BloggersBase - Humanities & Culture - Spirituality and Faith

Commentary on Biblical Law: “Vayikra”

Dror Ben Ami — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:40:16 GMT

Introduction:

In this week's portion of the Torah we deal mainly with animal sacrifices used in sin offerings. As in the previous few portions, we are once again faced with the issue of “relevance to the modern man”. Not only is there no temple in which to preform these actions, nor a active priesthood to carry them out, but, even if there were, many people would now find such acts repulsive and morally reprehensible. Furthermore, they appear to be illogical. How does “killing a cow” correlate to “taking away my sins”.

What we also see, I believe, from this week's portion is that the claim of some rabbis that “the kitchen table is an altar” is just ridiculous. How many of us pour the blood of our steak dinner on the legs of the table? In addition, while there might be a correlation between eating and guilt, eating is not sacrificing, and eating does not take away guilt it simply diverts our attention from it (actually, according to the principles or sublimation, we are eating in place of acts we feel guilty about performing).

Hence, in this week's discussion we will be focusing on two issues:

What is sin?
What do the individual rituals, as well as the animals and food used in these rituals, represent?

Finally, as mentioned in previous articles, although many people feel that bring in the New Testament into any discussion of the Torah is totally unacceptable, I do not agree. Not only is there a problem of mistranslation of Ancient Hebrew into Modern English, but there is also a problem of translating Ancient Hebrew into Modern Hebrew.

As noted earlier, most American students cannot understand the English of William Shakespeare and his works were written barely 400 years ago. How much more difficult then is it to understand Ancient Hebrew of the Torah which is at least 2,500 years old in written form and who knows how old in the oral tradition. By studying the images and metaphors used in the New Testament, we can get a glimpse at how the language was used 2,000 years ago. Thus, the motive for introducing the New Testament here is not theology, but rather as a language tool to broaden our appreciation for the language.

Leviticus 1.1 – 5.19

In the First Book of Samuel, are told that the sons of Eli the priest were bad men. Eli then tells them that if a man sins against men God can defend him, but if a man sins against God who will intervene for him? There are two aspects to this story:

sin is divided into 2 groups:
a) sins against men
b) sins against God
The specific acts of the sons of Eli give us a hint at the nature of sin itself.

Dealing with the second issue first, we see that one of the sins of Eli's sons are directly related to this week's portion of the Torah. People come to offer meat to God and the servant of Eli's sons comes and takes the part of the meat which belongs to God and, in addition, does not allow the meat to be cooked for the proper length of time.

The second sin is that they are sleeping with the women who work at the entrance to the sanctuary. In this reference there should be no doubt that these women are spiritual mediums. First of all, practically the only description we have of Jacob before he went to live with his uncle Laban was that he sat at the entrance to the tent and in this week's passage the Hebrew word for “tent” is clearly meant as “sanctuary”. Furthermore, one of the best known lines in all of Judaism is: “How goodly are thy tents O Israel”. Finally, the Hebrew word for “sex” is the verb “to know”.

In another story concerning Jacob, Rachel begins to complain that she is not pregnant. Jacob responds by saying that God is responsible that she has “no fruit in her womb” (In the New Testament the exact same image is used by the mother of John the Baptist when describing Mary the mother of Jesus).

The point here is that the only part of “The Tree of Knowledge....” that Adam ate was the fruit, hence “fruit” becomes a metaphor for “knowledge”. In other words, what Jacob was saying is that only God can place the seeds of ideas in the wombs of his mediums (i.e. fruit/knowledge). Thus, when we are told that the sons of Eli are both “eating God's 'meat'” and placing their seeds in the womb of God's mediums, we can clearly see why they are called “evil”. What is less clear, however, is how all this is related to “knowledge” and not actual food.

There are three very important clues which help us to understand the relevance of the “sacrifices” described in this week's portion of the Torah:

“Mount Moriah” is also decribed as “God's Mountain” and the name “Moriah” comes fro the Hebrew word for teacher (i.e. “mor-reh”). Hence the function of God is to teach and we can then see that, by placing their seeds in the wombs of the women who worked at the entrance to the tent, Eli's sons had set themselves of as “sources of answers for the people”.
The word “sin” in Hebrew is an archery term which means “to miss the mark”. One of the forms of the Hebrew word for “teacher” also means: “archer”. Thus “a sinner” is “a teacher who does not teach exactly what God wants them to teach”. Thus, in the New Testament Jesus focus a lot of his criticism on the Pharisees and not so much on the people. It is “the teachers” who Jesus considers to be “the sinners”, not the students. Hence the members of the general population are described as “sick”, which the Pharisees are described as “sinners”, “hypocrites” and “open coffins” (this use of the open coffin image actually comes from the Book of Psalms in the Old testament and is adapted by the New Testament).

The Hebrew word for “meat” can also be translated as

“preachings” or “gospels”. Furthermore, the Hebrew

word for “nations” is “goy”, but what most people don't

realize is that this word also means “dead meat”. This

becomes very important later in the Book of Samuel

when the people ask for a king.What they say is that they

want to be “like other nations” (i.e. they want to be a

source of teachings which has little or no understanding).

Samuel then tells them that it is not he they are rejecting,

but God. The point is that those who preach the words of

God are “live meat” and those who preach the words of

men are “dead meat”, hence the comparison of “the

mouths of the Pharisees” to “open coffins” (i.e. they are

sources of teachings of men with little understanding of

the ways of God).

Thus, “a king” is “a teacher of God's will” and we can

clearly see this by the fact that Saul's father is named

“Kish” which means “bow”. Furthermore, King Saul and

his family are rejected by God because King Saul did not

faithfully carry out the instructions of God. What were

those instructions? Kill the sheep (i.e. meat) of the

Amalikites!!!

In the story of Samson's riddle his rivals are given the solution by Samson's wife and Samson comments “if you had not been plowing with my heifer, you would not know the answer now”. The point is that a “heifer” is “a source of intellectual power” and “plowing a field” is a metaphor for “seeking answers”. Thus in messianic times swords will be beaten into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks and we have already commented on the fact that “fruit” is a metaphor for “knowledge”.

Thus what we see from all these examples is that “sin” has absolutely nothing to do with “bad behavior” as we understand it. “Sin” is “teaching ideas which do not accurately reflect the teachings of God”. Thus a great deal of the sacrifices in this week's portion have to do with “the sin” of “touching dead meat”.

As for the actual sacrifices themselves there are two aspects to be dealt with:

What does each animal and the bread, oil and flour represent?
What does “fire” and “cooking” represent?

As far as the animals are concerned we have already shown that “a cow” represents “intellectual power” as well as “preachings”. “A bull” is “a source of seeds”, hence it represents “new ideas” in regards to religious teachings. Thus the story of “the golden calf” was juxtaposed with the story of Moses bringing down from Mount Sinai the 10 commandments (i.e. the name “Sinai” means “scholarship”).

So, two sources of ideas were being pitted one against the other.

For centuries the rabbis have claimed that “the Torah is the bread of life” a and the messiah is suppose to come from Bethlehem which means “house of bread”. Finally, the term “messiah” means “one anointed with olive oil” and in ancient times oil oil was used in the lamp of the temple, which we learned in the previous “totally irrelevant to modern life” Torah portions.

Basically then, the people are to bring religious knowledge to the sanctuary and this religious knowledge is to be placed on a fire. As anyone who has ever seen a hot air balloon knows, “fire” is “a medium been heaven and earth”. What is important to understand here is that the Hebrew word for “heaven” and “sky” are the same. Hence “anything which has wings” can also be interpreted as “ a medium between heaven and earth”. Thus, when the Children of Israel “crave meat”, smack in the middle of the story, we are told of God placing the spirit of Moses into 70 leaders of the community. These 70 men, tradition says, were the first 70 rabbis and the “meat story” then concludes with God sending a flock of quails. What we then see is that “quails” represent “religious teachers” or “intermediaries between men and God”. Thus, even in the New Testament, Jesus says that the Pharisees are “the authorized interpreters of the Torah”. So “fire” then is something which takes “the preachings of men” and transforms it into a medium which is able to “rise to heaven” and become acceptable to God.

Furthermore, the sanctuary is a place when God speaks to his people. Hence after putting our “teachings” on the “fire” and sending them up to God, God then replies by sending us knowledge. This is exactly what happens in the story about King Solomon. The king offers an enormous amount of sacrifices and then God makes him the wisest of all men.

Thus what does “a sacrifice of meat” represent? Basically, in the story of Samson we saw that men had a question. They went to a woman, who in turn went to a man, to get the answer. Samson described this procedure as “plowing in a field” and even in modern times one can go to any university in the world and hear the question: “What is your field of study?

Hence, “a sacrifice of meat, in the form of 'oxen'”, would mean “giving up tradition sources of knowledge in schools and relying only on God for knowledge”. Thus, Noah offered a burnt sacrifice to God and God then lifted the curse he had placed on the earth and this curse was related to the production of “fruit”.

In the New Testament, “money” is a metaphor for “teachings”. The most famous religious school during the time of Jesus was named “Yavne”, however, the teachers who worked their referred to it as “the vineyard”. Hence, “The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard” refers to students and their “wages” refer to “teachings”.

