Forward to the Past:

THE CULTURAL CONTEXT

OF

ANCIENT ISRAEL

Teaching by Roeh Gibor

with excerpts from additional teaching by Joseph Good

of HaTikvah Ministries, Nederland, Texas

based largely on Roland deVaux's Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions

Avram is the root of Israel. He is called the first "Hebrew", which on the literal level, means a descendant of Ever, the son of Shem. But the meaning of the term (and Ever's name) means "one who crosses over to the other side". To be a Hebrew means to live for what is "on the other side", to be set apart from everything that is common or profane. Indeed, Avram followed YHWH's directive to leave his homeland for another place that He would show him later. (Gen. 12:1)

"A land that I will show you" can also be read, "a land [in] which I will allow you to perceive or see". Perceive or see what? That which he could not see or perceive while he was still in Ur. What was that? Ur means a place of "light". Yet there was not enough light there to perceive YHWH well. This is the purpose of Israel: to be in a place where we can perceive YHWH. Adam heard Him moving about in the Garden before he sinned. Right now no one can see Him and live, but there is a place where we will again be able to. Bringing this place back to earth is the task of Israel.

Though Avram had already moved a certain distance from Ur, YHWH moved him further still. (Gen. 11:27) He was able to move on because he already had taken on the habit of moving out and living in tents.

He was told to leave behind his eretz (land), his moledeth (anything having to do with his birth), and the beyt of his av (household of his father). He was not afraid to pull up stakes, but he had to go beyond where his father had taken him. His name was changed from that which his father had given him. A person is largely defined by the family he is from, but Avraham was not to be defined as someone from Ur or even from Haran, but as someone belonging to the Land where YHWH is seen. This is a foundation principle: Israel is a "holy land"--a physical location that is tied to a spiritual one. Avraham's son Yitzhaq never left this land. Yitzhaq's son Yaaqov did, but he came back, retracing Avram's steps and becoming a Hebrew himself. He came to be known as Israel ("one who contends with Elohim") because he, too, was not satisfied until he could perceive YHWH. Once he did, the day of the loner was over, and what he was about was a people, because Israel was not just one man, but his 12 sons who became 12 tribes all headed to the same place.

A tribe means a confederation of more than one related family who intermarry among themselves to ensure the tribal heritage, as seen previously in Avram's own family. (Gen. 11:28-29) Yaaqov was sent back to Terakh's household (that of Avram's father) to find a wife. He was not to marry outside of these limits, for this family had at least left Ur to seek what YHWH had called them to.

Basic Building Blocks of Ancient Israel

(1) The Mishpakhah

This most basic component of the structure of Israelite society is the mishpakhah ("family" or "clan"). Another name is bayit, which means household. This would include slaves. There might be many family units within one household, but there was only one Av Bayit ("father of the household"). He is the leader or overseer, not just one among many equals. He was still part of the family, but there had to be someone responsible where "the buck stops". Everyone in the family is expected to put their weight behind his decisions. This is the system that YHWH prefers, as unpopular as it may seem today.

For Israelite society to work, there has to be an authoritative system and it has to be adhered to. Courts had to be established before our ancestors could enter the Land, and so it will be for us. We must respect the order YHWH has set up. We are commanded not to take our father and mother lightly so that He can let us stay in His land. (Ex. 20:12) Courts were built of the roshey avot mishpakah--heads of the fathers of the clans. What made YHWH send many prophets was that those in charge refused to take charge, preferring the ways they were comfortable with (their moledeth) to the ways of the mishpakah He had called them to.

For Avram and for his descendants who are now returning to their heritage from families that in recent centuries have not walked in his ways, the mishpakhah is different from the moledeth. The term mishpakhah comes from a root word meaning "to be bare", for these are the people to whom you can bare your soul--those who know "the real you". Their nakedness is yours, for if any member is vulnerable, all are. (Lev. 18:10) That is why if one has two coverings, he needs to give one of them to his fellow who has none.

Avram took along his wife--the other necessary component to form a new mishpakhah--and "the persons they had gained ", or "the life they had made". This new mishpakhah included some of his moledeth (Lot), so the two may overlap, but this is not guaranteed. The main focus is to be on where you are, not where you came from; if some of those with whom you grew up want to come along, all the better, but be sure they share the same vision. Avram trained all the members of his household, for he had a vision and had to spread it. But he still had no offspring; the ideal heir was his own seed. (Gen. 15:3) The firstborn is normally the heir, and this is how authority passes in the new moledeth, whose modern equivalent is the local congregation. This is our new family. After we have broken away from our native cultures and make the transition to being Israel again, this is the pattern into which we must be resolved. Even Yahshua passed authority to his next-younger physical brother when he left, for this was the order of ancient Israel.

Those who choose mishpakhah as Yahshua defines it over their own moledeth are the ones He deems worthy of His Kingdom. (Mat. 10:37; 12:47ff; Luke 14:25-26) Many building-blocks form a strong wall. The mishpakhoth will not be identical, but we have to make sure each fits together with the rest--that all the stones are truly the same mishpakhah, having the same goal, motives, and purpose.

The mishpakhah, Scripturally, is always patrilineal--it obtains its identity from the father. If someone becomes attached to a spiritual leader from a different tribe, he obtains a new "father" as far as his inheritance is concerned. He might not remain in the same moledeth.

There is rank in the biblical mishpakhah. The Av is given the highest honor, with much given to the Em (mother) as well. The firstborn son inherits the place of the Av, as well as the job of cohen (priest) in the family. He is given a double portion of the inheritance, because he is expected to give of himself more than the rest, for whom he is ultimately responsible. This is what Yahshua meant when he said the one who wants to be greatest must be the servant of all. The firstborn is only counted as from both the Av and Em of the mishpakhah--not one of the maidservants. The others born in the household rank next, then the "souls they have gained".

Also connected to the mishpakhah are any visitors they may have. The nomadic code of survival requires guests to be considered sacred for three days. No matter who they are, they are to be treated with the utmost kindness and provided with the best the household has to offer. (An extreme example of this is seen in Gen. 19:8.) Three days gives them enough time to be rehydrated or adequately nourished to continue on their journey. Then they are provided with an escort to the outermost boundaries of the host's territory (Gen. 18:16), unless the visitor wishes to stay longer to be taught by the host. Then he is expected to not merely respect the Av, but to follow any ground rules that have been established for that household. (On a wider scale, it is mandatory for such "strangers within the gate" to obey the Torah while within the Land of Israel.) Some will then choose to take the next step and become one of the "souls they have gained". (Again, on a wider scale, becoming part of Israel and thus able to inherit through the tribe to which they are attached.)

Why would one want to become part of such a bayit? There are many benefits. As the advertisment says, "Membership has its privileges." What are some of them?

   (1) Covering or protection: Remember, the term mishpakhah has to do with covering those who are bare. It was more obvious in a desert setting where the elements are harsh and thieves abound, but we have to realize that if we are without others who are seeking YHWH and have both a strong and honorable house, we are vulnerable to whatever is out there. The roof and walls both guard us and provide boundaries. Rather than being seen as something restrictive, as is common today, being part of a community with clear boundaries and a rigid authority structure guarantees that we are not "blown about by every wind of doctrine". Since Lot walked with YHWH, he provided the covering for an entire city. Without removing him, YHWH could not bring the necessary judgment. (Gen. 18-19)

   (2) Aid if someone makes war on us, as seen when Lot was captured by the kings that attacked S'dom and ‘Amorah. (Gen. 14) He was still considered part of Avram's mishpakhah, though he was not living directly with him. How wonderful it is to have someone whom you can trust, like Avram, who will pray for you when you are under spiritual attack as well.

   (3) Alliances with other households that one could not have on his own as an individual.

   (4) Access to talents and gifts that you as an individual do not possess. "The whole is greater than the sum of its parts."

   (5) The right of redemption: someone to stand up for justice for you even after you are dead--the goel dam (redeemer of blood). This closest kinsman acts on your behalf, but also for the sake of the land remaining in the same families. If you are not part of Israel, you have no redeemer, for Yahshua said He came only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (Mat. 15:24) While He redeems us as individuals, it is so we will return to being part of His household.

