Torah 101-Bo Parsha I. Answers To Study Questions (Va'Era)

Torah 101-Bo Parsha
I.
ANSWERS TO STUDY QUESTIONS (VaEra)
1) Question for Exodus 6 and 7:

What are the differences between the signs that were originally ordered by Abba
YHWH to Moshe on Mount Sinai compared with what actually happened?
ANOCHI MAKEH BAMATEH ASHER BAYADI AL-HAMAYIM BA YEOR
VENEHEFCHU LEDAM (7:17) = I will strike the water of the Nile with the staff in
my hand and (the water) will turn into blood. Compare this with the original plan
for this miracle in Exodus 4:9 which was to take a little water from the Nile and put it
on the ground and have it turn to blood on the ground. This miracle was supposed to
happen after Moshe did the other two signs, one of the staff turning into a snake and
the other with the leprous hand. In the case of the first miracle Moshe does it, but he
didnt anticipate the magicians doing the same thing and his snake devouring the
others. In the case of the leprous-restored hand, Moshe elected not to do that miracle
at all in front of Pharaoh but clearly did all three signs in front of the Israelite elders
(Exodus 4:30-31).
2) Question for Exodus 8:
Why is Pharaohs offer to allow the Israelites to sacrifice within the borders of Egypt
disingenuous?
VAYOMER MOSHE LO NACHON LAASOT KEN KI-TOAVAT MITSRAYIM
NIZBACH LYAHWEH ELOHEYNU HEN NIZBACH ET-TOAVAT
MITSRAYIM LEYNEYHEM VELO YISKELUNU (8:22) = And said Moshe (to
Pharaoh): That would not be acceptable because what we will sacrifice to Yahweh
our Elohim is Set-Apart (forbidden for sacrifice) in the eyes of the Egyptians. Could
we then sacrifice such a Set-Apart animal before the very eyes of the Egyptians and
not have them stone us?
Meaning: As we saw in the Joseph story, sheep were sacred to the Egyptians and to
eat them and sacrifice them was considered a great sin. This is why Joseph tried to
set himself apart and not eat in front of Potiphars household. Now Moshe is saying
that if he sacrifices sheep in massive numbers in plain sight within Egypts borders, it
will provoke anger and riots, which is why they had to go OUT of Egypt, into the
wilderness to do this. Pharaoh wants to obviously control the political situation by
asking for the sacrifice in his borders, but also perhaps reasons that if a riot breaks out
with massive Hebrew casualties that the Hebrews will again curse Moshe and have no
heart to demand their freedom.
1|Page
3) Question for Exodus 9:

How is Abba YHWH comparing Himself to a fighter or boxer here?
KI-ATAH SHLACHTI ET-YADI (9:15) = I could have sent forth My Hand, meaning
I could have sent so much power that all you would surely die. YHWH is literally
tying one hand behind His back as if He were a kind of boxer or warrior and if
Pharaoh doesnt watch it, YHWH will untie that hand and really do some serious,
permanent damage. It is very close to saying, I am fighting you only with one hand
tied behind my backkeep it up though and I will bring the other hand to bear on
you as well.
4) Haftorah Question of the Week: Ezekiel 28:25-29:21
How is an image originally intended to relate to Egypt being weak in the eyes of
Abba YHWH used later on to showcase one of Yshuas greatest miracles?
MISHENETH KANEH (29:7) = staff of reeds. Compared to Israel, Egypt is like
paper, for papyrus reed is used to make the paper they write on. The reed KANEH is
where we get the name for the city of Cana, where Yshua will turn water into wine.
This is a perfect imagerecalling how the waters of the Nile were turned to blood!
2|Page
II.
QUESTIONS FOR THIS TORAH PORTION (Bo)
Please NOTE:
For clarity and time constraints, if I elect to not read the whole parsha
(which is the case this week) I may still ask questions relating to the
portions I did not read!
1) Question for Exodus 10: How is Pharaohs negotiating tactics here reminiscent
of the way slavery was dealt with in America during the first half of the 19th
century?
2) Question for Exodus 11: Do the details in this chapter absolutely prove a
supernatural basis (without scientific explanation) to the miracles? Why or why
not?
3) Question for Exodus 12: TRUE or FALSE: Uncircumcised men are prohibited
from participating in the Pesach meal?
4) Question for Exodus 13:1-16: Exodus 13:4 defines Canaan as 5 countries
(Caanan, Hittite, Amorite, Hivite and Jebusite) but other lists (Deuteronomy 7:12; Acts 13:19) says the Israelites were supposed to conquer 7 nations. Is this a
contradiction? Why or why not?
5) NT Commentary: Revelation 19:1-16
Revelation 19:1
Halelu-YAH means, praise YAH. Yah is the same name as Yahweh in
simplified form (Psa_68:4). The four occurrences of this term indicate that the
earliest assemblies knew and revered the name of YHWH.
The Aramaic word paroqa here is the same word used to describe Yshua as
Savior or more accurately, Life Giver. The synonym for deliverance is
yeshua or salvation in Hebrew.
Revelation 19:13
Perhaps for some, a terrifying vision of Y'shua! But, this proves that when he
went "into heaven" he became "the Word" just as when his spirit was revealed
"out of heaven" as the Word of YHWH.
Revelation 19:16
Aramaic "malka d'malka mara maraota," see King of Kings and Master of
Masters, Part 2 Revelation 19:16 in Appendix.
3|Page
King of Kings and Master of Masters