Accordingly, in this week's portion when we are told about “poor men” what we should be translating this as is “uneducated men”. So, “a rich man” must bring “his preachings” based on the vast knowledge he has obtained in a religious school and represented by “the ox”. The “poor man” can only bring “bread” or ”meal” which we noted earlier is a symbol for “the Torah” or “the law”. Hence, he does not have a great religious education, but he does know a few laws that have been taught to him here and there. Never the less, there should be no “yeast” in this bread. Basically, “yeast”, like fire” makes things rise up to a higher level. In the New Testament Jesus speaks of “the yeast of the Pharisees”.

What we are then being told is that the man must place oil on his bread (he must think about the law and try to make it a source of enlightenment for others) but he cannot use the teachings of others. In other words, he can't bring to God the teachings of his rabbi, he must bring his own ideas as simple and as meager as they might be.

In conclusion, I hope it is clear that this week's portion of the Torah is not so irrelevant after all and there is no need to go the market, buy a chicken, kill it and then spin around in circles to take away your sins.....

Amanda Graystone sees dead people!

Aaron — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:05:07 GMT

Greetings.

Jewish date: 2 Nisan 5770 (Parashath Wayyiqra’).

Today’s holidays: St. Patrick’s Day (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of the Magi: Dionysus (Thelema).

Worthy causes of the day: “DemocracyForAmerica.com » Speaker Pelosi: The Public Option is in your hands”, “Take Action: TrueMajority.org”, “Health Insurance Reform: Finish the Job | Senator Harry Reid, Nevada - HarryReid.com”, and “Union of Concerned Scientists:”.

Topic 1: The latest episode of Caprica: “The Imperfections of Memory”. Most of the theology in this episode deals with Amanda Graystone. Early on Amanda gets upset at an attempt to move a sidewalk memorial to the victims of the train bombing. She also sees her dead brother at the site of the memorial. In fact, she admits to Sister Clarice (who is trying to charm further information out of her), she has seen him ever since he died in a car accident when she was 11. Once Amanda was even put in a mental institution over her visions. While Sister Clarice thinks Amanda’s visions are a sign from God, Amanda thinks seeing her dead brother is a form of Divine punishment. What I remember from Battlestar Galactica (new series), the dead brother may actually be an angel in his form. Sister Clarice also makes use of the steady-state philosophy saying “All of this has happened before, and all of this will happen again.” On an unrelated note, Lacy decides to dishonestly join the Soldiers of the One in order to be able to convince a Soldier of the One to help her get Zoe II to Geminon.

Topic 2: More anti-Semitism: “Johann Hari: Back With a Vengeance”, which deals with historical revisionism, quoting out of context, bad analogy, and other rhetorical abuses. “Forgetting History (1995)” and “Kabooom !” deal with the Obama administration sticking its nose into the Israel’s plans to build housing in Jerusalem and promoting the discriminatory notion that Arabs should be able to live anywhere in Israel but Jews should not.

Topic 3: For today’s (peripherally) religious humor: “Buh Wheres The Pot Of Gold” and i had a“”:

Peace.

Aaron

Commentary on Biblical Law: "Pikudei" (cont.)

Dror Ben Ami — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 04:44:23 GMT

Introduction:

I felt guilty not discussing more aspects of this week's portion of the Torah in my last commentary, so I have added this article as well. In addition, I would just like to mention that I made a mistake when I said we were given "new" information" about Oheliab: the second workman. Actually, we already had been told that he was from the tribe of Dan and his father was Ahisamech (apparently I was so absorbed in discussing Bezelel: the first workman, that I hadn't noticed). I do not, however, feel guilty about my comments concerning the Rashi. Most of the things he writes are simply not true and quoting another rabbi who lived 2,000 years ago doesn't make it true. For example, one of my readers commented that Josephus quoted "a well know story" that Sarai had a dream and this is the reason she and Abraham deceived Pharaoh. Really! If Sarai indeed had a dream, she had it at least 1,500 years before Josephus and the rabbis he quoted were born and several hundred years before even Moses and the first seventy rabbis were born!

In 1963 President Kennedy was assassinated. There were eye-witnesses; there were television cameras; there were individual photographs and there were extensive investigations done by a variety of sources, both official and un- official. Not only can no one agree about what happened less than 50 years ago at the site of the assassination, but people can't even agree what happened in the hospital and how Kennedy's body was removed in violation of Texas state law. All these things happened in full public view, with scores of witnesses, yet no one knows for sure what happened. Josephus, however, and his rabbinical sources not only are absolutely sure that Sarai had a dream 1,500 years before they were born, but they also know exactly what she dreamt!!! (Please Josephus, I can't even remember what I myself dreamt last night…..).

Exodus 38.21 – 40.38

In regards to clothing in this week's passage we are told about 3 basic colors to be used: "red", "blue" and "purple" (Actually, the colors given are "scarlet", "sky blue" (like the flag of Israel) and "crimson"). The word for "scarlet" is also the Hebrew word for "second" (i.e. "2^nd"). We see it in the story of the birth of Judah's sons by Tamar where the "first born" sticks out his hand and the midwife ties a scarlet thread around it to identify him. Suddenly, he retracts his hand and his brother pushes his him aside and exits first.

What I find amusing about this story is that many people, including Madonna, now wear a piece of red thread (most are not aware that it should be scarlet) around their wrists because their rabbis have told them this represents "good luck and insures material wealth". Yes, it probably does, that's why it is called "second" and the "lucky boy" with the scarlet thread lost his rights as the first born.

The color "sky blue" can be found in relation to the tassels people are suppose to wear on their clothing. What the Torah says is that the tassels with "the sky blue thread" will prevent the Israelites from illicit sexual relations (what's interesting here is that most religious people in Israel do not wear the blue thread on their tassels and religious people in Israel are notorious for using the services of prostitutes). What's significant here is the line before the sexual part. It says that the tassels with the sky blue thread will help the Children of Israel remember the laws.

So, we see that today the Children of Israel do not wear the sky blue thread and they consult the writings of the Rashi first and the laws of God second (but I am sure that this is just a coincidence). Why don't they wear the blue thread, you might ask? Well, their rabbis told them they shouldn't wear it because we are not exactly sure of the "exact shade" of sky blue the thread should be. In other words: To wear red/scarlet threads to insure material wealth is okay…. To wear sky blue threads to remember God's laws is forbidden…..

The crucial question, however, is: Why are these two items juxtapositioned? (I am sorely tempted to write "juxtapositioned, one next to the other" but that's redundant).

The other crucial issue here is that the Torah doesn't actually say "sex". What it says is "'zian-ing' after your eyes". The Hebrew word "zian" means "penis". Now, perhaps I am reading too much into this, but isn't the basic identity of a Jewish male determined by whether or not he is circumcised?

The term "circumcised" has two meanings: 1) "to remove the meat which blocks" 2) the foreskin of the male is the same word used for fruit which comes from a tree less than three years of age, so it refers to "removing un developed fruit" which blocks.

The Hebrew word for "meat" is the root of the Hebrew word for "preachings" and "gospels". Thus circumcision could be said to be "removing the prechings which block" Block what? The name "Mount Moriah" comes from the Hebrew word for teacher (i.e. "mor reh") Mount Moriah is also called "God's mountain" and the passage reads that "On God's mountain he will provide".

Furthermore, "Mount Sinai" means "Mountain of Scholarship" and Moses after reaching the top of the mountain (i.e. attaining the highest levels of religious knowledge) was forced to fast for 40 days. The number "40" is associated with "cleansing". The earth was contaminated with the teachings of evil men and was washed clean with the waters of the flood for 40 days and nights. The Children of Israel were contaminated with the teachings of the 10 dis-honest spies and the first 70 rabbis who stood with them against Moses , Joshua Ben Nun and Caleb. Thus they were forced to wander in the desert for 40 years. Hence, what Moses needed to cleanse away was his years of scholarship. In other words: a person must work (i.e. study) for 6 days, but on the 7^th day he must stop working and rest. Thus Jacob separated himself from all his material possessions at Mahanaim (two camps) before the angel came and gave him a new name (i.e. a new function in life).

Basically then what we are being told by "the ritual of circumcism" is that "men must remove the teachings of men if they want their seed to live forever in the land promised to Abraham" (If you go back to the passage in the Book of Genesis you will see clearly that the covenant with Abraham concerns his seed, not him.

Even in modern times it is commonly accepted that the earth is a school and in any university you can daily hear the question: What is your field of study? The "seeds of Abraham" refer to "the ideas of Abraham". What God is then saying is that if you remove "the undeveloped fruit of men" (the teachings based on undeveloped knowledge) then these teachings will no longer block your communication with God and he will bless your ideas and associate them with the source of his teachings (i.e. the land of Israel).

Well, after all that, I must admit I have no idea what the color crimson represents….I used to have a computer program where you could enter a word and then it would scan the entire torah for the places the word is found, but it was stolen…..

What I have tried to do, however, in these two articles is to show that the listing of the materials in the sanctuary is not as meaningless as the rabbis seem to imply. There is meaning in the Torah, but you have to look for it yourself, not allow the rabbis to do your thinking for you. Most importantly, however, is that on the Sabbath one must rest one's thoughts and allow God to speak to you (Something I find a lot easier to say than to do…..)

Song of hope for the children of the needy

Dabar — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:40:50 GMT

Often the newspaper and evening news are utterly depressing. For over a year I couldn't watch TV news, but in that year I read the Psalms every day and carried verses from them with me in my pocket. This article is by my mother about her favourite psalm. I call it a song of hope. Psalm 72.

