Friday, June 17, 2016

Beha'alotcha: Kingdom of Priests

"For they [Levites] are the ones from among Bnei-Yisrael given to Me in place of all the first from wombs of Bnei-Yisrael.  I have taken them for Myself.  For every firstborn from Bnei-Yisrael is Mine, whether human or animal.  On the day I struck down the firstborn of the land of Egypt, I sanctified them for Myself.  So I am taking the Levites in place of the firstborn of Bnei-Yisrael, and I am giving the Levites as a gift to Aaron and his sons from among Bnei-Yisrael, to do the work on behalf of Bnei-Yisrael in the Tent of Meeting, and to make atonement for them -- so that there would be no more plague among them for coming too close to the Sanctuary."  -- Numbers 8:16-19 TLV
This parsha deals with a lot of topics, but the one I have been most focused on is the dedication of the firstborn and the Levites in lieu.  A few weeks ago, I wrote that this, in part, showed us the principle of redemption.  Yes, it showed this, but it was not the reason why the Levites were chosen.  The Levites were chosen because they did not partake in the golden calf worship and when Moses came off the mountain to call those on the Lord's side to stand before Him, all of the Levites came.  The Lord took them as a firstfruit rather than the firstborn of Israel -- a pattern we see in others like Esau and Jacob, Reuben and Judah, Adam and Messiah...

From what I have observed from much of Christianity, there seems to be a belief that God still has taken a kingdom of priests in lieu of the firstborn Israel, but would not say that these "priests" have to be Levites, but rather are the church, in what is more commonly known as replacement theology.  This comes from not laying the foundation, which is Torah, before we study the New Testament.  

If we study Torah, we understand that all priests are Levites, and all Levites are Israelites; but not all "Israel" are Levites, and not all Levites are priests, which means that not all Israel are priests.  There are levels of intimacy and levels of set-apartness that distinguish them.

The wilderness set up of the tabernacle and the Levitical laws of the Torah, shows us that there are levels of intimacy and levels of set-apartness.  The event that lead to the Levites in lieu of the firstborn (Exodus 32:26), proved that the Levites desired God.  They had set themselves apart from their fellow brothers' strange worship, and showed desire to be intimate with the Lord.  Hence, their level of intimacy and required set-apartness was above the rest of the tribes, not merely out of law but out of desire as we saw in the golden calf incident.   

Their reward was the Lord Himself, and yes this meant forsaking physical possession in this world (Numbers 18:24, Deuteronomy 10:9).  I have to go through the identity of the Levite with you because there is a mixture in the faith of people claiming to be a priest for the Kingdom of YHWH, and even though all Levites are not at priests, all priests are Levites and the laws regarding Levites are not only applicable to priests, but even more laws of set-apartness ... and yet we are seeing a modern day "kingdom of priests" rejecting the laws the Levites once desired for intimacy with the Lord, and rejecting its order altogether (even though we see its restoration in the future temple as foretold by the prophets).

This twofold choosing -- God choosing them and them choosing God -- came with privileges.  They camped within the courtyard, and they took the position of firstborn as they were presented as a firstfruit.  Compare... 
Have the Levites stand before Aaron and his sons and present them as a wave offering to Adonai.  -- Numbers 8:13 
"Speak to Bnei-Yisrael and tell them: When you have come into the land which I give to you, and reap its harvest, then you are to bring the omer of the firstfruits of your harvest to the kohen.  He is to wave the omer before Adonai, to be accepted for you.  On the morrow after the Shabbat, the kohen is to wave it."  -- Leviticus 23:10-11
Are we willing, Beloved Reader, to be without earthen inheritance as sojourners of this world, and to forsake foreign worship?  Let us remember that worshiping of gold and animals was of pagan origin, and yet in our churches across the Western world we see pagan worship within, certainly foreign to the Torah of God.  We have congregations full of golden calves and strange fire.  The Torah shows us that a priest of YHWH cannot be made of such a congregation!  In fact, such a congregation is like the madness of the world today, identifying with something they simply are not.  

May the Lord find of you, not one grieved by the commandments (I John 5:3), but one desiring to be set-apart because you desire intimacy with your Maker and truly finds their identity in Him.  And how else, Believers, can we identify Him if not by His Torah?

Shabbat Shalom,

Natasha

*Disclosure:  With the exception of Scripture and quotations, the information on this site is meant to be viewed solely on this site.  Any reference of its contribution is not to be parted with the reference of this site, nor without reference to its contributor.  Therefore, please cite properly.    

