, probably a century or two before the time of Christ, the powers that be had the hill on which The City of David had been located lowered, so that it would not be higher than the Temple.  The site of David’s City lies outside Jerusalem’s current walls.

Things change.

Maps and diagrams used are from Westminster Historical Atlas of the Bible.

Wise Woman and the King #T

In my reading a few days ago I came across a reference to Tekoa, the writer naming it as the city from which Joab brought a "wise woman" to assist him in persuading David to allow Absalom to return to Jerusalem.

Tekoa is located about ten miles south of Jerusalem.  It is situated at the edge of the Wilderness of Judea and at the head of a valley which extends to the Dead Sea.  It was a good place for encampment before proceeding across the barrens. There are two other references to Tekoa in scripture, one in the story of David's reign where we are told that Ira, one of David's mighty men, was from Tekoa.  The other instance is well-known, for the prophet Amos was also a native of Tekoa.

You recall, or if not then you should follow the story of the reign of David as told in the books of First and Second Samuel, that Absalom had slain his elder brother, Amnon, as retribution for Amnon's raping of their sister, Tamar.  As David mourned the death of his son, the murderer fled the city, lest retribution fall upon him.  Time passes.

David loves his son, Absalom, but had made no offer to allow his safe return to Jerusalem.  And thus Joab, David's advisor, knowing that David loved his son, devised a plan to persuade the King to allow Absalom to come home.  Enter the Wise Woman of Tekoa.  Joab told her, Go to the King, and say thus and so.  She did as Joab asked, but David in his wisdom, saw through the plot and asked her plainly, Did Joab put you up to this?  Yes, she confessed.

The upshot was that Absalom was allowed to return to Jerusalem, but David would not see him, nor allow him to see the King.  And thus Absalom lived in his own home and devised a scheme of his own.  Absalom would be King!  He connived to win the hearts and minds of the people by installing himself daily at the gates, ingratiating himself to the people, politicking, in a word.

Absalom builds such a following that he overtly announces his intention to rule.  Not wanting to kill his own son, along with other considerations, David flees Jerusalem, and the plot thickens, as the saying goes.

Things to think about.

1.  Joab as advisor to the King is a principal in the rule of David throughout his reign.
[What ultimate benefit did Joab gain, and what price did he pay?]

2.  Beloved as he is by his father, Absalom manages to outrun himself.
[Do we ever take advantage of those who love us most, to our own detriment?]

3.  The Wise Woman steps on stage, plays her role, and fades into the wings.
[Like this woman, we "step on stage" for a moment only, then fade into the mists of the past.]

4.  This Jerusalem: what exactly are we talking about here?
[Interesting question.  That may come up again on STSTT.]

5.  The Bible books of First and Second Samuel, First and Second Kings, First and Second Chronicles present the history of Israel and Judah under the kings.  David's story begins about the middle of I Samuel.
[Go back and reread these very interesting histories.  No, do not tell me there are too many difficult names and too much gore.  These histories are included in the canon for your edification.]

6. As a mere footnote, we wrote about David's youngest son, Eliphalet.
[You may read this account here.]