Quotes

12th March 2010, mgh

Psalm 72:4 He shall judge the poor of the people, he shall save the children of the needy, and shall break in pieces the oppressor.

David, the beloved of God and faithful King of Israel,in his final words expressed his belief in a Kingdom to come. He knew that it was a distant vision and that although it would not occur in his lifetime, he had implicit trust and belief that he would be resurrected to see its glory. Psalm 72:1 states that the king's son, Yeshua Anointed) who was a direct descendent of King David of Israel see here, would bring a time of peace and righteous judgement.

Give the king thy judgements, O God, and thy righteousness unto the king's son. He shall judge thy people with righteousness, and thy poor with judgement. The mountains shall bring peace to the people, and the little hills, by righteousness. He shall judge the poor of the people, he shall save the children of the needy, and shall break in pieces the oppressor. (Psalm 72: 1-4)

The next section describes the extent of this king's power. That there will be peace is again emphasised and all the kings of the earth are subject to him. His rule extends from “sea to sea” and to the “ends of the earth” and “all nations shall serve him.”

They shall fear you as long as the sun and moon endure, throughout all generations. He shall come down like rain upon the mown grass: as showers that water the earth. In his days shall the righteous flourish; and abundance of peace so long as the moon endures. He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth. They that dwell in the wilderness shall bow before him; and his enemies shall lick the dust. The kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall bring presents: the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts. Yea, all kings shall fall down before him: all nations shall serve him.(Psalm 72: 5- 11)

There is a glorious scent that comes from rain on mown grass, or on a harvested crop. A great blessing.

It then follows that the King will attend to the needs of the people, who will be protected from violence and their daily needs provided, so that there will be no hunger or poverty.

For he shall deliver the needy when he cries; the poor also, and him that has no helper. He shall spare the poor and needy, and shall save the souls of the needy. He shall redeem their soul from deceit and violence: and precious shall their blood be in his sight. And he shall live, and to him shall be given of the gold of Sheba: prayer also shall be made for him continually; and daily shall he be praised. (Psalm 72: 12- 15)

The earth will provide an abundance of food.

There shall be an handful of corn in the earth upon the top of the mountains; the fruit thereof shall shake like Lebanon: and they of the city shall flourish like grass of the earth. His name shall endure for ever: his name shall be continued as long as the sun: and men shall be blessed in him: all nations shall call him blessed. (Psalm 72: 16- 17)

King David acknowledges that it is the Creator alone who can achieve these outcomes and it is to Him that all praise and thanks are due. The Psalm concludes with the theme that is frequently repeated in the Bible. David's final prayer is that “the whole earth be filled with his glory.” An earth at peace without violence, wars, hunger, pollution and immorality is beyond this world's capabilities and can only be achieved by God's intervention in the affairs of humans and the return of Messiah David's son to establish a righteous rule in the earth.

Blessed be the LORD God, the God of Israel, who only does wondrous things. And blessed be his glorious name for ever: and let the whole earth be filled with his glory; Amen, and Amen. The prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended.(Psalm 72: 18- 20)

.......................................................................this appeared here he-shall-save-the-children

Normally humans would regard David's idea (and prayer for) one king over all the earth as a recipe for a dictatorship, but with some thought we must recognise it is the only way nations will not fight, and the earth obtains peace.

We are shortly to see a failure on a massive scale of the nation state as the world heads to a third world war. It is not 'if' but 'when'. Already the nation state has failed the children of the needy in most of the world. Unless it was for Christian and Jewish charity many children would starve. Why are the so called enlightened democracies of the world negotiating and dealing with those who oppress their people, and even letting them run the United Nations? Where is the world leader who is standing up for the children of the needy? Where is the nation leader who is willing to take on the oppressors? And who would be willing to reduce their own glory to glorify the name of the God of Israel?

If I had not had the hope of Messiah, life would not have been worth living in a dark year. But the hope of a better future, and the evidence of the nearness of that future (see here) allowed me to live through pain and the heightened perception of the weight of the world's sorrow.

Blessed be the LORD God, the God of Israel,...and let the whole earth be filled with his glory; Amen, and Amen..(Psalm 72: 18- 20)

Amen

Character Confession: Carefree

Julie — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 21:21:29 GMT

This picture might be difficult to see but it's our youngest at school. It was clown day and she's looking in the mirror and full of joy. This picture speaks to me on so many levels. It is the most accurate portrayal of how God made her.

My prayer when she was in the womb was that she wouldn't struggle like I did and at times still do. The promise God gave me was that she'd be an overcomer. I thought it meant she wouldn't have bad PMS but He's done so much more than a bad day.

This child knows who she is in Jesus. She is a worshipper, a song constantly on her heart. She is so sure of who she is that putting on clown make up and laughing at her reflection is a natural reaction for her. Me? No way.

She's so confident in Him that she has a tiara headband. Most girls would reserve it for pretend play times. Not this one. She uses it as a common headband. Why not, she wonders. She is God's princess, after all.

I'm learning so much from her. She has taught me not to sweat the small stuff and to laugh often. Never let the mocking stares of someone else bring me down but make me pray for them because they are missing out, not me.

As I approach my big 4-0 later this month, carefree is a word I want to embrace.

This princess powerhouse is an inspiration.

Picture by S.H.

The Other Two Brothers

ReuvenSpolter — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:17:09 GMT

Once, on a hilltop in Jerusalem, two brothers shared a field, split straight down the middle. Each brother enjoyed half of the field's yearly produce. Yet, these two brothers could not be more different.
One brother lived as a bachelor, alone but unburdened. He needed only enough sustenance for himself, and no one else.
The other brother was the head of a large family. Although his sons assisted in the work, he nevertheless found himself with the burden of providing for the many hungry mouths.
One day, the bachelor brother, evaluating the situation, said to himself: "My brother has many children. When he grows old his children will help him, provide for him and care for him. I, on the other hand, will be alone. Who will provide for me?"
So, each night, he crept to the fence dividing the shared field and stealthily "borrowed"from his brothers pile of grain, adding to his own.
That same day, his brother too thought to himself, "I have a large family and many mouths to feed. My brother, on the other hand, is alone. Why should we equally divide the yield of our field when my burden is so much greater?"
So, that night, he crept to the opposite side of the field, taking from his brother's pile and adding to his own.
The next morning, to their amazement, both brothers awoke to find themselves with the same amount of grain that they had at nightfall. Each night this same scene took place, and each morning, to the brothers' bewilderment, the outcome remained the same.
One night, both brothers happened to arrive at the fence at the same time. In an instant, they realized what had been happening each night for so long.
"You've been stealing from me!" the first brother angrily accused.
"Me, stealing from you? I was only returning that which was rightly mine! It is you that has been stealing from me!"
And, with that, the brothers entered into a lengthy, draw-out and bloody fistfight.

Looking on from the side, a tear welled in the eyes of David, visibly moved by the brotherly scene.
"That," said Ben Gurion, "is the most beautiful sight that I have ever seen! This hill is where I will build the Knesset."

(Hear from my friend David)

Commentary on Biblical Law: "Pekudei"

Dror Ben Ami — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 12:16:42 GMT

Introduction:

One of the main reasons I am against consulting "Torah Sages" when writing a commentary on the weekly portion is that since all these "authorities" are dead, this in effect limits one perspective of the Torah (i.e. the Rashi's opinions are now finite since he can no longer add to his them).

Secondly, since everyone is going to the same finite sources there is also a limit about what can be said based on these opinions (i.e. there is a limit on the amount of interesting ways one can combine the ideas of the different rabbis; there is no limit, however, on commentaries which are not interesting).

Finally, the most destructive aspect of quoting these men is that it creates "tunnel vision" in the commentator.

Let's take for example the commentary on the weekly portion entitled "Bo". In this portion God kills the first born of Egypt, yet not one of the commentaries that I saw focused on that issue (at least none of the commentaries I saw on You Tube or the one by Rabbi Shlomo Risken of the Jerusalem Post). Instead these commentaries all focused on the word "bo" itself, which is the first word of that portion of the Torah. Let's be clear here, rabbi after rabbi after rabbi only commented on this one word and totally ignore everything else in that was written in that week's portion of the Torah. To add insult to injury, what they all wrote was wrong…..

Basically what everyone did was to quote some "genius" who noticed that "the Hebrew word 'bo' means 'come', yet everyone always translates the passage to mean 'go'". I mean, what can I say? This was really an astounding observation! For some reason not one of these rabbis ever thought of the possibility that God was implying "Come with me……"

Regardless, in this week's portion of the Torah we have a similar situation. Rabbi Shlomo Risken, sitting in Jerusalem, writes about why the materials in the sanctuary are listed twice and Rabbi Perry Netter, sitting in Amherst, New York, by some miraculous coincidence, decides to deal with the same issue….

In fairness, however, they split off and interpret the passage differently. Rabbi Netter, the American, says the reason everything is listed twice is to show that Moses has not siphon off some of the wealth for his personal use (i.e. The Torah has now become an income tax form which Moses is submitting to the I.R.S.). Rabbi Risken, the man who believes he is "God's partner", argues that Moses is not a true leader because he only listens to the word of God and not to the voice of the people. In other words: Rabbi Risken thinks King Saul was a good king and King David was a bad king, an opinion, surprisingly, I heard voiced on Kibbutz Revivim 30 years ago (actually that religious people and kibbutzniks think alike is not so surprising, but I will deal with this subject in a future article).