Saturday, June 4, 2016

BeMidbar -- Training Ground

"So then, I Myself will entice her, I will bring her into the wilderness and speak to her heart.  I will give back her vineyards from there and make the valley of Achor a door of hope.  She will respond there -- as in the days of her youth, as in the day she came up out of the land of Egypt.  In that day -- it is a declaration of Adonai -- you will proclaim, 'My husband,' and never again call Me, 'My Baal.'"  -- Hosea 2:16-18 TLV
When we look around at today's churches and proclaimed believers, we can certainly see that it is not only Israel that has been guilty of mixing their husband with baal.  I have often considered that today's Christianity (and much the ages of Christianity in general) has been the pot wherein the spiritual defilements of Israel has been transferred.  Truly, when Yeshua said of the Pharisees of Israel that they are the group who make void the Torah for their own traditions, can't we then say that most of the Christian denominations are the Pharisees of today?  When Christianity has done exactly the things that God hated Israel doing, inviting the pagan practices and ways of worship into the building they call by His name, it is not difficult to see that the Almighty Husband who provided, protected, saved, and took upon their yoke, has speedily become their baal -- just the same as it was for Israel as Hosea speaks.  Are there any still keeping the faith out there?

BeMidbar -- in the wilderness.  For the past few years of going through the parsha cycles, I have tried in earnest to articulate its importance.  It is where the Lord rid the baals of my heart, the baals of His Israel.  It is where He first took Egypt out of them -- and 40 years it took to so do.  What a journey!  It is not hard to articulate because of how long it was, but because of the growth, the gain of things intangible but very much able to be seen in lifestyle, in action, in works.  I actually enjoy the midbar moments of my life.  It is not when I enter them, but rather when I exit them, that I'm almost saddened.  It is a privilege to be trusted and sent out to care for the things of God, having been trained by Him, but it is incomparable to the intimacy of being fed daily bread in the wilderness, incomparable to the Lord speaking to your heart.
In the wilderness of Sinai, on the first day of the second month in the second year from the Exodus from the land of Egypt, Adonai spoke to Moses in the Tent of Meeting saying, "Do a head count of all the community of Bnei-Yisrael by their families and their ancestral house, with a total of every male one by one.  You and Aaron are to muster by their divisions every son from 20 years and upward available to serve in the army of Israel."  -- Numbers 1:1-3
Have you ever been told that it is Biblical that a man take off a year when he first marries?  He is not to serve in the army, nor should he work.  Mostly, that thought comes from Deuteronomy 24:5, a clear commandment that when a man takes on a wife he is not to be called with the army nor is he to have any duty pass over him, but rather should be free at home for one year to make his wife happy.  It is also said then that this is the time a man should take to build his house.  Lord willing, the couple have multiplied that first year and bore their first child.  There is intimacy here.  When I read the very first verses in BeMidbar, I see the intimacy of the torah of the first year of marriage -- God waited a whole year after He took Israel out of Egypt in a offer of marriage with the Ten Words before He called the army to be set up.  In this, He not only kept the men keeping the torah of marriage as it pertains to be in the army but also He kept His own Torah, having been married to His bride for one year of rest before He begins military set-up.  He, in intimacy of the wilderness, spent the first year of His marriage at rest from the army, making His wife happy (Deut 24:5), or comforting her, as some versions say.  He calls for a numbering then, not just for the army's sake, but because His family has grown.  He has built the house, like the man of Deuteronomy 24:5.  Comforting his wife, taking off a year to build his house...that is intimacy.