   (6) Honor: This is an undersold, much-maligned concept today, but one that is very biblical. (Eastern cultures have preserved it much better.) In 2 Shmuel 21, we see evil things taking place simply because one family (King Shaul's) broke with a promise made centuries before by Y'hoshua, but YHWH Himself looked after those to whom the promise was made. This dishonor had to be paid for dearly. The honor of the whole household depends on the Av (father) being strong. Those who had been under King Shaul--which was all of Israel--had to pay for this one man's breach of trust. An oath made within the household is binding on the whole household. Whatever affects one will affect everyone in the household, whether the matter is large or small. Everything we do will come to light eventually. We are meant to be provided for from a common source, eating the same food--that which the shepherd has already verified is not poisonous, rather than just feeding where we wish. Consider the benefit of the whole household before your own preferences. Besides, whatever is better for the whole will ultimately be of the best benefit to the individual as well. Remember this before binding yourself to anyone or anything outside the household with a promise. If possible, we should make no oaths to anyone else, for we can have no real relationship with anyone who is outside Israel. It is an unnecessary burden anyway. But be careful even when making oaths to others within the house that you are following the right order. We cannot say we trust YHWH but do not trust the system of authority He has put in place. We must never speak a disparaging word about another member of the household (especially a leader) to anyone outside the household, no matter how many internal disputes we may have. If we do, we prove to not even be "strangers within the gate", but thieves! Remember that "loose lips sink ships". As tent-dwellers, we have to look out for one another--to leave our own flocks to go rescue our neighbor's lost sheep. David was made king because he cared about the honor of YHWH's house enough to risk fighting Golyath. Pin'khas was given an eternal covenant of priesthood because he cared about the honor of YHWH's sanctuary. The honor of the individual depends on his doing what it takes to benefit the entire house.

Women are a major part of any household. The whole moledeth of the world came from Adam and Chavvah, but their true mishpakhah only included the line of Shem and Ever, and eventually only Israel. In a mishpakhah every woman is joined to a man. If she is not married, her father or brother has jurisdiction over her. The concept of not having a family or tribe is very modern. Anciently, no one could survive without attachment to a house. All are responsible to the head, but the man has no house without woman. Sects like the Essenes (or Shakers) die out if they wait for converts rather than building the house from within. A capable wife is the crown of her husband. (Prov. 12:4) Bringing him honor is part of her job description. The same needs to be true of YHWH's bride. The capable wife is not, like Jezebel, determined to be independent. There is no honor for a man whose wife is "mouthy" against him. Anyone whose opinion, even if harmless in isolation, gets in the way of the Av, is clouding the issue; this is tantamount to rebellion. As in the military, there is order of rank so everything can function smoothly. Other opinions are irrelevant unless asked for. Loudly expressing dissent is treason. If we take time to discuss the instructions instead of obeying, the enemy has time to surround us. Only the head of the household has the right to appeal to a higher commander. Rulings are absolute (which is why YHWH requires two witnesses before anyone is executed. The capable woman is influential, not domineering. She is neither self-determined nor weak-willed. I.e., it is not accomplished by false humility (letting herself be walked over), but by being valuable. (Prov. 31:10ff) She has the right balance, being under submission, but so skillful that her husband brags about her in the gates (the equivalent of a court of law or city council). Women who are successful in this sense will help rebuild Israel in our day. Bearing children also brings great honor, as with Yaaqov's wives.

Under Torah, a woman who murders can be executed, but it was more likely that her husband would be killed to avenge someone the wife inadvertently killed, as he is ultimately responsible for those in his house. The head of the mishpakhah is responsible for the unmarried women in the family. A foreigner can become an Israelite, especially women captured in war, as long as they put away their foreign ways. Being an Israelite has more to do with the Elohim that you serve than with bloodline. It is shameful to marry a woman who remains foreign, as Esau did. It brings dishonor to the whole nation. Such foreign wives are to be put away along with their children, who are also considered foreign since primarily the mother raised them. (Ezra 10) Women under a head can inherit and own property. Sarah owned her maidservant, as did Rachel and Leah. The dowry is not given to the bride's father or brothers, but to the bride herself as "savings" in case she should be divorced or widowed. In Yahshua's day Miryam sat at His feet (Luke 10:38ff)--an idiom for being one of His disciples--so it is acceptable for a woman to study Torah, whatever the traditions were in Yentl's Russia! While much energy is spent explaining away what Paul meant when he said, "Let a woman learn in silence and subjection" (1 Timothy 2:11), the emphasis should be on "let her learn"! One cannot learn much if he is doing the talking, and yes, Chavvah was the one who "screwed it up" for the whole human race, so she cannot be in authority, but when Paul says a woman should not speak I the assemblies (1 Cor. 14:34), the term really means "blurt out" whatever is "on her heart" or "speak her mind". Free-flowing emotion gets in the way of true learning. If the question is divisive, she should ask her husband at home, for he is her representative.

So women are seen as very important to the household. But there is a clear-cut difference between the roles of men and women. Women are not to rule over men. When YHWH says "women and children" are ruling His people (Yeshayahu/Isaiah 3:12), it is an insult to the men who are acting like women or immaturely. When YHWH insults Egyptians by calling them women (Yeshayahu 19:16), it is not that women are not valued, but it is dishonorable for a man to act as YHWH has designed women to act--and vice versa. They have the same goal, but are equipped differently. The woman has to keep the household functioning so men can go to war without concern for their households falling apart. A woman is truly mature when she can completely run her household, then be in complete submission to her husband without complaint when he returns. We all have to learn how to change our minds completely as soon as fuller instruction comes. This is easier to do when we can talk it out together an analyze it as well--that is true training.

One who besmirches the honor of a house must be punished, even if there is no actual injury. (Ex. 21:22) The husband, the head of the household, has title to his wife, so he is the one who demands the compensation. This is a concept that the modern world seldom understands. Scripturally, when one has title to another, it is for the sake of benevolence; one protects what he owns. Malevolent title does not really exist. The idea that power corrupts was not as important a consideration as the need to be under a covering so one is not vulnerable--especially a woman. If someone is not under someone's headship, she was considered abandoned; one could do whatever he liked with her. When she is part of something bigger than herself, if someone deals with her, he is up against all who back her up. (You can get the sense of this from Yeshayahu/Isa. 4:1) A woman who is part of a household has a name. Even if one was bought as a slave, being part of the household of David was very honorable. It was better to be a doorkeeper there than a free man elsewhere.

Servants are an important component of the household. In Hebrew the term is the same as for slaves. But in Israel this term does not mean what we in the West think of when we hear the word. Usually, unless captured in war, one became a slave to pay off a debt. This debt is not to diminish his dignity, but for the survival of his family. Slaves in Israel are treated well--like one of the family, and as well as any of the children who have not yet come of age. (Gal. 4:1) In fact, masters are commanded to treat slaves humanely. (Ex. 21; Lev. 25:39-40) After seven years, one is set free unless he chooses to stay, in which case he becomes permanently part of the household. (Ex. 21:6) Yet it is dishonorable to a family to have one's brother involuntarily serving in another house. If someone in the mishpakhah owes, the whole family is in debt, and one is attached to the creditor in a negative sense. So it is incumbent on the family members to do their best to buy him back. Yahshua redeemed the members of tribes other than his own, because no one in those tribes was in a position to do so after leaving the Covenant. But the debt does not just disappear; it is transferred. If one has to beg for food, he owes his host for it. The one who gets himself in trouble and is redeemed is indebted to the redeemer, who now owns him. Yahshua therefore has the right to tell us what to do, and by obeying we assume some of the debt He has incurred. The House of Yoseyf is under a huge debt to YHWH for living on His land without keeping His Torah; that was like a sharecropper getting another job but still wanting to live on the land for free; he is a thief! Avram purchased the "souls he had made"; the Av in the present-day mishpakhah "purchases" souls by laying down his life for the flock. While some might be considered mishpakhah rather than moledeth because they are of one mind, Yahshua stretched out His hand toward those He counted His family. Others may be true Israelites, but those who are "at hand" when we need them prove to be our true mishpakhah. One's student must be one who is actually in his house.

(2) Prophets and Kings

Avraham is the first one called a prophet by YHWH (Gen. 20:7), though Noakh acted in that role. In Scripture we see no record of His having spoken through anyone between Noakh and Avraham. Aharon was called Moshe's prophet (Ex. 7:1), though he was YHWH's as well. Moshe calls himself a prophet in Deut. 18:15. David was a prophet through some of his Psalms, such as 22, which foretell things about the Messiah, who is also called a prophet despite His other roles.

Thus the role of the prophet is to both hear and speak the words of YHWH. This includes both revealed and written instruction, as well as institutional wisdom that is based on Torah, in which rulings are made by a king, general, etc. to decide on the "how" of commands for which the Torah does not specify the method. Such rulings may vary from family to family or tribe to tribe, but are binding where decided by the one YHWH has put in authority on that level.

An older name for a prophet is a "seer". (1 Shmuel 9:9) But one who sees may or may not be a prophet. There are portals into the realm that is not bound by time which demons can reveal as well, though this is forbidden by Torah. (Deut. 18:11) A seer is most often sought out by individuals who want to know what is to come, while a prophet speaks on behalf of the people of Israel. (He speaks for YHWH to the people, but as when Y'hezq'el asks, "How long must we be punished?", he is also speaking to YHWH for the people.) YHWH intended to speak to Israel through prophets, not seers. A prophet does not foretell the future just to bring people comfort. "Receiving a word from YHWH" is not a fad or a "fix" to become addicted to. Be warned to get out of the orbit of that church-based entertainment. True prophets will not interrupt or contradict each other; if truly from YHWH, their word will flow together smoothly and give various angles on the same message. Like a surgeon, their words will cut deep and fix what is wrong with Israel, then heal it.