Very simply, what must be recalled is that Wikipedia and practically every yeshiva in Israel repeat the lie that "the pregnant mother of the Rashi was 'saved' by the bricks in a wall moving backwards so that she was not trampled by stampeding horses". Not only this, but all these sources claim "you can go to Europe and still see the actual wall where this miracle took place".

While I am sure there is a wall in Europe with an indentation in it, I seriously, seriously doubt, that a God who, going all the way back to the birth of Rashi about 900 years ago, has stood by and watched billions of innocent babies and young children die horrible and painful deaths due to hunger and diarrhea (and is still doing so while you are reading this article), would reach out and save the person who would one day write that Keturah and Hagar were the same woman!!! (I think Rashi also insisted that Moses' Medianite wife and his Cushi wife were the same woman).

The point is that the story about Rashi's pregnant mother is, obviously, untrue. Thus one must ask: Why is a man who is "a source of lies even from the womb", the foundation upon which all Jewish thought is constructed?

Therefore, to conclude this introduction, I would just like to submit the hypothesis that the reason the materials of the sanctuary are listed twice is the exact same reason that God caused Pharaoh to dream the same theme twice. Joseph told Pharaoh God wanted to make it clear these things were true and would take place sometime in the future.

In a similar fashion, it is my belief, based on the name "Mount Moriah" that the function of God is to teach (i.e. the name "moriah" comes from the Hebrew word for teacher "Mor-reh). The quantities and materials used in the sanctuary are symbolic in nature and represent how God communicates with his people and when. They are listed twice to show that God does indeed communicate with his people…..

In other words: God communicates ideas to his people, he does not perform supernatural deeds like splitting oceans or raising people from the dead. These actions are metaphors….

Exodus: 38.21 - 40.38

Although the rabbis like to insist that everything is repeated twice in this portion and the previous one, we do learn something new in that the second workman is from the tribe of Dan and his father's name is "Ahisameach" (My brother is happy). The name Dan means: "judge" and he is, according to my personal system of reckoning that uses the status of the wife as the determining factor, the 11^th son of Jacob.

The number "11" should be thought of as 10 plus 1 and since Asher is the 10^th son and his name means "happy" and Reuben is the first son and his name means "to see a son" (i.e. to understand the word) what is being implied here is that judging right from wrong or good from evil is based on the knowledge of the 10 commandments and understanding the word of God. It should also not be forgotten that Reuben had sex with the mother of Dan and "sex" is a metaphor for "seeking knowledge from God" (If you are interested in the connection between the Children of Jacob and numbers then please click my name at the top of this page and on my homepage locate the articles "The Children of Jacob: parts 1 and 2).

The first subject the list of materials mentions is gold. "Gold" is a metaphor for "the written laws and commentaries of men". Thus the golden calf was made up of the jewelry provided to the Israelites by the Egyptians. A "field" is a metaphor for "a school" and "a cow" represents "the intellectual force used to make inquiries". Thus Samson says to his rivals who received the solution to his riddle from his wife: "If you had not been plowing with my heifer, you would not know the answer now".

Thus, "the golden calf" represents "a source of ideas based on the religious teachings of the Egyptians" and this should be contrasted to "the 10 commandments" which are "religious teachings based the ideas of God".

What we are then given are the numbers "20", "9" "700" and "30". The important point is that 30 talents of gold were not used, because the number "30" represents "a complete understanding of God's laws". Hence, fruit from trees may not be eaten until the 3^rd year and the number "10" should be associated with the 10 commandments or "God's laws" (actually, "the happiness from understanding God's laws"). Thus we see that Joseph, King David and Jesus were all 30 years of age when they began their roles as God's representatives (if you are not a Christian, the point is whoever wrote the gospel didn't select this number by accident).

The number "20" we know represents the ability to discern good from bad, because this is what God said when punishing the Children of Israel for refusing to enter the Promise Land and listening to Rabbi Shlomo Risken's good friends: "the 10 dis-honest spies", instead of listening to God.

The number "9", obviously, has to do with "pregnancy" and the birth of new ideas. The "ninth son of Jacob" is "Gad" and his name means "good fortune". "Wealth" (we already mentioned gold), represents "the teachings of men". Here the term "fortune" does not refer to "money", but to "being blessed". When Rachel was unable to get pregnant Jacob told her that he was not responsible that she had no fruit in her womb. "Fruit" is a metaphor for "knowledge" since this is the only part of the "The Tree of Knowledge…." that Adam ate. Hence, any woman who has "knowledge from God" (i.e. fruit) planted in her womb is fortunate. Thus the holiday which marks god giving Moses the 10 commandments is also called the "The Festival of the First Fruits" which in Hebrew can also be translated as "The Festival of the First Born Sons".

The number "7" has to do with the Sabbath and, basically, God speaks to his people on the Sabbath. Thus the Children of Israel are told not to search for food on the Sabbath because God will provide ("different types of food" are metaphors for "different types of knowledge, hence, the rabbis say "The Torah is the bread of life").

The number "100" has to do with "the happiness of receiving God's word". Thus, Abraham was 100 years old when Isaac was born and the name "Isaac" means laughter. Also "laughter" is used in the Torah as a word to describe "sex" and the word "sex" in the Torah is usually replaced by the verb "to know" (As an aside, the Eskimos also use "laughter" to describe "sex", but I am not sure what that proves….).

Putting all these numbers together the sanctuary of God seems to represent:

· "20": The ability to distinguish good from evil

· "9": Being blessed with the knowledge or ideas of God

· "7": When men stop searching for knowledge and rest, God will speak to them

· "100": The happiness of having God communicate with his people

· "30": The complete knowledge of understanding God's laws

Because the sanctuary is the work of the hands of men, however, all these positive aspects are imperfect, thus only 29.730 talents are used and not "30" which would represent a more complete, or perfect, form of communication.

Unfortunately, space restrictions preclude me from discussing any more of this week's portion, but at least I didn't focus on a single word…….

Joe Biden shoots his mouth off and someone sells bottled ghosts on eBay

Aaron — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:19:10 GMT

Greetings.

Jewish date: 26 ’Adhar 5770 (Parashath Wayyaqhel-Fequdhe).

Today’s holidays: Bahá’í Month of Fasting (Bahá’í Faith), Friday of the Third Week of Lent (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of Jacobus Burgundus Molensis the Martyr (Thelema).

Worthy cause of the day: “Save BioGems: Take Action: Protect the Spirit Bear”.

Image of no true friend of Israel via Wikipedia

Topic 1: “YOUNG ISRAEL MOVEMENT CONDEMNS VP BIDEN'S COMMENTS ON JERUSALEM”. Probably everyone by now has heard about US Vice President Joe Biden shooting his mouth off condemning Israel for deciding to build more housing units in eastern Jerusalem, i.e., in Israeli territory. This article correctly notes the (probably unthinkingly) anti-Semitic discriminatory nature of Biden’s condemnation and how the tactic he is trying to use to move along the “peace process”, putting pressure on Israel, has no chance of working because the Palestinian Authority is interested in destroying Israel and has no real interest in making peace. (The sad thing is that despite claims of being great friends of Israel, all the US presidential administrations at least as far back as Jimmy Carter have pressured Israel to do stupid things and appease terrorists in the name of “peace”. Had John McCain been elected president, I fully expect that it would be Sarah Palin getting mad at Israel for no good reason instead of Joe Biden.) Also notable on the topic of anti-Semitism: “BBC Complaints: A Complaint in Itself” and “Expose ‘apartheid’ charge's real agenda”.

Topic 2: “New Zealander auctions "ghosts" in a bottle”: I appreciate the fact that the seller admits the effect of the exorcism might have just been psychological. Rituals do often have psychological effects. However, if I were buying bottled ghosts, I would want solid evidence that there really were ghosts in the bottles first.

Topic 3: For today’s religious humor: “Build Your Own Easter Island Kit” and “Build Your Own Stonehenge Kit”.

Peace.

Aaron

Pam and Chuck Pierce: The Rewards of Simplicity

Julie — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:57:33 GMT

Pam and Chuck Pierce have a timely book available through Bethany House Publishers called the Rewards of Simplicity. I've learned a lot through Chuck Pierce's ministry so when I know he has a book coming out, I'm all over it. The Rewards of Simplicity is an offering every reader will be able to glean great wisdom out of to apply to their lives.

From Bethany House:

In today's fast-paced and technology-driven times, Christians feel stressed out and overly busy. Many are left longing for simpler days, unaware that these days are within their grasp, made possible by getting rid of spiritual and material clutter.

Respected prophetic leader Chuck D. Pierce and his wife, Pam, remind Christians of the rewards of living simply. Together they weave biblical teaching
with practical tips that will help readers answer questions like these:

How can I...

• clear out unnecessary clutter in my home?
• overcome anxiety?
• rely on God for my sustenance?
• get free from too much technology and/or entertainment?
• preserve a Sabbath rest?
• free myself from the stronghold of materialism?

Sharing their insights to help readers break free of anything that enslaves them, Pam and Chuck empower Christians, both materially and spiritually, to live a clutter-free life.

I found their experiences refreshing. It's easy to forget when you see Christian leaders that they are human and make mistakes just like us. It's easy for them to overbook and have marital conflict, maybe even more so because they have a full plate of ministry work. Pam did a great job explaining their situations, their real feelings, and what they do in those times.