In addition to intimacy in the wilderness, it is a training ground -- not just for being sent out to some ministry call, but training ground to accept truth when we see it.  When I read the words of Paul, a man well-studied in the Torah, uncovering Yeshua from within the Torah, it is because the Torah was a training ground that led him to accept the Lord Yeshua when he saw Him.  He knew the Torah pearls when he saw them -- Yeshua, ultimately that one pearl of great value that a man will sell all that he has to obtain it, willing that he would count it all as loss.  Yes, friend, even in BeMidbar we are very much trained to know the treasured Yeshua when we see Him.  The simplest of training into acceptance Yeshua is found in the first few chapters, this week's parsha.
"Those camping on the east -- toward the sunrise -- will be of the standard of Judah, according to their divisions Nachshon son of Amminadab, is the prince of the sons of Judah."  -- Numbers 2:3
Judah is to camp on the east side, wherein is the entrance into the tabernacle.  I look back all the way to the garden where God set up a cherubim with a flaming sword on the east side of Eden to keep Adam and Eve out.  This tells us that the entrance to Eden was the east side.  Because of understanding this from Eden, having the entrance to the tabernacle on the east side is to be expected.  Putting Judah there tells us that the doorway to God must be through the tribe of Judah.
All those numbered to Judah's camp, by their divisions, are 186,400.  They are to advance first.  -- Numbers 2:9
I must list this verse because I need to take this opportunity to share a change in understanding.  Years ago when I took a Beth Moore study I had been taught that the tribes set out exactly as they camped, and when you consider the number of people in the camps and how they camped the center extending out...the tribes of the north and south were close in number (which means they would extend out evenly) and the tribes of the east were significantly more than the west (which means the east would extend out far more) then the image seen from above, whether camping or traveling, is a cross.  I was so wowed by this supposed discovery.  However, as I read now, this first camp (Judah), is to advance first.  As I continued to read of the other camps, I saw that the image seen at least while they were actively traveling (not camping) is not a cross, but rather a line.

Numbers tells us Judah camps on the east, but sets out first.  This alone changes nothing of the former belief, since they were traveling east then the camp on the east would be in the front anyway.  However, looking at the other camps -- Reuben is on the south and sets out second (2:10 & 2:16), Ephraim is on the west and is to set out third (2:18 & 2:24), Dan is on the north and is to set out last (2:25 & 2:31), and the Levites are in the middle of the 4 camps as the heart and core of the camps (2:17 -- as a side note, I find it interesting that lev, or levav, means heart, and adding an "i" at the end makes it first person possessive -- levi, "my heart", at the heart of the camps).  This is traveling a line.  If it were a traveling cross, then the Word would say Judah is first, followed by the Levites, Dan, and Reuben as second, and Ephraim last.  I bring this up merely to show example of how easy it is to follow a misinterpretation because of a pre-conditioning to the NT justifying the OT, rather than the other way around.  The OT, when properly studied, will justify the NT, as the NT is the OT revealed, the hidden pearls manifested, and the Lord Yeshua magnified the Law.

Judah advanced first.  This past week I had gone through a battle with someone and before it came to be, the Lord had given me a dream of praising Him, and that day I had a worship session in my home with dancing, flags, and tambourine.  That night was the battle that came unawares, and looking back I see how the Lord taught me how to fight it...first, with praise.  When we read of the travels of the camps and Judah being first, especially since we just finished numbering the army, we see a clear connection with praise (the meaning of Judah) and battle.  It may at first seem like an interesting thing to set out praisers ahead of the army, like Jehoshophat in 2 Chronicles 20:21, but it is what the Lord desired Himself.  He put Judah first.  Praise comes first.
"See, I have taken the Levites from among Bnei-Yisrael in place of the firstborn who open the womb among Bnei-Yisrael.  The Levites will be Mine, because all the firstborn are Mine.  In the day when I was striking down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, I consecrated Myself every firstborn in Israel -- whether man or animal -- as Mine.  I am Adonai."  -- Numbers 3:12-13
I once heard a Torah-observer say that he could not accept another human being sacrificed for him, that it is not moral.  The standards of morality have to be found in the Torah, there is nothing else where we can hold morals up to.  In truth, the morality of God Himself is revealed in the Torah, God is His Torah, the Torah then being the standard that man takes for himself as the instructions for life, to be more like his Maker and be reconciled to Him, one with Him.  God accepting one life in lieu of yours is sitting right here in the verses above, in the Torah itself.  It is then moral to do so, and He giving Himself as the life in lieu of yours makes Him (Yeshua) not only Torah-observant, but the Torah-manifested.

The wilderness is for intimacy and training.  It is not just training for service for God that all too often is for our own glory, elevating our esteem to be the same as God, and using God's hand as the power behind it.  Rather, it is more so training for acceptance, and not just acceptance with God, but that we would accept God -- accept Yeshua, and not the baals, especially the ones who have stolen His Name.  "In that day -- it is a declaration of Adonai -- you will proclaim, 'My husband,' and never again call Me, 'My Baal.'"

Shabbat Shalom,


Natasha

*Disclosure:  With the exception of Scripture and quotations, the information on this site is meant to be viewed solely on this site.  Any reference of its contribution is not to be parted with the reference of this site, nor without reference to its contributor.  Therefore, please cite properly.    