Sometimes they speak in riddles or parables to hide the message from those who are not meant to understand it. It is not intended for everyone. The more knowledge of Torah we store in our hearts, the better we will be able to understand when prophets speak in "spiritual vocabulary". We can tell the difference between a seer and a prophet also through the fact that once they heard the still, small voice of YHWH, all true prophets did something about it. Legitimately-revealed knowledge is to be acted upon. Prophets mediate for Israel in various ways--through instructing, correcting, ruling, reigning, warning, or delivering. A prophet is an intercessor, to the point where his own life does not really matter to him. When someone lays down his life for YHWH and His people, it is the prophet in him coming out, whatever his other roles may be. They often looked like fools, but they are equipped by the Ruakh to accomplish whatever they need to. He cannot be neutral in his mediation, however. He must be 100% for YHWH and 100% for Israel--as Israel is defined in the Torah.

YHWH planned to communicate through prophets, not seers. Moshe had established judges while still in the wilderness, but prophets were sent to bring special knowledge to Israel or direct us back to the Torah. He did not intend Israel to have a king until a particular point. He was intended to be Israel's King. But Israel demanded a king like other nations had, and sometimes YHWH gives us what we pester Him for so that we will be quiet and so that we will see how the things we desire often end up biting us. Israel was asking to be delivered again as Moshe had done, and since the tribes were not all acting in unity (but often formed alliances between several tribes against other tribes), our ancestors thought a common figurehead could accomplish this as it did for other nations. They also wanted to keep up appearances as a "real nation" in the eyes of others--much the way we see the modern state of Israel acting today.

After the king chosen by YHWH to fit the image Israel wanted in a king messed things up, YHWH put His real choice of a king in place. He showed which tribe He favored by placing Yehudah in a position of honor (and later Ephraim as well). But still Israel's kings tended to wander away from YHWh, so He had to keep sending prophets to correct their direction. David could not have survived without Nathan, because inherent in a king's heart is worldliness and a bit of arrogance, as well as the mundane concerns and worries of the kingdom. Nathan bowed to David, but David knew he was in the superior position in YHWH's eyes. David recognized that he deserved his correction, and YHWH loved him for it.

A certain amount of a king's decision are at his own pleasure; a prophet speaks only when YHWH tells him to. Sometimes YHWH pitted the words of one prophet against another to test someone's obedience to the revelation he had already been given, whether through Torah or through an ancestor's ruling. (Yirmeyahu/Jer. 35) One man lost his life because he trusted the word of a prophet that contradicted the instruction YHWH had given him earlier. (1 Kings 13) A prophet did not pass his position to his son the way a king or priest would.

In the days of the kings, it was common for someone to go see a prophet on the New Moon or Sabbath. (2 Kings 4:23) This suggests that people would assemble on those days to hear them teach. It was the job description of the priest to teach the Torah to the common people (Malakhi 2:7), but this may have been a rote teaching, whereas a prophet would teach the underlying meaning, as Yahshua did in the "Sermon on the Mount". A prophet's word should not be trusted until it can be proven to be based in Torah.

There is only one King left for Israel (Yahshua), and he is also called a prophet, priest, counselor. He is even called "everlasting father". This does not mean He is the same as YHWH the Father, but that from the point He was given authority forward, he is the head of all the household of Israel. We must distinguish between true ruakh and man-made spiritualization of Scripture. Yes, there are deeper levels of understanding literal Scripture, but in most cases even these had a much more everyday-life context in ancient Israel. They are a mystery if we do not have the Hebraic mindset. This is gained by living out the Torah and is best accomplished in community with others who know they are Israel. We cannot understand Yahshua unless we know the role of a king in Israel. Archaeological finds have taken away the legitimate excuse of ignorance in so many cases. Since YHWH's wrath departed from Ephraim, knowledge has increased exponentially, and understanding of these basic building-blocks of Israelite society and how they fit together are much more available than they were only a few years ago. The more like our ancient forebears we come to live, the better we will understand exactly what someone Scripture meant when he said it, for we will know it is speaking about us, as Israel.

(3) Other Types of Leaders

Moshe established rulers of 10, 50, 100, and 1000. As tribal territories were established, other types of leadership rose to prominence:

   * Z'kan (Strong's #2205: elder, ancient, literally bearded) -- those who can lead because of their long experience.

   * Sar (8269: prince, chief, captain, general) -- i.e., the one in charge.

   * Aluf (441: associate, one familiar, from the word for a tamed ox) -- this type of person is desirable as a guide.

   * Nasi (5387: one who rises up or is exalted) -- possibly those that rose to positions they did not inherit.

In a family or clan, there were elders who were spokesmen for the whole group. The tribe's leadership would be made up of these. Since Israel's land was divided according to tribe and clan, the inhabitants of a given city would usually be related by blood.

One's place in Israelite society is based on genealogy. People did not have last names like we do today. They were called "Ben (son of) …" What followed might be their immediate father, but often many relatives were called after a more prominent ancestor further back. The descendants of Solomon went by the "House of David"; despite Solomon's international renown, David was considered a better example of what they wanted to be known for. It was common to be adopted into another family; even if one was only a doorkeeper there in the House of David, this held high honor. If he committed himself permanently to this house, his ancestry was considered to have changed--no light thing, for if he brought dishonor to the family, he could be killed. Our ancestors saw no difference between a blood brother and an adoptive brother. Paul addresses those attaching themselves to Israel who, like us today, might not know how their ancestors fit into the tribal structure. Many who were once outsiders will be included among the tribes of Israel. (Y'hezq'El 47:23)

(4) Tribal Life

There are two words for tribe (shevet, 7626, and matteh, 4294). They seem totally synonymous. Both mean a branch (which part of Yaaqov's family tree we sprout from) or a rod, and by extension, a scepter which symbolized their rulership (that which corrects us). A rod is also used for measuring, and indeed we must make our decisions in light of what tribe we are from, for each have their own giftings and responsibilities. The Rekhabites (Yirmeyahu 35:6-11) even refused invitations from a priest and a prophet of YHWH--while in one of the parts of the Temple that most people were never allowed into-- to be obedient to their ancestor, and YHWH commended them for it. The Rekhabites are a "holdover" from an early stage of Israel's history. One of their prominent ancestors told them to live this lifestyle because he foresaw that it would be best for them, because it reminded them that they were sojourners. That lifestyle was one of growing no crops and building no houses, but living in tents. In other words, they were nomads. Anciently, there were three levels of nomads. As we know which of them someone in Scripture was, the more sense we can make of what he said:

   (1) Nomads in the purest sense are camel-breeders who travel great distances looking for a place to graze them. They have little contact with settled people. They recognize how tent-dwelling keeps YHWH's people pure. They have no security, but live from day to day. They, of all people, know best that they themselves are the real house. The Rekhabites were this type of nomad. Some picturesque Hebrew vocabulary comes from this stage in our history: the word for "move on" means to pull up stakes; the word for "stay" means to stretch out; the word for "safety" is described by the ropes being tight. There are hundreds of thousands left today living this lifestyle among the Bedouins (descendants of Avraham and his third wife, Qeturah).

   (2) Flock nomads raise only sheep and goats. Sheep eat the roots of their pasture, so they must move on to other areas depending on access to water, which often was tied to the time of year. They would often stay in one place just long enough for crops to grow. During some seasons they might live in houses, but even after we received the Land, we remained semi-nomadic, for the deeded lots of land were quite large. The only way to care for a flock long-term is to live out among them; tents are most practical. Even when reaping crops, which must be done as soon as they ripen lest birds or insects devour them, reapers live in a sukkah right in the field. (Yeshayahu 1:8) To take someone's land, you must kill them, but it was common to raid someone's possessions in a surprise attack. It was considered a sport to be able to steal from other peoples, and one is considered more successful the fewer people he has to kill in the process. David did this while running from Shaul; it is only a sin if it is against one's own people. During the time of the judges, when Israel's unity broke down, one tribe frequently raided another.