There are also great topics on simplicity that everyone could benefit from. In my prayer circles I keep hearing the common theme of "I feel like I'm supposed to just clean, really clean and purge my home, my life." I think it's a prayer directive, but for those that aren't so sure about that, it's just a good time for Spring cleaning. This book gives excellent suggestions on how to make the most of a Spring cleaning experience.

I found this book refreshing and helpful, and once I get my writing all caught up, I plan to take the suggestions to simplify our home to use. You should too.

This book was provided for review by Bethany House Publishers. To purchase, click here.

Islamic terrorism and communion on the Moon

Aaron — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:33:09 GMT

Greetings.

Jewish date: 24 ’Adhar 5770 (Parashath Wayyaqhel-Fequdhe).

Today’s holidays: Wednesday of the Third Week of Lent (Roman Catholicism), Feast of Israel Regardie (Thelema).

Worthy cause of the day:

Topic 1: There is no way I am going to escape this, since it was on the news yesterday: “Pa. woman charged with recruiting jihadists”. This article deals with Colleen LaRose, an American convert to Islam who became involved with terrorists. One of the things said in this article struck me as notable:

The case "demonstrates that terrorists are looking for Americans to join them in their cause, and it shatters any lingering thought that we can spot a terrorist based on appearance," U.S. Attorney Michael Levy said.

What was so great about LaRose (so far as Islamic terrorists were concerned) is that she looks like an ordinary American, thus reducing intuitive suspicion of her activities. Apologists for Islamic terrorism have complained that being suspicious of Muslims of Middle Eastern descent is racist. Indeed, I have heard of a few incidents of hostility against Middle Eastern-looking people (Syrian Jews, Sikhs) by some Americans who did not have the knowledge or good sense to be able to distinguish from Muslims. But Mr. Levy has a point: suspicion against Muslims is not about race. Islam is the most pro-terror of all the major religions, and it makes sense for non-Muslims to be cautious of Muslims, regardless of what they look like.

I also keep running across this video a lot lately: “British Islamist Anjem Choudary: They Give US Money, But We Attack Their System”:

Anjem Choudary, interviewed in this video, is an apologist for Islam terrorism and seeks to implement shari‘ah in the United Kingdom. Interesting is his claim that under such a system the monarchy would be eradicated, which is odd since Muslim countries are highly autocratic, including the Kingdom of Jordan. Also interesting is that he identifies un-Islamic ideals, such as “freedom” and “democracy”, with idolatry; I hope this is a metaphor, though as a metaphor it has gotten very stale. Choudary seems to think that everything would be rosy and wonderful under shari‘ah in the UK; please note that countries which implement shari‘ah are not noted for freedom or respect for humanity.

Topic 2: “Communion on the Moon”: Just a little historical article I ran across lately. I had been aware of one of the astronauts transmitting back a reading of the opening of Genesis on the Apollo 8 mission, but I had no idea that Buzz Aldrin took communion on the Moon.

Topic 3: For today’s religious humor: Yet another LOLcat picture featuring Basement Cat: “And what”:

Peace.

Aaron

Commentary on Biblical Law: "Vayakhel"

Dror Ben Ami — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 07:12:43 GMT

Introduction:

As mentioned in a previous commentary, some rabbis try to make "more relevant" the portions of the Torah that deal with the dimensions and materials used in building the sanctuary by comparing the altar to such mundane things in our lives like a kitchen table. In my opinion such efforts not only don't make sense, they are unnecessary.

This week's portion of the Torah is relevant to our daily lives because "Mount Moriah" is also called "God's Mountain" and the name "Moriah" comes from the root of the Hebrew word for "teacher" (i.e. "mor reh").

Thus the function of God is to teach by communicating with his people and the sanctuary of God is a place where 2 way communication with God takes place (although people do sometimes say prayers before eating, none the less, a kitchen is not a sanctuary. Furthermore, the food in the kitchen is not offered to God and, as a general rule, people don't receive messages from God while standing over the stove). If one was pressed, however, to make such comparisons then equating person's body to the sanctuary would seem to be better than the kitchen in that 2 way communication with God does take place within a person's heart, mind and soul.

Regardless, it is my belief that, even without such comparisons, simply by studying the materials used and the dimensions given for the sanctuary and then locating other stories of the Old Testament (or the New Testament) using similar materials and dimensions (or numbers) we can then get a better appreciation for how each section of the sanctuary represents a different stage or level of communication.

Thus, in a similar fashion, if one was to look at the throne of Solomon, since there are 6 steps leading up to the throne and root of the Hebrew word for "sit" is also the word for "Sabbath", one might conclude that "the throne of Solomon" represents: "a week" and that on the Sabbath God speaks to us from his throne in heaven.

Once again, it is impossible to deal with every item in this week's portion in a relatively short commentary, so specific issues will have to be dealt with in detail in separate articles. So, for example, if one is interested in reading more about the significance of the Sabbath, which opens this week's portion, then please click on my name at the top of this article and on my homepage please locate the article: "Should the Children of Israel Work on Sabbath".

Exodus 35.1 - 38.20

As mention in the introduction, this week's portion begins with a discussion of the Sabbath and one new element is mentioned: "fire". In order to understand what is meant here I believe that first we appreciate that fire is something which exists at the level of understanding described as "earth" and it then lifts things to a higher level of understanding called "heaven". Thus, meat is placed in a fire and when it burns its aroma rises to heaven.

Rather than list the things which fire does burn, which is endless, I believe it is more fruitful to focus on the things it does not burn. Basically then in the Old Testament there are two things which were not consumed by fire:

1)The bush of God from which he spoke to Moses

2)The three friends of Daniel who were protected by an angel.

We know two things from these stories. The first is that "The Tree of Knowledge…." is made of wood, hence "wood" becomes a metaphor for "a source of knowledge". The second is that "an angel" is "a messenger of God", hence "an angel" becomes a metaphor for "a source of God's words". Since the rabbis have for centuries describe the Torah as "The Tree of Life" and, almost by definition, "The Torah" is "the word of God", we can then see that the definition we gave to wood can be refined a little and made to be "wood" is a metaphor for "a source of knowledge about God's words".

Thus, returning to our two examples of "things which do not burn", we could say that "the word of God" does not burn and rise up to heaven since "it came down from heaven" (this then implies that the 3 friends of Daniel were prophets who were sources of the word of God). Thus, "fire" can be described as "something which raises things up to a higher level of understanding" (except those things which already are at a higher level of understanding).

Basically, "different types of food" are metaphors for "different types of knowledge". We have already mentioned "The Tree of Knowledge…." and, since Adam ate the fruit of the tree and not the wood, we can conclude that it is "the fruit" which represents "knowledge". Furthermore, the rabbis also describe "The Torah" as "the bread of life". Finally, the root of the Hebrew word for "meat" also means "preachings" and "gospels" and in the story of the Israelites craving meat is intertwined the story of the establishment of the first 70 rabbis.

In a later Torah portion discussing food, God tells the Israelites that they should not leave their places and search for food on the Sabbath, but that God will provide them with food. Furthermore, in the episode mentioned in the introduction about Mount Moriah and God's Mountain we are also told "God will provide". Hence, "on the Sabbath", we can clearly see that "men are not to search for knowledge" and, in addition, in this week's portion we see that, with the prohibition of the use of fire, men are not to take knowledge, for example: "meat", and try to raise it up to a higher level of understanding.

I would also just like to mention that in Hebrew the word for "burn" comes from the root of the word for "awaken". This is also the root for the word "forest" and we noted that "trees" are metaphors for "sources of knowledge". This same root can also be found in the Hebrew word for "youth" and David was described by King Saul as "looking like a youth". David, of course, would later become "a source of God's word". Finally, the Hebrew word for "youth" can also be translated as "the voice of a donkey" and one of the most famous stories in the Old Testament is when the donkey of Balaam speaks after seeing God's angel (If this subject interests you then you can locate the article on my homepage "Thou Shall Not Covet the Ass of Thy Neighbor's Wife").

In regards to the materials of the tent and the altars etc. the important point I believe is that the metals must be "pure". This is important because the Torah does not speak of "clean" and unclean" foods, but rather "pure" and "impure" foods. Since we have shown that "food" is a metaphor for "knowledge" what we are being told then is that certain teachings which are "impure" do not convey exactly the ideas of God, but are "mixed" with the ideas of men.

This is not the place to discuss this idea in detail, but, basically, the means to determine "pure" and "impure" is by "chewing" and "the feet". Even in modern times we speak of "digesting knowledge", since we have noted that the word "meat" is the root of the word for "preachings", we can then see that "any preachings based on knowledge that has not be digested properly" is "impure". Furthermore, when the snake was punished he lost the use of his feet and God implied Moses that "holy-ness" comes up through certain areas of the earth and enters into the feet, thus he asked him to remove his sandals. Apparently then, the shape of ones foot, influences one's ability to receive the "holy-ness" which emanates from holy ground.

The next important issue is the names of the skilled craftsman. One of the men is "Bezelel", the son of "Uri" and the grandson of "Hur". First of all it should be noted then that these men are from the tribe of Judah and "Judah" means "to praise God". The name "Hur" means "Liberty" and Hur is the man who, together with Aaron, helped hold up the arms of Moses and his walking stick during the battle with the Amalikites. The name "Uri" means "my light" and the name "Bezelel" means "in the shadow of God".

Here we must recall that in Plato's "Republic" there was the story of the people in the cave starting at made from a fire shadows and not perceiving the true light of the sun outside or the real forms. The point is that the items Bezelel is making are reflections of God. Thus in the Book of Genesis what is written is man is made "in God's shadow" (The translation: "Man is made in God's image" is incorrect).