Friday, May 20, 2016

Behar -- The Big Return

Then Adonai said, "My Spirit will not remain with humankind forever, since they are flesh.  So their days will be 120 years."  -- Genesis 6:3 TLV
It has been quite a few years since I first heard someone say about this passage, "You know that's referring to Jubilee years, right?"  No, I hadn't known that, and it had been since then that the Jubilee year remains such a spark of interest to me each parsha cycle when we come upon its study, on top of being such a mystery.

Why a mystery -- you might ask, especially since Scripture doesn't make it appear to be a mystery.  The time of the Jubilee is set clearly in Scripture to be after 49 completed years, as the 50th year, and that it is proclaimed in the 7th month of the 50th year, on Yom Kippur.  
"Then on the tenth day of the seventh month, on Yom Kippur, you are to sound a shofar blast -- you are to sound the shofar all throughout your land.  You are to make the fiftieth year holy, and proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.  It is to be a Jubilee to you, when each of you is to return to his own property and each of you is to return to his family."  -- Leviticus 25:9-10
When the Word mentions the proclamation being on the 7th month, this tells us that the 50th year (the year of Jubilee) actually starts 7 months prior.  Note, the Word does not say that month of the Jubilee shofar blast is to begin a whole new year.  As far as I have read, the Bible has only ever named Abib as a new year, leaving Yom Teruah as a later-adopted alternative to Rosh HaShanah.  Whether or not that was God-directed, it was not Torah and thus in the mystery of the Jubilee, I rest that the Jubilee starts as soon as 49 years ends (which ends with Adar) -- Jubilee year started on the Abib of the 50th year and it was proclaimed 7 months later on Yom Kippur.  There are 2 ways I'm looking at this mid-year proclamation:  1) the people have 7 months to return before the shofar blasts that the return is complete, or 2) the people have 5 months to return, starting from the shofar blast on Yom Kippur, and better have completed their return by the time the year ends and a new 50 year cycle begins the following Abib.  I have not studied on when they started their travels back to their own families.  We have to remember that these people didn't travel by airplane or motor vehicle, like we do, but their travel took some time...time God gave them either before or after the shofar blast, while also providing food for them on the way as each was allowed to eat the increase in the year, freely, without any property claims from another.

So going back to the mystery in Genesis about 120 years' 2nd meaning referring to Jubilee years... It was such a satisfying connection of dots for me, because when you add up 120 Jubilees you get 6,000 years -- which is the belief of many as to how many days this earth will receive before the LORD's day.  It makes perfect sense when we study the creation account.  Elohim made the earth in 6 days and rested the 7th, sanctifying the 7th day as His day.  When we adopt Scripture's prophetic "day as a thousand years" and apply it to the creation account, then we can turn the earth's 6 days into 6,000 with the 7th day/millennium being the LORD's day, a term used when referring to the return of the Lord into the millennial reign -- which we know clearly by Scripture that His reign on earth is a millennium.  When other would this be then on the 7th millennium, foreshadowed by the 7th day of each week that He established all the way back in the creation account?

So, having hit the things you probably have already been familiar with, I want to get into the Hebrew that further intrigues me about the mystery of the Jubilee.  Before doing so, we can first see that the Shemitah and Jubilee have quite a few similarities, with their difference is that the Jubilee is a year of return, whereas the Shemitah is not.  
"But in the seventh year there is to be a Shabbat rest for the land -- a Shabbat to Adonai.  You are not to sow your field or prune your vineyard.  You are not to reap what grows of itself during your harvest nor gather the grapes of your untended vine.  It is to be a year of Shabbat rest for the land.  Whatever the Shabbat of the land produces will be food for yourself, for your servant, for your maidservant, for your hired worker and for the outsider dwelling among you.  Even for your livestock and for the animals that are in your land -- all its increase will be enough food."  -- Leviticus 25:4-7
Can they eat of the land?  Yes they can!  However, there is a difference between going out and getting your daily food versus a full harvest and storing.  It is like the wilderness, when they got the manna daily, but did not store it, except for the 6th day.  There is a difference between picking off a few grapes versus separating the cluster from its vine.  So these were the rules with the Shemitah -- the land gets rest from sowing, pruning, and full harvesting, and the land is food for everyone.  
"You are to count off seven Shabbatot of years -- seven times seven years, so that the time of seven Shabbatot of years -- 49 years.  Then on the tenth day of the seventh month, on Yom Kippur you are to sound a shofar blast -- you are to sound the shofar all throughout your land.  You are to make the fiftieth year holy, and proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.  It is to be a Jubilee to you, when each of you is to return to his own property and each of you is to return to his family.  That fiftieth year will be your Jubilee.  You are not sow, or reap that which grows by itself, or gather from the untended vines.  Since it is a Jubilee, it is to be holy to you.  You will eat from its increase out of the field."  -- Leviticus 25:8-12
The Jubilee agricultural rules are no sowing nor full harvesting, and the land is food for everyone.  I did notice I did not see anything about no pruning.  I wonder if that is significant?  Adding to, the year of Jubilee is predominately a return to origination.  This return is Hebrew shuv, from which we get another word -- teshuvah.  This word is very significant when we are talking about Yeshua's return, as teshuvah is repentance.