   (3) Flock and cattle nomads did more farming, so they had to settle near a more constant supply of water, though as we see in the cases of both Yoseyf's brothers and David, they would be based in one spot for a long time, but still take the flocks far afield. If there was a famine (as in Yaaqov's day and Avraham's), they would move the whole community to another base; we were still competing for resources. Water is what people fight over most, for we cannot have crops, animals, or even life without it. (Gen. 13:5ff; 21:25-32; 26:17-25) To take a city by siege, one only had to cut off its water supply, so the water source was well-guarded. Water is a picture of Torah, and like Yitzhaq, who reopened his father's wells that the Philistines had stopped up, we need to let the waters flow freely again and ensure that a source of this supply is hidden within us. (Ps. 119:11)

Wilderness (midbar) is not always, but often, synonymous with desert. It is any uninhabited place, but the root word is d'var, which means "word". In the wilderness, YHWH gave His words to Israel. He saw it as the place He had betrothed her in her innocence (Yirmeyahu 2:2-31; Amos 2:10; 3:15) But once she arrived in the Land, she turned her back on that place He had such fond memories of, thinking of the desert as a frightening place--the home of animals associated with demons. (Yeshayahu 13:20; 34:8ff) There, she had no choice but to trust Him and stay very close to Him because she was surrounded by threats. (Hoshea 13:4ff) He came to loathe her cities because of how secure (and more distant from Him) they made her feel. (Amos 6:7ff) So He will put us back in a place of utter dependence on Him again. (Hoshea 2:14-23) He will even makes us live in tents again! (Hos. 12:8-9) We get a taste of this at Sukkoth each year, but we need to learn to be comfortable wherever His presence is, for His comfort zone is more deeply, permanently secure, though it rarely appears to be. If we follow Him this closely, He will enable us in ways no one else knows. (Psalm 23:5) Moshe told Israel to return to their tents to await YHWH's instruction. (Deut. 5:30) To hear from Him, we have to put ourselves in a position of vulnerability. When Israel became settled and became specialized through division of labor, the standard of living rose, but we forgot how to be invested in our flocks and our brothers--our real wealth. A life of ease tends to turn us away from dependency on YHWH. To get our attention, He may make life hard on us again. When we live in tents, it is easy to pick up and move, as Yaaqov did. Egypt tried to break us away from being shepherds; to jerk us back out of it, He first took Moshe and taught him to be a shepherd because no one in Israel remembered how to be nomads. Even when Yaaqov built a house, he still lived in tents, like some Bedouins today. Once we inhabited many towns, the cohesiveness of Israel was lost. Our priorities diverged and the authority system weakened. How could Y'hoshua, who did not live where they did, know that his commands would fit their situation? But the later Yahshua is returning us to being one household again. His rod of iron will leave no room for anyone to say, "The Torah just doesn't suit me!"

(5) Blood Relations and Redemption

A woman called her husband ba'al (master or owner). It is no wonder YHWH felt such a jealousy when His bride started worshipping an idol by that name! In a family, the father had absolute authority which went even beyond "Do what I say" to the right to sell someone in the household as a slave so the house as a whole could survive. The birthright is the right to head the household after the father dies. Yaaqov's dilemma was that his brother was to head up the family, but lacked the maturity and commitment to do so properly. In ancient societies, there were three ways of reckoning lineage:

   (1) Matriarchal Lineage: A child is considered to belong to the family of his mother and her social group. This was most common in small-scale agricultural communities, though modern Jews count lineage this way due to a history of many illegitimate children fathered during persecutions who nonetheless were taught Judaism by their mothers. There is some indication of the elevation of women in Lavan's household from the fact that Lavan spoke before his father did, indicating that less respect was granted the father there.

   (2) Patriarchal Lineage: Traced through the father. This was most common in pastoral societies. The eldest son becomes the head of the household when his father dies. Avram did not leave Haran until his father died (Gen. 11:32-12:4), indicating that he had no authority in the household until that time.

   (3) Fratriarchal Lineage: Headship passes to a man's eldest brother when he dies, taking precedence over the man's own sons. This pattern was common in the monarchies of Europe. While ancient Israel was typically patriarchal, it reverted to a fratriarchal pattern if a man had no sons to succeed him. Yahshua passed his position of leadership in the family to his next brother, Yaaqov (James). Levirate (brother-in-law) marriage is also a remnant of the fratriarchal pattern in Israel.

The redemption of a relative who sells himself into slavery to pay a debt (Lev. 25:47-49) retains some fratriarchal order of precedence: a brother has the first right of redemption, then his uncle (brother of his father), then his uncle's son, then if none of them can afford to buy him back, any blood relative may do so. The one who redeems is called the go'el. He would also redeem land that had to be sold away to pay debts, as we see in the book of Ruth. Naomi had already had sons, so no one had to redeem her, but since Ruth had joined herself to Naomi's family, the redeemer of her land also had to fulfill the levirate role of raising up a son for Ruth's deceased husband. The pattern was not codified until the Torah, but it was the expected practice in Israel much earlier. When Yehudah's son died childless (Gen. 38), Yehudah gave his son's wife to his next eldest son. When he too died, Yehudah was afraid to give her to his last remaining son. So in order to raise up a son for her husbands, she resorted to pretending to be a prostitute. When she was found to be pregnant, Yehudah had the authority to command her to be burned (a right the Torah later restricted to the priests alone), but when she proved that her twin sons were really his, he counted her as righteous since she had been concerned to raise up progeny for his own sons.

People were bound together by holding an elohim in common. Names were based on their elohim's name, as in Sh'mu-el, Eli-yahu, Yah-shua. Kinship was also based on being from the same geographical region. (e.g., Judges 19:16.) But the most common thing that connects people is blood. Blood gives one the right to be the redeemer, but the one who redeems also becomes our brother. If someone joined another house in order to uphold its honor, he was considered to have the same father as those naturally born into that house. This gives us many insights into events in Judges, Kings, and Chronicles. It also shows us the how of Yahshua's reconciling us through His blood. (Col. 1:20). Blood redemption is not a Christian concept, but a much older Hebraic one. Job was not a slave, but knew he needed redemption. (19:25) David called YHWH His Redeemer, who brought him into His house and made him an heir to honor. (Ps. 19:14) When we sold ourselves to those around us, YHWH's indictment was that we took on their ways. (Lev. 25:47) None of the Northern Kingdom's immediate relatives were left in a position to redeem us; the closest of kin that were still recognizeable was Yehudah. He is our kinsman, which in Hebrew would simply be akh (brother). Though we cannot clearly trace our blood connection to Israel, Yahshua gave us a "transfusion" of His blood and extended His family honor to us. We take it into ourselves, not just as a covering. (Yochanan 6:54-55) He is now the firstborn of many brothers (Rom. 8:29)--a fratriarchal redeemer! We can be joint heirs because we now have the same Father (Yochanan 20:17), if we are concerned for the honor of His family. It is sharing (partaking) in Messiah's blood that makes us one community. (1 Cor. 10:16) It is His blood that brought us near when once we were aliens from the covenant. (Eph. 2:11ff) We are now kinsmen again, for we have common blood!

YHWH, our true Redeemer, is strong; He will plead the case of both Ephraim and Yehudah. (Yirmeyahu 50:33ff) Yahshua is His messenger, endued with the full authority of the One he represents--an important Hebraic concept thath clears up the many misinterpretations of who He is. The covenant is with those who turn from transgression when the Redeemer comes. (Yeshayahu 59:19) As we walk in the light (the Torah), we have fellowship and are cleansed from sin by His blood--that is, becoming His kinsmen and one another's. (1 Yoch. 1:7ff) And we will get our Land back as well! (Y'hezq'el 34:13-14)

(6) Marriage

A mishpakhah must begin with one man and one woman, but there can be more than one wife in a household. There is no ancient Hebrew term for polygamy, because it was normative until at least the time of the Judges, and still common thereafter. It is still practiced today among Bedouins and Arab cultures and Jews living within them. The Talmud says a king should not have more than 18 wives (since the Torah specifies that he is not to multiply wives to himself, as Shlomo did and thereby made major compromises with idolatry), and a common man should not have more than four.

# Why would a man have more than one wife? If the first wife cannot bear children If she bears no son to carry on the father's name, care for his mother when aged, and be a priest to the family.

# To be able to have more children--highly-valued because with many sons there is more protection

# To give every woman a covering when there are more women than men. (The default covering was her father, and if he died, her eldest brother or the eldest son of her father. In our day, this position would fall to the head of the congregation.) There are some problems inherent in polygamy exemplified in Scripture. There tends to be animosity and political jockeying between the various wives. Questions arise over the priority of inheritance the children of each of the wives. The Torah indicates the kind of treatment each of the wives in a plural marriage must receive. The first wife's rights can never be diminished if her husband marries another. (Ex. 21:10) A later wife can also not be given priority over the first. (Mal. 2:14-15) The firstborn of a less-preferred wife must still be given his special privileges. (Deut. 21:17)

There are restrictions in the Torah on whom a man may take as a wife. (Lev. 18:5ff) He may not marry (or have sexual relations with):

   * his mother or any wife of his father

   * a daughter of either of his parents

   * his grandchild

   * a stepsister, half-sister, or sister-in-law

   * an aunt from either of his parents' families

   * any daughter or granddaughter of his wife from her previous marriage

   * his wife's sister while his wife is still living

   * any woman who is someone else's wife (Ex. 20:17)

Priests may not marry any non-virgin except the widow of another priest; no divorcees. (Lev. 21:7) Levites also may not marry outside their tribe. Other women in Israel can marry into another tribe unless they have an inheritance since they have no brothers. (Num. 36)

Since men and women were segregated much of the time, how did men in ancient Israelite society meet women whom they might wish to marry? They could meet at the feasts to which all able-bodied men were required to attend, but which most women who were free or able to attend would attend as well. They might meet while working in the fields (the way Boaz met Ruth). Many met their wives at wells. (Moshe, Yitzhaq's representative, and Yaaqov) This also highlights the fact that many unmarried women were shepherdesses, though not every shepherd was a woman. Since wells were held in common by several local clans, meeting a wife at a well often meant people married their distant cousins. There was a pattern of marrying relatives in Avraham, Yitzhaq, and Yaaqov's case, partly because of the negative religious influence others around them would have had. (Ex. 34:11 forbids us to marry pagans, for they will tend to turns us away from YHWH, as seen in Deut. 7:3. There are spirits attached to any cultural heritage, and they will ensnare those who become united to one who still practices them. Usually the woman's practice wins out, since women are by nature more spiritual than men. A man from outside Israel may not marry an Israelite woman unless he becomes part of Israel, but he cannot just join the nation at large; he must attach himself to a particular, already-established house. He might only have been an Israelite for a few years, but if he is committed to that household, its honor extends to him and no one can ever remind him that he was once not an Israelite.