Part 1 Revelation 17:14
The Aramaic in Rev_17:14 "malka d'malka mara maraota" stands out for two reasons.
First, unlike the conjugation for "King of Kings" (malka d'malka), there is no dalet
proclitic to read as "of" between the words "mara" (master) and maraota" (masters). Also
the general rule of Aramaic nouns is that a "ta" ending indicates the feminine! The
combination of these two oddities together suggests that an additional meaning is
intended along with the generally accepted reading of "King of Kings and Master of
Masters." One possibility is that the word we think of as "Masters" is actually another
noun derived from the same root but which takes on a feminine form when spelled this
way. An example of this use is in Col_1:16, where it means "dominion" in what
grammarians call the singular emphatic state. Therefore, one could read this sentence as a
clarification of a thought rather than a synonymous mirror echo, as "King of Kings and
Master of (all) dominions," which would closely parallel descriptions of Mashiyach in
Dan_7:1-28.
However, there are other aspects of this phrase which must also be considered. First is the
use of "metaphoric transference" which is an exception to the rule when Hebrew and
Aramaic terms for "Lordship" are applied to YHWH or His Son. In the Aramaic portions
of Dan_5:21-23 we see the word "mara" used both for pagan deities and YHWH. From
Path to Life (page 163):
"The reader will recall that in "Definitions of MarYah" the related word also used in the
above Scripture, Mara, is defined in terms of human kings or false deities, not YHWH.
Only a few pages later and it seems as this rule is broken - or is it? What is going on in
this case is a phenomenon I refer to as metaphoric transference. Put simply, metaphoric
transference means that two concepts that are not alike at all in reality are linked through
metaphor as though they were. In this case, the pagan court of Belshazzar does not know
the personal name for the Creator, YHWH. But their Aramaic dialect certainly is used to
address their false gods with the title Mara. Enter Daniel, who is in this one instance
transferring this word temporarily to YHWH to make a point that the deities the
Babylonians think are supreme are false and have no power they are dust compared to
the real Master Mara of Heaven!
"In later times then, Jews who stayed behind in Babylon would simply take off the alap
and strip the word down to the root level so that it would not appear to have dual pagan
Yahwistic use; hence "MarYah" which was not used in Daniel's time but which clearly
grew out of this usage in his book. Furthermore, it is very easy to see Daniel as the pivot
point in the usage for this word for two special reasons:
1) This portion of Daniel is in Babylonian Aramaic, in a form fairly close to the later
Babylonian variety that the Peshitta Tanakh would be translated into. As a result, it is
also no coincidence that Daniel is the only Tanakh book to even have this word.
4|Page
2) The use of Mara in Daniel is effectively split between human (Dan_4:19; Dan_4:23)
and divine (Dan_2:47; Dan_5:23) applications, which is also instructive in showing how
the root Mar would become attached to Yah later.
"Another key point is: just because the metaphoric usage ends up referring to YHWH,
does not mean it is equivalent to the Name of YHWH by its plain definition or usage."
So it is important to note that in Daniel and Revelation there are metaphoric usages of
"Lordship" that do not appear anywhere else in Tanakh or NT; and, the kinship between
Daniel and Revelation is not just thematic, but is linked with Aramaic in both books. We
see this kind of ironic metaphoric transference also in Tanakh, where the prophet Elijah
mocks non-existent deities in 1Ki_18:27 by saying to the pagan priests: "Shout louder!
Surely he (Baal) is an elohim! Perhaps he is deep in thought, or busy, or traveling.
Maybe he is sleeping and must be awakened."
Another factor that must be noted is: Who is Y'shua referring to as "King of Kings and
Master of Masters"? In Rev_17:14, the narrator says this applies to Y'shua. However,
1Ti_6:15-16 says something different: "Almighty Elohim, King of Kings and Master of
Masters who only is incorruptible and dwells in light to which no one can approach; and
whom no man has seen, or even can see: to him be glory and dominion forever and ever
Amen." Here Rav Shaul uses the same phrase to apply to YHWH alone. Can both be
true? The answer is clearly yes, because YHWH gives life, power and authority in His
will to the Son (Joh_5:25-26), who was the Miltha/Word acting on YHWH's commands.
Y'shua clearly came in his Father YHWH's Name, and when someone comes in the name
of a king in the Middle East and elsewhere, they bear authority from the king to stand and
act on behalf of the king when he is not physically present. Obviously YHWH is
omnipresent, but the model holds true because His Son was the physical embodiment of
His authority on Earth, which is why the Son judges on behalf of the Father but the
Father metes out actual judgment and is the only One who knows future appointed times