That being said, many today believe that the Jubilee is when Yeshua will return for His bride.  I desire to share a few highlights from the Hebrew to see if we can validate or must reject this belief.  Going back to verse 9 -- 
"...you are to sound a shofar blast -- you are to sound the shofar all throughout your land."
Some translations actually say you are to sound the trumpet of the Jubilee.  The "trumpet" is Hebrew shofar and the "Jubilee" is Hebrew teruah, which means a shout or a battle cry.  Hence, the TLV translates it as a "shofar blast."  It says that the shofar blast is to be sounded, but actually the Hebrew word translated into "sound" is abar.  Abar is the root of the word Hebrew itself, and as we know of the word Hebrew, its meaning is "crossed over one."  Abar is to cross over or transition.  It really doesn't have anything to do with sound, but some of its meanings are not only to cross over or transition but to cover/atone (hence it is "sounded" on Yom Kippur, the day of atonement/covering), and also wrath (confirming another belief on the judgment of Yeshua coming on Yom Kippur).  So far, with a crossing over (which is what we, the Hebrew bride, will one day do) and atonement and wrath on a day that the trumpet will sound and freedom is proclaimed, along with a teshuvah (return), it definitely does sound like the beliefs of a Jubilee return of Yeshua is sitting right in Torah.  However, there are more regulations of the Jubilee year.  From verse 11 & 12 --
"That fiftieth year will be your Jubilee.  You are not to sow, or reap that which grows by itself, or gather from the untended vines.  Since it is a Jubilee, it is to be holy to you.  You will eat from its increase out of the field."
The word "sow" is Hebrew zara, meaning to conceive/become pregnant.  It immediately brings me to when Yeshua spoke of a time when it would be woe to those who would be pregnant or nursing (Matt 24:19, Mark 13:17, & Luke 21:23).  "Reap" is interesting because it does not only refer to the gathering of grapes, but Hebrew qatsar also means to grieve, annoy, discourage, or to be such as well as be impatient.  Now I think of all those references about perseverance as the time comes.  The year of the Lord's return is definitely not the time to quit or discourage one another.  When you are in a race, the last leg is when all stops thinking it is a competition and surprisingly all are encouraging of one another to make it.  Don't drop out at the last minute.

So far if we look deeper into meaning and application we can see that the Word is also telling us to not discourage nor grieve the one who grows by himself, nor be discouraged nor grieved as you are growing by yourself (as seems to be what many are doing, falling away from the modern church and getting out of a building).  "That which grows by itself" is the Hebrew cafiyach, to be self-sowing.  What a revelation of what the church would like towards the end.  I have talked to quite a few who believe Scripture tells us that there will be a day when the church as we know it will cease, and the Holy Spirit will be the teacher of men even in their own homes.

In moving forward, I was happiest to see what "untended vines" was originally in Hebrew.  The Hebrew original is naziyr, a separated and consecrated/chosen one (Nazarite), or untrimmed vine.  Untrimmed vine and Nazarite being the same thing brings a better understanding to the power of Samson being linked to his untrimmed hair.  Having been trimmed made him no longer a Nazarite.  This is perfect opportunity to bring up that the naziyr is the not the same word translated in Zechariah as "branch" when referring to Yeshua, but that word is tsemach, and naziyr is also different from the city Natzeret, which His dwelling therein (Matt 2:23) was why He was called a Natzrati.  We allow this confusion in easily comparing Yeshua to a Nazarite because 1) He is separated/set apart and consecrated as the chosen one, and 2) He is the true vine.  However, we must realize that considering what it means to be a Nazarite (again, not the same as being a Natzrati), Yeshua could not be one because in the very least He drank wine on the last Seder.  He also cannot be because although He is the true vine, He is not an untrimmed one.  In John 15:1-2, Yeshua tells us that He is the true vine and every branch in Him that does not bear fruit is cut off, letting us know that He is actually a well-trimmed vine.