A man is said to "take" (choose, receive, or acquire) a wife. (Deut. 24:1) The wife calls her husband ba'al (owner), as he has title over her. That means her children are his, and she serves his house, but he does not have a right to sell her like any other possession he owns (though he can sell one of his children to pay a debt). A man may purchase another man's daughter to be his wife, but if he does he is never permitted to divorce her or diminish her inheritance, no matter how many other wives he takes.

The bride price (mohar) does not buy her. It is paid to her father (to whom the proposal is made for marriage rather than to the woman herself), but it belongs to the wife as "insurance" in case she is ever widowed or divorced. (Gen. 31:14-16) It is stored up or invested by her family until such a time as it is needed. The minimal bride price (paid for humiliating a virgin) is 50 sheqels of silver. (Deut. 22:28ff) The bride price might not be monetary. Kalev offered his daughter to whomever would capture a city (Josh. 15:16; Judges 1:12), and David paid Sha'ul more than his asking price of 100 Philistine foreskins! Yaaqov provided seven (and, as it turned out, really 14) years of labor for his father-in-law as Rakhel's bride price. Additional gifts were often given to the family of the bride to compensate them for the loss of her help in the household. (Gen. 24:52ff; 34:12)

The proper protocol was that the groom-to-be proposed marriage to the woman's father, who then discussed the matter with all her brothers and made inquiries to screen him before it would ever go any further. If they all agreed, her parents would then ask the woman herself if she was interested in marrying the man. Then the choice was up to her, though arrangements had often already been made.

There are two stages to a Hebrew marriage. The first, betrothal (aras), is like engagement, but much more binding. The woman is already "under contract" and responsible to be faithful. Neither party can back out of the arrangement without deep dishonor to both families. The second stage is the wedding (be'ulah), when the husband has the right and responsibility to consummate the marriage.

Betrothal and Wedding Ceremonies

(1st stage) Betrothal (aras)

The Talmud says that the minimum age for a male to marry is 13, and 12 for a female--the same as the traditional age for bar or bat mitzvah. This was from very close to the time of Yahshua.

One who is betrothed to a wife but has not yet taken her may be excused from the army. (Deut. 20:7) This is a privilege one is not even given if he has a newborn child. Later the Torah added that one should not be called into the army or any civic duty for a year after his marriage. (Deut. 24:5)

The betrothed woman is considered his wife, and if she is found willingly consenting to lie with another man, she and the other man are both to be executed (Deut. 22:22-27), for she belongs to another and has broken this covenant to which YHWH Himself has been a witness. (Mal. 2:14; Prov. 2:17) The groom, however, is not considered her husband until the second stage of the marriage; her father is still her ba'al until that point.

Joseph Good notes that when Yahshua told His disciples, "In My Father's house are many chambers. I am going to prepare a place for you; I will come again and receive you to Myself…" (Yochanan 14:2-3), He was speaking in the terminology of the betrothal ceremony. The ceremony also included the presentation of tokens of intent, such as a ring and bracelets. (Gen. 24) The bride is then veiled to let all know that she is now set apart to a ba'al. This stage of the marriage could last up to 13 years, but usually was one to two years--until the groom's father determined that all was ready, which meant the groom himself did not know exactly when it would end either. (Compare Mat. 24:36.) He would be building the khuppah (wedding canopy) and the kheder (bridal chamber), and the bride would be learning to make herself beautiful for her husband and how to be a capable wife.

(2nd stage) Consummation (be'ulah/kiddushin) One thing that stands between the two ceremonies (aras and be'ulah) is celebration by the people. One enters the covenant by an oath, though in Scripture the marriage is seen more as civil (before the people of Israel) than religious as such, though YHWH certainly has a hand in it all. Those He joins together, no one is to separate. (Mat. 19:6) Yahshua cited this concept to show that some of those supposedly most religious were actually entering into marriages for reasons of political advancement rather than marrying the ones YHWH had chosen as best-suited for them.

Both bride and groom would wear white. The bride wore a crown of gold, and the groom a garland of olive branches that is placed on him by his mother. (Song of Songs 3:11) He is "on display" before the other women.

The bride also wears a veil, for she is seen as a queen, to be most highly honored on that day. (Song 4:1-3) If she is not the first wife, she has certain rights--to receive the same ring and the same amount of jewelry as other wives. She is brought in wearing embroidered clothes, accompanied by unmarried companions with gladness and rejoicing. (Psalm 45:14) The groom comes out from his father's house, where there has already been some measure of celebration, in a procession with his friends and brothers and much baggage, to be greeted by musicians. (1 Maccabees 9:39)

Joseph Good adds that the Passover was YHWH's covenant meal with Israel. Moses led them away from one master to another. The blood of the lamb was the bride price. Mt. Sinai, being lifted up off the ground so they could go UNDER it (Ex. 19:17) was their khuppah.

A written contract called the ketubah is signed.

There were two witnesses at the wedding. (Compare Z'kharyah 4; Rev. 11:3.) One (much like today's "maid of honor") escorts the bride to the khuppah, and the other (much like today's "best man") accompanies the groom.

The father of the groom gives a feast for his son (Mat. 22:2). The bride is entitled to a feast that lasts seven days. (Gen. 29:27) If someone is being honored very highly, the feast can last 14 days. (Tobit 8:20)

On the first night of the feast (Gen. 29:23), the couple goes into the wedding chamber for the yikhad (consummation--becoming one). Now he is finally her ba'al. The "friend of the bridegroom" (Yoch. 3:29-30) stands outside and listens for the groom to call out to him that the marriage has become complete. He then relays this information to the guests who are already celebrating at the father's house (Yoch. 14:2), and of course this takes the celebration to a higher level.

The laws in Torah regarding borrowers are very similar to the mohar (bride price), because the groom is essentially borrowing the bride from her family. Like a bank that holds the note for a loan that is not yet paid off, the family holds the groom responsible to take proper care of their daughter. They could "recall" her if they feel she is not being treated rightly; the children that result from the marriage belong to the father regardless. The parents keep the proof of the woman's virginity at the time of the yikhad--the blood-stained sheet. If the husband, discontent with the wife for some other reason, falsely accuses her of not having been a virgin at the time of the wedding, the parents can bring the blood as proof. (Deut. 22:13-15) It was common to have the legal marriage document signed only by the male, according to archaeological findings at Elephantine and around the Dead Sea, though a few signed also by the wife have been found. Usually all it had to say was, "I take this woman for my wife" (with both of their names). Merely "taking" a woman without a legal document may be what makes the difference between her being a concubine and being a full-fledged wife. If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed, he is required to marry her. (Ex. 22:16)

Annulment or Divorce

A get (bill of divorce) is required to annul even a betrothal, because it, too, is legally binding (Yirmeyahu 3:8), and without it, a woman could not remarry; with it, she could. The simple language of the ancient divorce certificate is found in Hoshea 2:2, in which YHWH is divorcing the Northern Kingdom: "She is not my wife; I am not her husband." A scroll of divorce is needed for evidence. (Yeshayahu 50:1) The bride price then becomes her alimony.

If a woman was married because her husband first raped her, he is never permitted to divorce her (Deut. 22:28), for he humiliated her and married only for selfish reasons, rather than with the benefit of the whole community in mind. If a man made a false accusation that he did not find his wife a virgin when they married may also never divorce her. (Deut. 22:18)

How seriously YHWH takes adultery (which always involves another man's wife, as contrasted with fornication, which can involve an unmarried woman) is seen in Genesis 20:3ff and 26:7ff, where YHWH was ready to destroy a king and all his subjects because he had taken Avraham's wife into his harem, though he did not know she was h is wife. In adultery, both parties are to be stoned to death. (Lev. 20:10; 22:23) When one is suspicious that his wife has committed adultery, a test is administered (Numbers 5), but if she admits to wronging her husband, there is no requirement in Scripture that one divorce her, except in the case of a priest's daughter, in which case she has profaned her father and must be burned alive (Lev. 21:9). This is fornication, for adultery would require that she be stoned.

