| | The Hebrew text is very clear in visualizing the God of Israel in physical terms, even if meant to be understood metaphorically. But the Aramaic Jewish translations of the Hebrew Scriptures will not allow it to be so presented, but will rather speak around it (paraphrase) or use an intermediary word between the physical description and God. In [[Genesis]] 32, [[Jacob]] is wrestling with "a man" but after the bout, Jacob says, in the original Hebrew text, "I have seen God face to face and my life has been saved". In the Aramaic translation, however, Jacob is made to say, " I have seen the ''angel of God'' face to face and my life has been saved". At times, the intermediary word is the word "Word" - in Aramaic, Memra (the root is Aleph, Mem, Resh as in the Hebrew word 'Omer). Whereas the Hebrew text (Gen. 3:8) has it, "They ([[Adam]] and [[Eve]]) heard the sound of the LORD God walking about in the garden", the Aramaic has it, "they heard the sound of ''the Memra'' of the LORD God walking about in the garden" Apparently, walking about in the garden conjured up too much of rustling of leaves and bushes to take figuratively, and so it was the "Memra" that was heard and not the LORD God. This is the pattern in other places in Genesis. Prof. David Flusser of the Hebrew University notes that it is to this mindset that we owe our understanding of John 1:1 and not to Philo and the Alexandrian "logos" philosophy. "In the beginning was the Word (Memra) and the Word (Memra) was with God.. and the Word (Memra) was God. John 1:1 is meant to rip away the distinction between God and the Memra, so assiduously held to by contemporary Judaism, and so declare that they, the Memra and God, are in reality one, ...and this One has, indeed, come down and has become flesh of our flesh and bone of our bone. John, in his epistle would later say in wonderment, " Whom we have handled, we have touched and held Him." | | The Hebrew text is very clear in visualizing the God of Israel in physical terms, even if meant to be understood metaphorically. But the Aramaic Jewish translations of the Hebrew Scriptures will not allow it to be so presented, but will rather speak around it (paraphrase) or use an intermediary word between the physical description and God. In [[Genesis]] 32, [[Jacob]] is wrestling with "a man" but after the bout, Jacob says, in the original Hebrew text, "I have seen God face to face and my life has been saved". In the Aramaic translation, however, Jacob is made to say, " I have seen the ''angel of God'' face to face and my life has been saved". At times, the intermediary word is the word "Word" - in Aramaic, Memra (the root is Aleph, Mem, Resh as in the Hebrew word 'Omer). Whereas the Hebrew text (Gen. 3:8) has it, "They ([[Adam]] and [[Eve]]) heard the sound of the LORD God walking about in the garden", the Aramaic has it, "they heard the sound of ''the Memra'' of the LORD God walking about in the garden" Apparently, walking about in the garden conjured up too much of rustling of leaves and bushes to take figuratively, and so it was the "Memra" that was heard and not the LORD God. This is the pattern in other places in Genesis. Prof. David Flusser of the Hebrew University notes that it is to this mindset that we owe our understanding of John 1:1 and not to Philo and the Alexandrian "logos" philosophy. "In the beginning was the Word (Memra) and the Word (Memra) was with God.. and the Word (Memra) was God. John 1:1 is meant to rip away the distinction between God and the Memra, so assiduously held to by contemporary Judaism, and so declare that they, the Memra and God, are in reality one, ...and this One has, indeed, come down and has become flesh of our flesh and bone of our bone. John, in his epistle would later say in wonderment, " Whom we have handled, we have touched and held Him." |
| | + | King Herod, in his thirst for power and his paranoia at the news that someone was born, whose "star from the east" indicated that there was indeed a claimant to his throne, the Messiah of Israel, sent his garrison, most probably from the fortress Herodian which over looked the town of Bethlehem, Bethlehem, the home of David, the most Illustrious of Israel's kings, would soon experience the death of its two years and under male children, in Herod's pursuit of retention of his power. This has been called the Massacre of the Innocents. But Jesus was not among them as his father Joseph, being warned in a dream, had spirited the family to Egypt. And there they remained until Herod was dead, and Archelaus, Herod's son, was reigning in his stead. But the "Holy Family" was not to return to return to Bethlehem, but to Nazareth of Galilee, and so Jesus would grow an Israelite and a Galilean, and his first disciples, Galileans. But the fight into Egypt and the return from Egypt to the land of Israel, is seen by the Gospel of Matthew to have another reason intended for it by the Father. The son of God in the writings of Moses was, of course, Israel itself, and the Prophet Hosea would later write, God Himself speaking, "When Israel was a youth, hadn't I love him, and hadn't I called my son out of Egypt?" But Matthew would write, speaking of the return of Jesus to Israel, from Egypt, in direct reference to the Prophet Hosea's prophesy, "Out of Egypt have I called My Son", thereby letting us know, in his own way, who Jesus is - He is the Son of the Father, the son, who had and would not fail. He is Israel, the remnant, and through Him, the nations of the world would be blessed, along with His people, Israel. |