So far I have seen confirmation of Jubilee-year return.  Except for this very thing, that the Jubilee cannot bring harvest, and Yeshua's return brings just the thing.  In fact, Yeshua's harvest is quite messy with blood, likened unto the threshing of grapes upon the floor and the stained color that brings -- is the grape harvest not a picture of what is described as Yeshua's return?  Yeshua waits until His return to separate the wheat and the tares, which is a harvest.  His return is many things that we see described of the Jubilee, but one thing it is that the Jubilee is not is a harvest.

After 50 Jubilees comes the completion 6,000 years.  After a full 6,000, which means a Jubilee just completed, is the beginning of the 7th.  So then maybe not a Jubilee return, but the Fall Holy Days after a Jubilee?  The mystery continues.  Until then, counting and sevens are not just for understanding times, but for foreshadows and real observance.  With that being said, happy "seventh".

Shabbat Shalom,

Natasha

*Disclosure:  With the exception of Scripture and quotations, the information on this site is meant to be viewed solely on this site.  Any reference of its contribution is not to be parted with the reference of this site, nor without reference to its contributor.  Therefore, please cite properly.    

Friday, May 6, 2016

Kedoshim -- Set Apart Ones

Friends, we have a problem in today's religion, and that is the forsaking of set-apartness, holiness.  It is so forsaken that the majority scarcely even know what it means.  Holiness does not mean righteousness; it means set-apartness.  Set-apart from what, exactly?  Well, set-apart from the world.  It is an easy concept to understand when we consider this, that we are to purposely not do the things of the world.  However, through the years, religious groups have excused this act of mixing.  This was first done by Israel, which is documented in the Bible, and later into Christianity.  Both groups who claimed to be in relationship with the Set-Apart El.  There is a problem.

This parsha is what I consider the heart of Leviticus.  It is so properly named "Kedoshim," because it is talking about being set-apart ones.  Leviticus is not the book of sacrifices, but the book of set-apartness.  In fact, in the Jewish culture it is typically the first book young children learn to memorize because it gives us an idea of who God is and how to relate to Him.  Folks, we cannot have a relationship with the Creator if we don't know how to relate to Him.  So many see the book of Leviticus as a sacrificial system to come to the Father, and therefore brush right past the book because the New Testament gave us access to the Father without this system.  Friends, I read on Facebook a professed believer who goes around sharing the Gospel asking for interpretation on a passage in Leviticus, saying this was the first time she has read that book.  These things should not be!  Who then are we sharing when we share the Gospel, if we aren't familiar with the specific set-apartness the Creator claims to be and in result expects of us?  We may have access to the Father, but because of His character there are specific ways He expects for us to handle ourselves in relation to Him.  It is like a pastor I once heard who said that we likewise have access to electricity, but there is protocol in handling it.
"Now you are to keep all My statutes and all My ordinances and do them, so that the land where I am bringing you to dwell will not vomit you out.  You are not to walk in the ways of the nation which I am casting out before you, for they did all these things and therefore I abhorred them.  But I have said to you, 'You will inherit their land and I will give it to you to possess it, a land flowing with milk and honey.'  I am Adonai your God, who has set you apart from the peoples."  -- Leviticus 20:22-24 TLV
This passage comes at the end of this week's parsha.  I wanted to start with it because is it is a summary of what the parsha is about.  By this, we know that the laws and ordinances prior to, from the moment YHWH says they are to be kedoshim, make up the description of what it means to be kedoshim (set-apart ones), and that failure to be kedoshim will result in the land purging itself of them as it is doing of its [then] current inhabitants.  This tells us, then, that what Leviticus 19 & 20 says not to do the nations were doing, and what Leviticus 19 & 20 says to do the nations weren't doing.  Hence, in not doing what they were doing and in doing what they don't do, Israel was set-apart from them.
"Speak to the congregation of Bnei-Yisrael and tell them:  You shall be kedoshim, for I, Adonai your God, am holy.  Each one of you is to respect his mother and his father, and keep my Shabbatot.  I am Adonai your God."  -- Leviticus 19:2-3
As mentioned above, immediately after He says they are to be kedoshim, He begins explaining what this means.  The first thing YHWH mentions is respecting parents and keeping the Shabbat.  Now, the original Hebrew doesn't exactly have punctuation marks, so putting these 2 commands as one sentence does not make them directly related to one another.  However, the word "and" between the 2 commands is a Hebrew vav (the text literally says "and the Shabbat guard").  The vav is a nail, and nails connect things together, which makes it translates into "and" -- it connects 2 points.  In this case, it is connecting the respect of parents to the keeping of Shabbat.  They are related.  