There are many warnings in Proverbs about the "strange woman" who forsakes her companion. (e.g., 2:16ff). She is compared to a deep pit and a narrow well--both very hard to get out of once entered. (23:27-28) Chapters 1 through 9 compare the righteous union that leads to life with this path, which leads to death. Wisdom is personified as a woman (1:20), and the strange woman also symbolizes one who turns away from the Torah, for adultery is a common way YHWH describes His people's idolatry. Paganism is a flattering adulteress who is beautiful, but will destroy us.

If someone divorces his wife and marries another, he cannot go back and take the first wife again if the second marriage ends. (Deut. 24:1-4) This is one of many things YHWH says would make Israel common like all the other nations rather than set apart. But if the woman never actually married another man, or if the first marriage was annulled in the betrothal stage, before they had consummated the marriage, the first husband can take her back. This theme figures importantly in the saga of YHWH and Israel, for like Gomer, Hoshea's wife, she has "fooled around" on Him, but never actually married any of her lovers, so YHWH does plan to take her back, as he says so often throughout all of the prophets.

Levirate Marriage (Yavam)

The brother of a man who has died with no son to carry on his name must marry his widow. (Deut. 25:5) The first son born to them is considered his brother's seed and takes on his name to perpetuate his inheritance. (25:6) It is not literally his brother's seed, of course, but is the closest thing possible, since it is their common father's seed. The fact that the position is filled is more important than whether or not the connection is physical or not. The importance of the seed being carried on is alluded to in Psalm 22:29-30, where it says "even he who did not keep his own soul alive, a seed will serve him and be accounted to the Master as a generation." In other words, the descendants of those who do not live to see the Kingdom will take their place before the Messianic king, serving to represent the names of those from whom they came.

YHWH killed a man who refused to fulfill this obligation to his brother. (Gen. 38:9ff)

If there is no brother-in-law, the deceased husband's uncle is the next of kin, then his uncle's son. (Lev. 25:49) We see this "nearer kinsman" issue in the book of Ruth, as Boaz had agreed to serve as Ruth's redeemer, but a certain Ploni Almoni had the first right to redeem both Naomi's land and provide a son for Ruth's deceased husband. Through levirate marriage, an outsider like Ruth who married into Israel could also remain part of Israel.

If a widow had no family to go back to, but had a son, his inheritance would serve to support her as well. If she had only daughters, the land inheritance would be lost unless her daughters marry within the tribe to protect the inheritance. The Land was divided in a specific way for a particular purpose, and YHWH did not want it to move from tribe to tribe. The brother-in-law who fulfills his role also ensures that she remains attached to her late husband's land. If she was not attached to some head-of-household, anyone could take advantage of her. There were no police as such. The males of her family would serve in this role. If she is childless and without a covering of any kind, she is a "true widow" (e.g., 1 Tim. 5:5-9) has YHWH's special concern (Ex. 22:22) and would be cared for by the people of Israel through the mediation of the Levites. A priest's widowed daughter with no child would go back to her father's household. (Lev. 22:13)

(7) Family Institutions

The Position of Women

Calling their husband "ba'al" (owner) or "adon" (master) kept her position in perspective and helped her surrender to him according to the Torah.

In ancient Israelite society, women were never permitted to divorce their husbands, or even leave them. If abused, her (father's) family could defend or avenge her. Religious authorities could beat lawbreakers (and some still do). Without a supportive community to hold her husband accountable and pressure him to treat her rightly, she had no recourse, for the cohesion of the overall society is preserved by keeping everyone in order under a clear chain of command. This also establishes the parallel that Israel has no grounds to divorce YHWH no matter what He brings on us.

A male indentured servant goes free every seventh year. (Shemoth/Ex. 21:1-11) A female servant does not. However, 21:8 says, "If she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, he must allow her to be redeemed; he has no authority to sell her to a foreign nations, since he has dealt treacherously with her." This strongly suggests that for a woman to be sold as a servant, she had to become a literal part of the family--either the wife of the purchaser or of his son. (v. 9) Essentially she is surrendering her bride price to the one she will work for. He is not permitted to treat her any worse than any other wives he may have. If he does, she is permitted to leave freely. But notice that she is only eligible for ransom if she displeases him. She may not be ransomed by her family otherwise.

A woman captured in war may be taken as a wife, but she must have her hair (her glory) and her fingernails (symbol of her past culture) removed, and she must be allowed 30 days to mourn the loss of her family. (D'varim/Deut. 21:10ff) If he ends up not being pleased with her, he may let her go free but may not sell her or treat her harshly, because she has been humiliated. (21:14)

A woman's status was greatly enhanced as she bore children (as we see in Rachel and Leah's competition), especially sons, who are the heirs and buildingblocks of Israelite society. (Ruth 4:11) If a man has more than one wife, and the firstborn is the son of a less-favored wife, he is still responsible to leave the normal inheritance of the firstborn (double portion) to him.

A woman only receives an inheritance if she has no brothers. (BaMidbar/Num. 27, 36)

If a wife was unable to bear children, she had the right to give her maidservant to her husband to bear him children in her name. In that case, the maidservant was legally childless; the children belonged to the actual wife. (Seen in the case of Bilhah and Zilpah, handmaids of Rachel and Leah)

If she makes an unwise vow, her husband (if married) or father (if not) may annul it on the day he hears about it; otherwise he is responsible to see that she fulfills it. If she cannot, he must. A widow or divorcee is fully responsible for vows she makes. (BaMidbar 30:3-6)

The ultimate definition of what a woman is to a man is in B'reyshith/Gen. 2:18. It says she is a helper suitable for him--that is, corresponding to him, a counterpart that "opposes" him by "leaning against him" to support him and helps him stay balanced. This shows that YHWH does not intend for any of to be loners. It is the first thing He says was not right about His creation. Her strengths must be in his areas of weakness to make up for the gaps in his strength; if they are both alike, they will compete with each other for supremacy. (3:16)

Widows

YHWH expresses a particular concern that justice be done to widows and fatherless. (It does not say orphans, because even if they still had a mother, she might not be able to support them, having no real power in society.) We are strictly warned not to pervert justice for them in any way, because they are so vulnerable. (D'varim 10:18; 24:17) Corners of the grainfields and stalks dropped are to be left for them to glean. The same held true for some of the olives on the tree and grapes on the vine. They were not just brought to the widows; having to go work for it kept them healthy and gave them the dignity of at least having harvested it themselves.

If they were unable to work, food was still not just brought to them at home; they were designated a place to sit, stationed at a public place where others could come make their donations and be blessed in the giving. (We see an example of this in the lame man who sat every day by the gate called Beautiful, where Kefa and Yochanan met him and gave him the gift of being able to work again. One was only licensed to beg if there was nothing else he could do. This was not dishonorable, but rather was an open door for Israel to do the right thing. If there is any way one can work and he does not, receiving public welfare only undermines the integrity of the community.)

In the diaspora, where many communities were in urban settings, Sha'ul/Paul drew some parallel principles from these practices, which he established as rulings for believers in messiah. (1 Tim. 5:3ff) Young widows are not to be supported by the community coffer; they are to remarry. (Marriage is assumed in this culture.) Older widows are to be cared for by their own family. If they have no family at all, then the community supports them if they have proven deserving by their past service to their family or community. This way everyone remains responsible. If there is any way someone else can be taking care of them, they are not enrolled on the public dole list (v. 9), which was administered at the synagogue or other civil meeting place. This list was only for qualified widows, fatherless, blind, deaf, or lame.

Children (Yeladim)

To not have children (by choice) was considered equivalent to murder. The first commandment to the animals, Adam, and Noakh was "be fruitful and multiply". Most ancient polytheistic peoples had one elohim dedicated specifically to fertility, and people did strange things to appease her in order to guarantee fertility for themselves or their land. Sometimes they offered food. Sometimes they presented carved likenesses of the goddess to the temple. Sometimes they performed sexual rites with the priests or priestesses. Large stones were stood up outside the temples as phallic symbols, and when sun-worshipping priests had favor with Constantine, he chose them to teach "Christianity" to their constituency, and they continued to use the phallic symbols to identify a place of worship. It was later moved to the roof for greater visibility, to become known as steeples.

Only Israel was monotheist at that time. As for everything else, Israel was to look to YHWH for the fertility that the land, animals, and people needed. He promised that if we did things His way, none of us would ever miscarry (Ex. 23:25-26) and that none among us or our livestock would be barren. (Deut. 7:14) This was a huge blessing, but our attitude today has shifted 180º from that viewpoint, so that we seek to develop more and more ways to remove fertility! Sterility carried a great stigma, whereas to have a child in old age was counted a supreme blessing. Most of the names of the tribal patriarchs are related to the blessing their birth would bring.