The other workman is "Aheliab" (some people pronounce this name "Ohel-li-av") and his name means "The tent of my father". As we clearly see in this week's portion "a tent" is a metaphor for "a sanctuary". "A father" is a "source of seeds". Thus, as touched upon in the introduction, "a sanctuary" is "a place of 2 way communication with God" where men come with questions and God provides answers, just like the Oracle of Delphi. Hence Saul went to ask Samuel where "his father's donkeys were" and then Saul became King of Israel (we have already touched upon the connection between "donkeys" and "the voice of God").

As mentioned already, it is impossible to comment on every item in this week's portion, but I would just like to discuss the sheep's hair and the goat's hair, since these items also appear in the story of Jacob and "the wages" he received from Laban.

In the story of Samson we are told that "hair" represents "devotion to God". Goat's hair is associated with "Esau and men" since Rebecca selected the hair of a goat to deceive her husband into think Jacob was Esau and Esau is associated with the "color red" which is also the Hebrew word for "man". Thus "goat's hair" is a metaphor for "devotion to the teachings of man" (Esau was a hunter who ran after meat).

"Sheep" are always associated with "the word of God" and "the Children of Israel" are always described as "sheep" and they are also described as "The Son of God". In the New Testament, Jesus is described as "a lamb", the son of God and "the word of God", hence, the title "The Son of God" is a metaphor for "The word of God".

Basically then what we are being told is that "devotion to the teachings of men" is a necessary first step in communicating with God. This is why the "goat's hair" is used on the outer tent of the sanctuary. "Devotion to the word of God" is the next step and thus the "sheep's hair" can be found inside the sanctuary. "Sheep's hair which is dyed 'red'" suggests to me that within the sanctuary we must be "devoted to following God's teaching about men" and obey his words.

In conclusion, I would just like to cut and paste in a section I included in a different commentary concerning the symbolism of "numbers":

One: is the number associated with: "Reuben". His name means: "to see a son" which I feel means: "to understand the word". "One" is, of course, associated with God himself….

Two and Twenty: are associated with: "Simon" which means: "to listen" and, of course, it is associated with "dichotomy" (the two edged sword). It means: "to listen to both sides" and God said: "those below the age of 20 do not know the difference between good and evil", which, to my mind, nullifies any teachings about: "original sin".

Three and Thirty: the name: "Levy" means: "to bind", but there is also the law forbidding eating of fruit less than 3 years old. Thus the number: "3" is associated with: "fully developed teachings" and Jesus, Joseph and David were all 30 when they began the active stages of their careers as leaders….

Four and Forty: "Judah" means: "to praise God" and the number: "40" is associated with "purification" (i.e. removing the teachings of men).

Five and Fifty: The name Issachar means: "man for higher". He is the 5^th son of Leah and the number: "5" is associated with: "buying back the sexual favors of Jacob" and: "buying back the first born sons from God". The number: "50" is associated with: "redemption"

Six: The sixth son of Leah is: "Zebulan" his name means: "gift" or "package". There are 6 steps to the throne of Solomon and Leah had 6 sons. The number: "6" should be associated with: "the maximum level men working to gain understanding, before stopping and allowing God to speak"

Seven and Seventy: The name: "Joseph" means: "to add". On the Sabbath God will add to men's knowledge. Joseph is the brother set apart from the others, just as the Sabbath is set apart from the other days. The number: "70" is associated with: "the teachers given a little of the spirit God placed in Moses".

Eight: "Benjamin" means: "son of the right", but originally this boy was called: "son of my sorrow". Rachel, the ewe, died giving birth to this son, it suggests that God's messages are sometimes painful to accept, because we must give up all our previous beliefs.

Ten and One Hundred: The tenth son, in my opinion, is: "Asher" (the second son of the servant of the first wife). His name means: "happiness" and is of course associated with the 10 Commandments. The number: "100" is associated with: "Isaac" whose name means: "laughter" (Abraham was 100 years old when he was born). The idea is related to: "the happiness of receiving God's laws…"

In closing, I would just to add to this that "1/2" seems to me to have something to do with "sickness" which is a metaphor for "teachings which block men from understanding God".

Dancing with Destiny: I Want a Dangerous Shadow

Julie — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:03:06 GMT

I can't believe I'm at the end of this book. I hope my little thoughts on Jill Austin's Dancing with Destiny spark you to go to God and ask Him what dreams lie in you just waiting to be birthed. The key words I keep hearing in almost every area of my life are about dreams, destiny, transformation, redeem. This book is an excellent way to learn more about these themes, God's heart for those things, and for you! If you click on the book image you can go to the late Jill Austin's website to learn more about the book.

I mentor children and one of the things I love sharing with them is this truth: "You have as much power in you (because of your relationship with Christ) as Christ on Resurrection Day."

That's worth reading again.

I don't know about you but I don't want the free pass to heaven. My acknowledging a personal faith in Christ gives me that security of eternity with Him in heaven, but I want every second I'm on Earth to blaze a trail that leaves straight to Him.

A lot of people feel they aren't of value because they aren't a Billy Graham type. Trust me, you were created with a plan to do amazing things for God. I know I was created to use words of life. I encourage. I write. I speak. I don't just pray in a please help way, I already know God showed up. I don't know His answers, but I know enough I'm going to send you His way. He loves you too much to hide, you seek Him, He's there. Promise.

Jill shared a verse that has a hold on me.

"Acts 5:12-16 says that those early believers brought the sick out into the streets on beds and couches so that perhaps Peter's shadow would fall on them. This disciple carried so much authority, so much of the resurrection power of God, that wherever his shadow fell, people were healed and delivered instantly." Jill Austin's Dancing wth Destiny, page 175.

Jill then asks a question I'm going to leave for us to chew on together.

Is your shadow dangerous?

That's where I'm at. I'm done striving. I just want to hear His voice and be obedient with what He shares. When I go as He's called, I want my shadow to leave a trail and I want that trail to have the power to keep blazing long after my shadow disappears.

How about you? Do you want to exist or live?

I can't wait to hear from you. Please feel free to leave comments, I love them. Go be a dangerous shadow!

I'm going to continue on the dream, destiny theme by sharing thoughts from the book Dreaming with God by Bill Johnson. I'll start next Wednesday. You'll join me, won't you?

Third Sunday of Lent: Rejection, Worries, and Cultivation

Br. Vito — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:54:44 GMT

Week three into my Internet fast, and I'm still struggling to stay away from being online. Like I mentioned last week, there are many needs that are met through email and research online. Yet it seems that staying away altogether would be a better option than trying accessing the internet and actively trying to stay off Facebook or Twitter.

And, of course, this seems to be the time when I need to be online the most.

This week I got my first ever college rejection letter. Even in high school, I was accepted to each school I applied to (granted I only applied to schools I knew I'd get into last time). It shouldn't be surprising: I was a huge slacker in college, and I'm amazed I they didn't laugh at my transcripts! But when I got the letter last week, my ego still took a hit as I read the words: "we regret to say that your application has been declined."

My future isn't completely bleak: I was accepted to St. Xavier University in Chicago before receiving the rejection letter from another college. And because I goofed off/dropped so many classes my first time around, I will have to complete core classes all over again: creative writing, math, history, etc. Part of my problem when I was 18 is that I thought those classes, classes I'd taken in high school, were a waste of my time. Now as I look at my future and entering college again, I'm thankful to take classes I will already have knowledge in...as it will make my transition a lot easier.

I've also worried about how this blog is doing. While I try not to worry about blog hits, links, bounce rates, and the other statistics that Google Analytics tracks, I've noticed a decline in readership that troubles me. I know there are more important things than what my rank is or how many people I'm reaching, but as a task-oriented person, anything that shows "decline" can feel the same as "failure."

On the plus side of all of this, I recognize that I have a lot more time for other things. I've been asked to make another side rosary for a friar, I finished a prayer project I've been working on, I'm trying to write a book (as if writing this blog isn't enough!), and since the weather's getting nice again, I've ready to get the soccer ball out again. I'm playing my guitar a lot more, and realize that I'm actually getting good at it!

Perhaps that is one of God's gifts that I've received from all of this: while I'd love to be connected and working online a lot more, the ability to disconnect and tap into my other gifts and desires is a treasure worth enjoying...especially here in Novitiate.

So many that's what Lent is about. Rather than just giving up something for 40 days that we will continue doing right after Easter, but (like today's Gospel) an opportunity to cultivate and nurture ourselves that will allow us to share our gifts and bear fruit for others long after these forty days are done.

I'll blog again next Saturday; next Sunday we leave for our silent retreat in Wheeling, WV.

As for my rejection letter from college, I decided to save it. Thanks to an idea from my Novice Master, I decided to save it for a later project: my Wall of Humility. In the future, whenever I get too full of myself, I'll have a few things on my Wall of Humility to bring me back down to earth.

Peace,

Defending the indefensible

Aaron — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:46:33 GMT

Greetings.

Jewish date: 23 ’Adhar 5770 (Parashath Wayyaqhel-Fequdhe).

Today’s holiday: Feast of Frances of Rome (Roman Catholicism).

Worthy cause of the day: “Alliance for Justice: Call for Investigation of Missing Torture Emails”, “MoveOn.org Political Action: Tell the party establishment to stay out”, and “CARE: Voices Against Violence”.