as stated in Mat_7:21; Mat_24:36; Joh_5:30; Joh_8:15-16.
Part 2 Revelation 19:16
The dual meaning of "King of Kings and Master of Masters" from Rev_17:14 is also
present here. In this case however, a totally new vista of possible understanding opens up
with the detail of the name being inscribed on Y'shua's thigh. The significance of the area
of the thigh principally comes from the patriarch Ya'akov wrestling with a heavenly
messenger possibly Y'shua himself as the Face of El and having that Divine Being
touch him on that part of his leg (Gen_32:24-26). Also, even prior to that event, the thigh
was an area that the patriarchs used to impart sacred promises (Gen_24:1-9), of which
Mashiyach is the most important! However, there is another connection of this matter of
the thigh that is not quite as obvious. Path to Life (pages 20-23) references the research of
Neil Altman (a Dead Seas Scrolls expert) and investigative reporters David Chowder and
Bill Norton. They wrote an article entitled, "Support for the Gospel of Matthew Comes
from an Unlikely Place" which appeared in the Kansas City Star, January 7th, 2004.
5|Page
Their article addressed an ancient fragment of the Talmud that mentions a parody of the
Gospel of Matthew written by Gamaliel, the same Rabbi who taught Rav Shaul
(Act_22:1-3). The main significance of this find was that Gamaliel died in the 73 CE,
which would mean that if the parody of Matthew belonged to him, the original book of
Matthew circulated at least two decades earlier than most scholars previously believed.
Gamaliel was and is an extremely important Rabbi in Rabbinical Judaism; many of his
teachings were passed down into later traditions like the Talmud. About a hundred years
later Gamaliel's parody of Matthew would have likely found its way into the hands of
Rabbi Tarphon, who had a famous debate with Justin Martyr in the city of Ephesus.
Ephesus was also the residence of Yochanan bar Zawdi prior to his exile to the island of
Patmos, where Revelation would be finished. However, because Yochanan's previous
fame was associated with this city, this same book of Revelation is mentioned by both
men in their debate many decades later.
Why is this important? Because from this time onward, the Rabbinic schools were
collecting their own apologetics against the teachings of Mashiyach Y'shua. Known as
the Toldot Yeshu, the work reached its final written stage in about the Sixth Century, but
it was well known that earlier written and oral versions were also in circulation. Three of
these versions may have had their origins based on the two Gospels and Revelation.
The end of Matthew relates how the Pharisees began propagating a lie that the talmidim
stole the body of Mashiyach at night, a theme that is also loosely echoed in the Toldot
Yeshu. Later, perverting a theme in Yochanan's Gospel, the body of Mashiyach is found
buried by a gardener as opposed to Mashiyach being mistaken for a gardener himself
as though the talmidim tried to fake the resurrection. But, if ancient traditional sources
are correct, the same Yochanan who wrote the Good News of Yochanan, also wrote the
Book of Revelation.
So here is where all these threads tie together: In the final version of Toldot Yeshu, the
Pharisees invent an elaborate myth about Mashiyach's miracles being as a result of his
copying the original 72-letter name of YHWH onto a small piece of parchment, the Name
that was inscribed on the foundation stone of the Temple; a Name that other legends say
was spoken to create the universe. Since this kind of "divine forgery" is a capital offense
the myth suggests that "Yeshu" concealed the holy Name by cutting a hole in the skin of
his thigh and placing the paper inside it! Perhaps the phrase "King of Kings and Master
of Masters" was contained in the "72-letter name" that was lost? Another weird aspect to
this legend of the Pharisees continues along the lines that Yehuda the traitor became a
hero and fought back with the same name. Then, by "defiling Yeshu in the air" the holy
letters escape both men, rendering them powerless but not before explaining the source
of the false Mashiyach's healing powers. In fairness, we do not know to what extent
either Rabbi Gamaliel or Rabbi Tarphon may have directly contributed to the Toldot
Yeshu in its final form, but the fact remains they had opportunities to be aware of that
work and perhaps spin a tale or two of their own. Therefore, it could very well be that
what Rabbi Gamaliel helped begin, Rabbi Tarfon might well have further developed in
part by reading Revelation prior to his debate with Justin Martyr.
6|Page

Torah 101-Bo Parsha I. Answers To Study Questions (Va'Era)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Torah 101-Bo Parsha I. Answers To Study Questions (Va'Era)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Torah 101-Bo Parsha

ANSWERS TO STUDY QUESTIONS (VaEra)

1) Question for Exodus 6 and 7:

3) Question for Exodus 9:

QUESTIONS FOR THIS TORAH PORTION (Bo)

King of Kings and Master of Masters

You might also like