Having a son was considered important for many reasons: The father's name is perpetuated, which would not be the case with a daughter, for she will leave the home and become part of another's household to perpetuate her husband's name. A son protects his family's possessions and lands, for if someone has no heir, it seems as if YHWH is taking back His blessings. Sons are a way of extending one's life, for they are seen as extensions of oneself. What my son accomplishes, I am seen as having done. He must also uphold his father's reputation.

Sons usually carried on the same trade as their fathers. That this practice also carried on into very recent years is shown by surnames like "Baker", "Smith", "Miller", or "Cooper". This was their name because it was what they did, and sons were generally expected to learn that family trade.

Childbirth

If a child is born "on the knees of another", this is an idiom for adoption, but often they literally got into this position using a birthing stool to allow the newborn to actually pass between the legs of the adoptive mother. (Gen. 30:3) In Mesopotamia, women in labor crouched over benches made of bricks and stones. There is an opening in the bench, and the midwife crouches in front of it and catches the baby as it is born. A similar symbolism could be practiced by adoptive fathers. (Gen. 48:12; 50:23) It was considered an honor for a tribal chief, for example, to have his wife adopt a servant's child, because he would then have a higher place in society, though his parents were usually the ones to actually rear him.

The prophets often use childbirth as an object lesson for YHWH's dealings with Israel, showing that men, too, were very familiar with women's painful experience of the birth process. He speaks of bringing distress on people that cannot be ignored, like birth pangs. (Yeshayahu 13:5-8; 37:3; Yirmeyahu 4:30-31; 6:24; 2 Kings 19:3; Hos. 13:13, 21; Rev. 12:2, etc.)

At birth, a child had his umbilical cord cut, was washed in water, then rubbed with salt (to draw pores shut, make him cry to get his lungs functioning well, and possibly to toughen his skin against the harsher climate he lived in), then wrapped in cloths (Y'hezq'el 16:4; Iyov 38:8) --not one large cloth, but tightly with many strips so he almost appeared mummified. This may have felt more like the womb to the infant. Males are to be circumcised on the eighth day. (Gen. 21:4; more on this later.)

When the child was weaned (typically at 3 years old), there was a great feast. (Gen. 21:8)

Birth Order

We can glimpse the importance of birth order in the account of Yoseyf and his brothers. (Gen. 43:33)

The birthright is the right to inherit the father's authority. When the father dies, the eldest son becomes the head of the household, and receives twice the inheritance of the other children, unless he does something to forfeit his rights; then it passes to the second son. Or, as in Esau's case, it can be sold. (Gen. 25:31ff) In Israel the right of the throne went to Yehudah (the line through whom Yahshua came), because his three older brothers lost their rights for various reasons. Yoseyf, however, received the birthright, being the eldest of Yaaqov's other wife. (1 Chron. 5:1-2)

The firstborn receives a double portion since he is the "beginning of his father's strength". (Gen. 49:3) So an inheritance had to be divided by the number of sons one has--plus one. With this extra portion came the responsibility of upholding the family's welfare if they should ever fall into poverty or debt. YHWH upholds the right of the firstborn even if his mother is not his father's favorite wife. (D'varim/Deut. 21:15-17) This inheritance is slightly different from the birthright, which has to do with being the priest to the family.

The firstborn is dedicated to YHWH since YHWH killed the firstborn in Egypt for Israel's sake. (Ex. 13:2ff) This does not mean he is sacrificed as the idolaters did. In fact, He said anyone who does this must be put to death by his own family. (Lev. 20:2ff) The deity He specifically mentions in this connection is Molekh, which means "the one who rules". The modern equivalent of this would be turning our children over to the "powers that be" or in ways that would make "the system" think they own them, when in fact they belong to YHWH and Israel. Another parallel would be letting the children be the ones that rule--something they are not capable of doing, yet which the world wants to "empower" them to do.

Rather, YHWH says we can redeem the firstborn unless we wish to let them serve Him for life as Hannah did with Shmu'el. Otherwise, the Levites substitute for them, but there is a price to pay for this. (Num. 3:12) YHWH does not allow us to delay in bringing the ransom price. (Ex. 22:29; 34:20) If one is born a descendant of Levi and especially of Aharon, he has a privileged and responsible position that everyone else in Israel knows they do not have. He is a servant of YHWH, and with that comes special honor. The lines are clear. He put strengths and weaknesses in each tribe for different purposes. People today believe they have more authority than they actually do, but this is built on a platform that cannot remain standing long. True authority is based on merit and YHWH's choice.

All of mankind can be represented by two men, Adam and Yeshua. Adam was the firstborn, but lost his birthright because he breached the agreement by sinning. Yahshua, like Adam, was called the Son of Elohim, and so He was the "younger brother". He accomplished what Adam should have originally done, so He merited the birthright. In the account of Pharaoh's slaying of the firstborn, the excuse the midwives gave Pharaoh of why they did not kill the baby Hebrew boys was that they were born quickly; i.e., the women walking more closely with YHWH had an easier labor. (Ex. 19) This may refer back to the curse of having greater difficulty in labor given in Genesis 3:16.

Naming

In the East, even today, one's name is extremely important. In the West, we usually name based on what sounds nice or what names are in vogue. The difference is the importance of community and family in eastern cultures. Everything is about one's tribe, and one's name says something about his place (or simply his membership) within that community. A child lives up to what he is called, unless there are other intervening factors. If it is drilled into a child that he is worthless, he will act that way. But when we name a child, we endow him with an essence, and we can expect results, especially if YHWH is the one who names them. (YHWH Himself appears to have been the one who named Levi, whose name means "joined", for this tribe ended up being joined to Him in a very special way.)

Moshe was given a prophetic name, meaning "drawn out" (Ex. 2:10), and YHWH later said He knew Moshe by name. (33:12, 17) This means more than just that He knew who he was; He recognized that Moshe had been given the right name, for he was the type of man who could draw Israel out of Egypt. Yaaqov asked the one who wrestled with him what his name was. (Gen. 32:29) Knowing it would give him insight into the essence of this powerful stranger. He thought he could get a better grip on him if he knew what to call him.

Children were often named according to historical occurrences. After Eli died, his daughter named her newborn son Ichavod ("the glory has departed", 1 Shmuel 4:21). Leah's and Rachel's children reflect their rivalry for Yaaqov's heart:

   * Re'uven = "See, a son!" (Leah's desperate cry to be loved)

   * Shim'on = "hearing" (YHWH heard her prayer)

   * Levi = "to be joined to" (the Levites join people to YHWH)

   * Yehudah = "to praise" (thinking her husband would praise her.)

   * Yissachar = "My hiring" (because she paid for the occasion to conceive him.)

   * Z'vulun = "To dwell with" (She wanted her husband to stay with her permanently.)

   * Dinah, the seventh child and Dan, the seventh son, both mean "judgment".

   * Yoseyf = "YHWH will add" (or, "there will be another"--I won't just have one son!)

   * Ben Oni ("son of my pain"), renamed Ben Yamin = "son of the right hand" (or, "son of                      [many] days".)

Prophets gave their children prophetic names. Hoshea's son Yezreel means "Elohim has scattered/sown". (Hos. 1:4-5) His daughters were Lo-Ammi ("not my people") and Lo-Ruhamah ("no more mercy"). Yeshayahu's children were She'ar-Yashuv ("A remnant will return") and Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz="Hasten the spoil, speed the booty", referring to the judgment that was impending (7:3; 8:1).

During the early period of Israel's history, as evidenced by the births of the 12 patriarchs, a child was named at birth. Later, we see evidence of at least sons being named on the eighth day at their circumcision. (Luke 1:59) Possibly the delay was to seek insight into the spirit of the child by how he acted and inquiry of YHWH about what he was meant to become.

The mother often named the children, but the father had authority to confirm (Luke 1:60-63) or overrule (Gen. 35:18). Avram named Ishmael (Gen. 16:15), probably because his mother was a slave and had no right even to name her child. Moshe named his son Gershom because it reflected the fact that he was in exile at the time. (Ex. 2:22) Essentially, who names the child comes down to whichever is listening more closely to YHWH and discerning the times.

By Yahshua's time it was accepted practice to name someone after another relative. (Luke 1:61)

A king's name often became a title to his dynasty: Pharaoh, Caesar, Avimelekh (which means "my father is a king"!)

Many kings of nations included the name of their elohim in their name: Akhaz-YAH, YEHO-shaphat, BEL-shazzar, Ben-HADAD, Eth-BAAL, NEVU-khadnetzar. Sometimes the king was then seen as somehow possessing the essence of that deity. Other people also were given such "theophoric" names: Dani-EL, ELiYAHU, YEHO-shua. When someone gave his name, someone could immediately make some assumptions about where he came from and what his practices were. Place-names were also based on the name of the local deity: Baal-Peor, Mt. Nevo, etc. Yaaqov named the place where he encountered the unknown wrestler PeniEl, or, "the face of Elohim."