Topic 1: “When Court Jews Defend Moral Cowards”. This article by Rav Shmuley Boteach has much less to do with court Jews than moral cowards who defend the indefensible. Particularly taking a beating is Pope Pius XII, who is infamous for his failure to do much of anything against the Nazis and all their moral atrocities during World War II. Religion is supposed to be about what is true, not what would be politically expedient to believe or what we want to believe. Do note that all glossing over the Armenian genocide and Pius XII’s indifference is actually doing is making people angry.

Topic 2: More anti-Semitism: “What New Settlement?” and “Jerusalem on the Media Frontline”. Both of these articles deal with dishonesty in reporting, the first with the untenable claim that adding 112 housing units to a preexisting city in Israel constitutes a “new settlement” and the second attacking the assumption that anything the government of Israel does regarding Arabs living in Jerusalem is necessarily not for their benefit. Meanwhile, Muslims have been rioting on the Temple Mount, including throwing stones at Jews worshipping at the Western Wall, and blaming Jews and Israel for their temper tantrum and Israeli police trying to restore the peace. This indecent, rationalizing sort of behavior is precedented; after all, Yasser ‘Arafat launched second intifada and made the excuse that ’Ari’el Sharon was somehow to blame for simply taking a stroll around the Temple Mount.

Topic 3: Other articles which I wish to note but do not have time to discuss: “Al-Qaida calls on US Muslims to attack America”, “Scientology in the spotlight amid fresh allegations”, and “Top home-school texts dismiss Darwin, evolution”.

Topic 4: For today’s religious humor, courtesy of Barry and Nancy: “The economy is hitting us all pretty hard”:

Probably this was totally unintentional.

Peace.

Aaron

Winning by other than straightforward tactics

Aaron — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 09:49:08 GMT

Greetings.

Jewish date: 21 ’Adhar 5770 (Parashath Wayyaqhel-Fequdhe).

Today’s holidays: Bahá’í Month of Fasting (Bahá’í Faith), Third Sunday of Lent (Roman Catholicism).

Worthy cause of the day: “Tell Obama: Let us fight for the public option.”

Topic 1: The latest episode of Caprica, “Know Thy Enemy”. The more I watch this show, the more my intuition insists that the Tauron culture has serious religious dimensions to it. Revenge seems to be a major value. Tauron industrialist Tomas Vergis, from whom Daniel Graystone had a metacognitive processor (MCP) stolen, believes that Daniel is responsible not only the theft of the MCP but also for the death of two of his sister’s children. Rather than kill Daniel, Tomas has decided to play mind games with Daniel and ruin something that Daniel loves. It also must be noted that the Tauron honor system does not allow for theft from fellow Taurons. On a different track, life in a virtual world, as Zoe I worked to create, is seen by Sister Clarice as a form of afterlife. She is also not above spy tactics to try to get information on Zoe.

Topic 2: “Another Tack: An Arab land”: This article deals with Arab tactics in the Arab-Israeli War. Covered are fabricating the past, appropriation of Jewish history, and trying to silence the Jewish point of view—anything to make Arabs look in the right at all costs. Major rule: If you lie, you effectively admit you have no argument. Another major rule: none us us has the right to always be right.

Topic 3: For today’s religious humor: “Basement Cat Jr’s”:

Peace.

Aaron

God so loved the world?

Dabar — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 05:40:55 GMT

Quotes

God so loved the world. John 3:16

mgh

I have heard often Christians quoting this verse--

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

The emphasis is usually placed on the magnitude of God's love rather than the manner in which His love is shown. A careful analysis of this verse shows it is about the 'manner' not the 'magnitude' of His love.

The beginning of this verse is perhaps better translated from the original Greek where the word 'for' is often translated as 'because or seeing that” and 'so' is not a superlative, but gives the sense of 'in this way' or 'in this manner'. The beginning of the verse will then read as

Because (seeing that) God in this way (or manner) loved the cosmos, that he gave his only begotten Son.

John then then continues, saying that those who believe will not 'perish'.

The flip side is that many would perish

This quotation must be seen in the context of the chapter and the emphasis on “should not perish.” God's love is then shown as mere provision for the forgiveness of sins. Verse 14 of John 3 gives the context for this verse. It states:

“That as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up.” (John 3: 14)

This takes us back to Numbers 21: 1-9. Israel had spoken against God and Moses and complained that they had been brought into the wilderness to die. They said that they loathed the light bread. They rejected God's means of keeping them alive. God sent serpents among the people and many died. They then turned to Moses and acknowledged their sin and Moses prayed for them. God told Moses to make a fiery serpent and set it on a pole and those who had been bitten, if they looked on it, they would live. Only in this way was the love of God available.

We must note here that many people had died. The nation was being taught that obedience was essential if they were to live. A loving God had allowed the destruction of “much people”. Why? The nation was learning there was only one means of salvation. Throughout Israel's history there were many instances when a just and loving God brought destruction upon many of the people so that His plan could be achieved.

Take also the flood. Here again a loving and just Creator brought destruction upon an irreverent and disobedient civilisation. Consider the record of Isaiah.

“For a small moment I have forsaken thee: but with great mercies I will gather thee. In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment: but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, says the LORD thy Redeemer. For this is as the waters of Noah unto me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.” (Isaiah 54: 9)

Returning to John 3, the lesson becomes clearer. The death (and resurrection) was the means by which humans who ultimately will perish without God's intervention, are to gain forgiveness. By a death, only those who believed would be saved. Just as many in Israel were saved on that occasion in the wilderness, many would be saved through Y'shua's sacrifice. But we must also be aware that God had destroyed many in showing his requirements of obedience and acknowledgement of sin. Just as many Israelites died in the wilderness, John 3:16 implies that many of “the world” will “perish” or be destroyed. His “love of the world”, in the case of the flood and in Israel's wilderness experiences, demonstrates that the Bible God's love of the “world” is completely different to the modern day notion of Christian love or the sentimental and sensual love of the world of music and movies. The word in context implies a love with a social and moral application.

This verse says God's purpose will not be achieved on this earth without the destruction of many people and the devastation caused by armageddon. The “world” as the Bible God sees it is not as humans see it.

John 3:16 is not advice to make friends of the world, but rather to go out and proclaim the only message of salvation. This verse says without redemption all humans would perish.

The Christian attitude to the “World”

If Christians believe that John 3: 16, presents an all embracing love of the world, then John's later advice in 1John 2: 15-17 is a contradiction.

“Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passes away, and the lust thereof, but he that does the will of God abides forever.” (1John 2: 15-17)

The advice that Peter gave about the world to those of his generation when they asked about salvation is found in Acts 2.

“With many other words did he testify and exhort saying, Save yourselves from this untoward (warped, perverse) generation.” (Acts 2: 40)

It is perhaps good advice as we live amongst a warped and perverse generation, particularly in relation to moral standards.

This verse presents the future as having two sides: one of salvation and peace to those who associate with God's redemption plan, and the other of destruction to those who reject his plan. John summarises it:

“that whosoever believes in him should not perish”

For more John316

Scientology Defectors out church as scam

Republikid — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:04:52 GMT

In what can only be described as "not news" here is another story of long time Scientologists leaving the church and outing it for it's deceptive and abusive practices. NYTimes Article

I for one have a really difficult time understanding how people can be that gullible. So far every time I have seen a Scientologist on television my spidey-senses start going berserko-ballistic. These people are f**king creepy. It doesn't help to have Tom Cruise on your payroll, he's a complete loon when he isn't acting for a movie. John Travolta is only slightly less ridiculous, but both of them show their true colors whenever the anti-Scientology crowd shows up at one of their events. The Xenu folks love to harass Scientologists. Can you blame them?

I have seen numerous videos in which a very agitated Tom Cruise or John Travolta refuse to leave the building they are in until someone removes the Xenu people from their presence. Seriously? What? Are you scared of them? Aren't you a good Scientologist? Don't you have an answer for every thing they could possibly say to you? No? Well then. I guess you both are just whiny little sissies who need to grow a pair or just stay indoors where it's safe.

The Church of Scientology has had a long and sordid history. Horror stories from former members abound. Allegations of intimidation, murder, torture, starvation, and reports of Tax fraud are just some of the fun stuff you hear. Wow, this church sounds awesome! I would love me some of that kind of abuse! Let me go put on my gimp gear and grab a bottle of lotion. I'm Ready!

This latest New York Times article is no different. Allegations of being worked like slave laborers making wages that sweat-shop employees would laugh at, being shunned by family members, forced abortions, and a host of other assorted claims of abuse.

Amidst all this controversy the church is spending obscene amounts of money on new and remodeled buildings and even a 380,000 sq. foot convention center. Oddly enough reports from various sources claim that the churches numbers have actually dropped by half in the last decade.

Who are they spending this for? Their non-existent members?

It's not hard to see why people generally laugh at Scientology as a whole and take frequent pot-shots and celebs like Cruise and Travolta who, for all their acting ability, can't see a scam when it hits them in the face. It could be very soon that this church goes the way of the do-do or worse, gets reincarnated as something even more ridiculous and sinister.

"Thou Shall Not Covet the Ass of Thy Neighbor's Wife"

Dror Ben Ami — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 14:27:20 GMT

Introduction:

The title is just an amusing little play on words I heard in the 6^th grade, but it demonstrates how statements in the Old Testament can be mistranslated. Never the less, the term "donkey" found in this week's portion has indeed been misunderstood by the rabbis for millennium just as has the term "goat".