People usually lived their whole lives within a few miles of their birth, so "last names" were not needed. They usually appended their father's name: Y'hoshua ben-Nun, or that of a prominent ancestor (Yoseyf ben-David), or one's clan (the Makhirites, the Rekhavites).

When people were taken captive in war or siege, their names were often changed by the conqueror: Daniel to Belteshazzar, his three friends Chananyah, Misha-el, and Azaryah to Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. These names are based on the names of the elohim of the conqueror, Babylon, and reflected the captor's new authority in their lives and his wish that they would assimilate. Esther's name change was to protect her identity until the right time, but she continued to be referred to by her Gentile name, possibly because it was more unique than Hadassah and clarified just who was being spoken about--"the" Queen Esther.

When other peoples or their prevailing cultures occupied Israel, people sometimes appended foreign names to their Hebrew ones: Yochanan Marcus, Flavius Josephus, etc. Sometimes other prevailing languages influences their names in part: Bar-nabas, Bar Kochba, Shimon Bar-Yonah (Aramaic form instead of the Hebrew "ben"; later we see the Arabic "ibn" used in Jewish names because of the context in which they lived). In other cases, Hebrew people took Gentile names for themselves or gave their children Gentile names: Stephanos, Nicanor, Philip. Sometimes this was to gain more prestige or favor, and sometimes it was just a natural byproduct of several generations of living under occupation, whether forced or invited.

If YHWH intervened and changed someone's name (e.g., Yaaqov to Israel), it meant He was changing the direction of their path. He was no longer to be thought of as a thief, but as one who wrestled with Elohim and prevailed. In the same spirit, Moshe changed Hoshea's name (which simply meant "salvation") to Y'hoshua ("YHWH saves").--and Yahshua changed Shim'on's name to Kefa ("a rock" or "pebble"). Rav Sha'ul called himself Paul ("little one" or "workman") after a major event changed the way he viewed himself.

Circumcision

The Hebrew term for this ceremony in which the male foreskin is removed by cutting is milah, meaning "cutting short". It was prescribed by YHWH as a sign of His covenant (b'rit), which also means to cut. Often men circumcised their sons (or at least supervised, Gen. 21:4), but women are also held accountable to be sure it is done; it is linked to her being able to be purified from the 7 days of ritual uncleanness after the birth of her son, for it takes place between this and the period of cleansing. (Lev. 12:1ff)

The ceremony is a household one, not connected with the priesthood or temple (predating both). No priest need be present, and there was no particular custom of celebration; that came when the child was weaned. (Gen. 21:8)

The technique was to use a sharp stone (Ex. 4:25; Y'hoshua 5:2), often flint, since it can be sharpened like a knife. It was already the late bronze age when the command was given, and surgeons in Egypt had been using bronze for a thousand years. But the state-of-the-art knives were not used, since the custom was an ancient one, and the idea was to do it in the way one's ancestors had done it.

Why on the 8th day? (Lev. 12:3) The body doesn't produce enough vitamin K for the blood to coagulate quickly until that day, and the level of prothrombin (which speeds healing) is the highest in one's whole life on this day! It can be done on the Sabbath. (Yochanan 7:22) As at Sukkoth, the 8th day (Shemini Atzeret, or the "8th conclusion/encore") is very significant because it symbolizes a new beginning after the cycle of 7 is complete. A boy is circumcised on the 8th day to speak of a "new beginning", a renewal of covenant.

If done to an older child or adult, it is very painful (Y'hoshua 5:8), and worst on the third day. (Gen. 34:24) As in this account, it was linked to marriage. Some Arabs still circumcise just before marriage, and in the traditional Judaic ceremony, circumcision is called the gateway to the khuppah (wedding canopy). Gentiles who want to marry Israelites must be circumcised. Israel is a set-apart people chosen for a task, and it is a reproach to give their daughters to uncircumcised men. But they can become Israelites this way.

Even slaves bought by an Israelite household had to enter the covenant and obey its laws. (Gen. 17:10-14) Its importance to Israel is highlighted by the fact that to eat the lamb at Pesakh (Passover), one must be circumcised. (Ex. 12:43-48) The Egyptians rarely did it (Yirmeyahu 9:25-26); a few circumcised mummies have been found, but probably owing to Hebrew influence through Yoseyf, etc.

"Circumcision" also applies to the fruit of a tree. (Lev. 19:23) Uncircumcised lips indicate an inability to speak properly (Ex. 12:30), for the word for the foreskin in Hebrew (orlah) literally means "excess" or something that hangs over, that keeps one from performing the natural function of the organ. We are told in Yirmeyahu 6:10 that uncircumcised ears keep us from delighting in YHWH's words. An uncircumcised heart is a symbol of having no understanding. (Yirm. 9:25-26)

Education

The youngest children (up to age 4) were raised by their mothers (e.g. 2 Samuel 4:4). King Lemuel passed on what his mother had taught him (Prov. 31:1). As they grew older, both parents taught them (Prov. 1:8; 6:20), and they would spend more time playing in the streets (Yirm. 6:11; Zech. 8:5; Matt. 11:16), which were safe then because few Israelites had horses, and the whole town knew one another. The elderly (often grandparents) would commonly be there with them, watching as well as teaching. (Zkh. 8:4-5) Young men would then typically be part of "cliques" (Yirm. 9:21) that would stick together around the town squares, where caravans would stop and make available not only merchandise but news and stories from other lands. Women continued to teach daughters. (9:20)

Education was chiefly the responsibility of parents until King John Hyrcanus (of the Maccabees' dynasty) established mandatory formal schooling for children c. 130 B.C.E. This was the first such law in history, since elsewhere school was only for the privileged classes.

It is the duty of every Israelite to recount what He has done to the next generations. (Ps. 71:18; 78) Fathers and elders are especially commanded to teach the Torah's commands to their sons and grandsons, as well as the national history of Israel, especially at Passover (Ex. 10:2; 12:26; 13:8; Deut. 2:7; 4:9; 6:7; 32:7, 46). Monuments and rituals were designed to make children ask questions and thus create occasions to relate YHWH's works (Deut. 4:9; 6:7, 20; Y'hoshua 4:5-7) As they walked past them on long pilgrimages (1 Shmuel 1:21), there would be plenty of time to tell the complete story. It was often made exciting and easier to memorize through the means of song. (2 Shmuel 1:17; Ex. 15) Even teaching the child a trade was seen as for the purpose of keeping him from disobeying YHWH's command not to steal.

Anciently children were taught the book of Leviticus (the center and heart of the Torah) by age 5. They were to be conversant in all the Scriptures by age 10, and then instructed in its applications by the Bar/Bat Mitzvah at 12 or 13.

The Hebrew word for "teach" (lamad) literally means to prod with a sharp stick! Another term used in Deut. 6 means "bring [the matter] to a point".

Parents commonly used the shevet (which means "rod", but also the staff of a shepherd or king), for it drives foolishness from them and brings rest and delight to the parents (Prov. 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). YHWH describes His own chastening in terms of a father's (Deut. 8:5; 2 Sam. 7:14; Prov. 3:12). It is not to be done out of anger, but with the discipline (warning, instructing, turning, correcting) of the child in mind. (Deut. 8:5) If he continues to act perversely, blows may be used (2 Shmuel 7:14) to avoid a far worse punishment. (Deut. 21:18ff) Indeed, "father" and "teacher" were often interchangeable terms. (2 Kings 2:11ff; Jdg 17:10; Gen. 45:8)

Levites are especially duty-bound to teach Israel (Mal. 2:7), and Israel the whole world. Prophets taught the kings (2 Kings 12:2) Schools of the prophets (2:3-5) mainly taught the "sons of the prophets" Torah (the foundation for YHWH to work with), not how to foretelling or speak in tongues. If a great teacher invited one to study under him, it was considered an insult to refuse. (1 Kings 19:19ff)

Young children were taught to write. (Judges 8:14) There were special schools for scribes/recorders (Yirm. 36:4; 2 Sam. 8:17; 20:25; 1 Kings 4:3). Archaeologists have found countless commonplace potsherds and even walls used for practice. Women also learned to write. (1 Kings 21:8) Isaiah was told to write his visions (ch. 8). Unlike most ancient nations in which writing was forbidden to the masses and often even to kings, being limited only to the cultures' religious priests, in Israel writing extended to the majority of the population so that they could have a foundation from YHWH's word, since the whole nation is to be a "kingdom of priests". (Ex. 19:6)

Continue this Article

The Family/Clan

Prophets and Kings

Other Leaders

Tribal Life

Family Relations & Redemption

Marriage

Family Institutions

Customs Relating to Death

Civil Institutions

Government