Although this article will be dealing with some aspects of this week's Torah portion, it is not meant as a full commentary. Anyone interested in reading a commentary on this week's portion should click my name at the top of this page and locate on my homepage the article: "Commentary on Biblical Law: Ki Tisa" (By the way, in this article we also will not be dealing with "goats", so if that subject interests you on my homepage you can also find the articles "Why a Goat" and "Milk, Butter and Meat").

----------------

The most famous story about a donkey in the Old Testament concerns Balaam on his way, he thinks, to curse the Children of Israel. In this story their way is blocked by an angel with a drawn sword, which, at first, can only be seen by the donkey. The donkey tries to saves his master and crushes his foot against a stone wall that is located between two vineyards. Balaam in anger beats the donkey with a stick and as a result the donkey begins to speak.

Since we all know that donkeys cannot talk and neither can snakes (as Bill Maher, the famous talk show host and comedian, likes to repeatedly point out), then the question becomes: What is the Old Testament trying to tell us in these stories?

First of all a little background information: about 2,000 years ago, a very famous religious school was located in Yavne and when the temple was destroyed there is a legend about a rabbi pretending to be dead and escaping the city in a coffin in order to ask the Roman general Titus for permission for this school to remain functioning. For our purposes, however, what is important is that this religious school was referred to by the teachers there as: "the vineyard".

Since, in this week's portion we are specifically told that the 10 commandments were written on 2 tablets of stone, the imagery of passing between 2 vineyards with stone walls suggests that the story of Balaam's donkey is entirely based on metaphors. So, for example, when Samson ripped apart the mouth of a lion we are specifically told that it tore as easily as if it was a goat and this action took place within a Philistine vineyard.

Very simply then, because "the donkey" can speak, it must be considered "a source of knowledge" or: "a source of teachings". Thus, later Samson will take the jawbone of a donkey and kill 1,000 Philistine soldiers. Just like the 1,000 wives of King Solomon or the 1,000 ships of Helen of Troy this number "1,000" is simply a symbol for "a new age", thus "The Messianic Age" will last "1,000 years".

What must also be recalled in the story of Balaam is that "the 10 Plagues of Passover" are actually called in Hebrew "The 10 Hits" (If you are interested in learning more about this subject then on my home page you can locate my articles "The Ten Plagues in Egypt: parts 1 and 2" as well as the article "The 10 Commandments").

What also must be recalled is that Moses was prevented from entering into the Promised Land because he "hit" a rock with a stick and forced it to produce water. The key to this comparison is that Moses will later compare "his words" to "rain". Thus when hit with a stick the rock produced "words" (i.e. rain/water) and the donkey produced words.

Our confirmation that all these stories are indeed inter-related and based upon the same metaphors is the continuation of the story of Samson whereby, after killing the Philistines, he climbs "the hill of the jawbone of the ass" and cries out to God for water, which subsequently flows up from the ground ('hills" and "mountains" represent "higher levels of understanding", thus Sodom was located in a valley).

Another well known story associated with the donkey is that the messiah will enter Jerusalem riding this animal. Furthermore, when King Solomon was anointed and crowned he re-entered Jerusalem on the back of his father's donkey.

Less well known is the fact that when Absalom, in his unsuccessful attempt to overthrow his father, tried to flee the battle field, he mounted a donkey. Unfortunately, his head was caught in the branches of a tree and he was later killed by the soldiers of David's general Yoav.

What also is important to focus on in these stories about donkeys in the Old Testament is the things they carry on their backs. First, as noted, they carry messiahs (enlighten beings). Donkeys also carried "the wheat" that Joseph sent to his father Jacob and "the bread" that was supplied to David by his future wife Abigail and his political supporter Barzilia. The rabbis for centuries have described: "The Torah" as "the bread of life" and "the messiah" will be born in "Bethlehem" (i.e. "the house of bread"). Later the Syrian general Naaman will carry the land of Israel back to his homeland on the backs of donkeys in order to construct "an altar" there (i.e. the land of Israel is "the place where men communicate with God and God communicates with them").

Another important point to note about the donkey is that the Hebrew word for "youth" can also be translated as "the voice of the donkey" and David (the future author of the psalms) was described by King Saul as "looking like a youth'. Why this is significant is that the root of this word for youth is the word for "awakening" (pronounced: "ar"). The Torah, in addition to being associated with bread is also associated with trees and another famous quote is "The Torah is the Tree of Life". Hence, in my opinion, it is no surprise to find that the Hebrew word for forest also has this same word for "awaken" as part of its root.

Another very important indication for the meaning of a donkey is the Torah's prohibition to yoke a donkey and an ox together. In the continuation of the story of Samson killing the lion he asks his rivals a riddle concerning this act. The men forced Samson's wife into revealing to them the solution and Samson then declared "If you had not been plowing with my heifer you would not know the answer now". For us the important point is that "an ox" or "a heifer" represents "the intellectual strength needed when seeking answers" (As an aside, "a field" represents "a school" and even in modern times we still ask "what's your field of study?").

Thus, if "seeking answers with an ox" represents "intellectual strength", then seeking answers with a donkey must represent something contrary or at least not compatible.

The answer comes from the wives of Jacob. The name "Leah" means "cow" and, because of her 6 sons, Leah must be associated with the 6 days of the week. In contrast Rachel means "Ewe" and her son Joseph is clearly described as "the son separated from his brothers". Hence Joseph is associated with the Sabbath and Joseph's sole function in Egypt was to supervise the production of the wheat fields.

Therefore, because we have already noted the donkey's connection with messiahs from the house of bread and the bread supplied to King David, we can then see that "the donkey" represents "the words of God" or "a source of teaching from God".

Thus on for 6 days we work, but on the Sabbath we do not work. For 6 days of the week we work and search for food, but on the Sabbath we do not work or search for food. Thus "the ox" which represents "intellectual work" (i.e. scholarship), cannot be yoked together with "the donkey" which represents "knowledge provided by God" (The word "yoke" comes from the sanskit word "yogi" and means "teacher" and the name "Mount Moriah" means "Mount of the Teacher" and this place is also called "God's Mountain") .

Thus in this week's portion we are told that the Children of Israel must, of all the animals, buy back the donkey from God and, in a previous portion, they were commanded also to buy back their first born sons. If they do not do this they are commanded to break the donkey's neck and, just by coincidence I am sure, the Children of Israel are called "the stiff necked people".

I could go on and speak about the father of the man who raped Jacob's daughter being named "donkey" (Hamor) and his son's name being "shoulders" ("Shechem"), but I am feeling a little tired today……..

Proof by assertion does not work. Proof by assertion does not work. Proof by a

Aaron — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 20:05:14 GMT

Greetings.

Jewish date: 19 ’Adhar 5770 (Parashath Ki Thissa’).

Today’s holidays: Friday of the Second Week of Lent (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of the Magi: Lao-Tzu (Thelema), World Day of Prayer (Christianity).

Worthy cause of the day: “Take Action: Join Us for the Food Safety Action Day on the Hill!”.

Topic 1: Pesaḥ (Passover) is coming in less than a month. You can find out a lot about it at the site of the Orthodox Union, which includes their annual Passover Guide.

Topic 2: “Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets” and “Redefining The Creation/Evolution Controversy”. Both of these articles deal with creationists. The first deals with creationists also supporting denial of global warming and trying to use legal maneuvers to coerce have both unlikely beliefs taught in public schools. Major rule: Truth is not determined by governments. For example,
Trofim Lysenko convinced Joseph Stalin that Medelian genetics was wrong and hypotheses that acquired characteristics could be inherited. Lysenkoism therefore became what the USSR deemed truth, and since Lysenkoism is wrong, Soviet genetics was put back by decades. The second article attacks the notion that the evolution-creationism controversy is an argument between science and religion. This idea is often assumed to be true because it is said so often (proof by assertion). The author of this article is the man behind The Clergy Letter Project, a series of letters signed by thousands of clergy affirming the truth of evolution and exposing the proof by assertion as baseless.

Topic 3: For today’s religious humor: “Buddha Cat”:

Peace and Shabbath shalom.

Aaron

Five Ways to Tell It's Been That Kind of Week

Julie — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:02:41 GMT

Remember me?

It's ok if you have to think about it, because it scares me to think how many days have passed before I even looked at this site. That bothers me, because I consider it a ministry.

But I also consider caring for my family a ministry and this week, that went up a notch or two in the care department. Our youngest developed a sinus infection which brought on an asthma flare up. She was down and out for days and that means so were we.

Instead of knocking myself out trying to catch up, I'm just going to post a little something today and start all over on Monday.

Come on back now, you hear?

Five Ways to Tell It's Been That Kind of Week: Julie Arduini version

1. My husband and I have incorporated the word "shift" into our parenting this week.

2. I'm healthy. It's 4pm. I'm still in pajamas. For the third day.

3. There is a peanut butter egg in the fridge. If you know me even a little, this is a statement. Because if this were a normal week, that statement would be in the past tense.

4. I'm fluent in Chinese after four days. How? Non stop recordings of Nick Jr's Ni Hao Kai Lan. I'll be honest, I just know the word dolphin but I should be fluent in Chinese.

5. 'Getting out" meant opening the door to get the mail.

How was your week? How did God carry you through?

By the way, before the sickness my husband tweaked the website and created a new button for YOUR blog and/or website. Do this frazzled mom a favor and grab the code for your site. Thank you!