I was very intrigued to see this and then went on to study more of the Hebrew.  The word translated into "respect" is the Hebrew yare.  It means to frighten, but it also means to shoot.  The Bible tells us the children are like arrows, and blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them.  How do you respect your parents?  By letting them shoot you like an arrow.  They are to send you off, but being sent off comes with a goal.  Yare is quite similar to another Hebrew word.  That word is yara (or yarah), which is the root of the word Torah.  Torah does not entirely mean Law, but the definition goes much deeper than that.  Yarah means to shoot or aim, and the Torah is the direction of that shot.  Children are to be the arrow of their parents, and parents aim that child in the direction of Torah.

That being said, Torah has a goal.  I'm an archer, and I never take a shot without looking at my target.  Therefore, Torah has a goal.  We don't just claim children are to be respectful, yet we don't aim them at a specific target as they respect us.  Respecting parents means submitting to their shot of you as an arrow, but that shot has to have a specific goal.  In this case, parents have a huge responsibility in their children respecting them.  It is like our current rabbi's wife had said to me, you honor parents as they honor the Lord.  Their honor of the Lord, which is the goal of their shot of you as an arrow (your submission as an arrow is your respect unto them), is the Shabbat.  The Shabbat is the sign of the Covenant.  In proper training up of a child, the goal of the child's respect unto the parents is the parent's aim of the child into Covenant.  However, to take this concept to our spiritual Father, the goal even of us as YHWH's children is Shabbat...to rest.  The goal of walking Torah as a whole is to rest.  The writer of Hebrews (chapter 4) in fact tells us let us continue to labor in good works (walk Torah) because we have not yet entered our rest.  Torah will lead to rest.
"You must keep My statutes.  You are not to crossbreed different kinds of animals.  You are not to sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor are you to wear a garment woven of two kinds of material."  -- Leviticus 19:19
We certainly have advanced in today's science of crossbreeding animals of different sorts and humans with animals, etc.  It may be a surprise for some to realize, by mention of it here in the text, that this was being done even as early as this time frame in Leviticus.  Actually, there are some who really believe that Greek gods are not mythical, but were results of mixing.  Then of course there is also the study of the mixing involved that made up the Nephilim.  Mixing is not new science, but returned from times of past.  It is like we have gone back to the days of Noah.

Also in this verse is the prohibition of wearing a garment with 2 different sorts of material.  If this be the case, then we are failing that shot.  I'm interested in feedback on this passage.  I have researched into it myself and see that Strong's 8162 (mixed garment) is of foreign derivation.  The word or item the word describes is not original to Hebrew.  Many lexicons believe that it is a specific garment that was a mixture of wool and linen, linsey woolsey.  If this be the case, then we can understand it better.  When we read of linen, we see that it is used in holy articles.  Wool, on the other hand, was used in abundance.  We are talking about a group of herders -- there were plenty of sheep.  The wool was used often because of the abundance of it.  Wool was therefore commonly used, whereas linen was for holy use.  So to forbid the mixing of wool and linen is to forbid the mixing of the common with the set-apart...which is what this parsha, and actually all of Leviticus, more so the whole Bible, is all about.
"You are not to eat any meat with the blood still in it, nor are you to use enchantments, or practice sorcery."  -- Leviticus 19:26
Before I get into this, I want to point out another passage that is in the New Testament.  "Therefore, I judge not to trouble those from among the Gentiles who are turning to God -- but to write to them to abstain from the contamination of idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what is strangled, and from blood." (Acts 15:19-20).  So many read this and say that these 4 things are the only Torah requirements that a Gentile has to keep.  What many have failed to research is that during this time of Gentiles being added into the community, Christian churches didn't exist.  There were synagogues (wherein they taught Torah) and pagan temples -- that's it.  So these people went from pagan practices to Torah.  They were overwhelmed.  The apostles had decided to start them off with the things they would have to immediately let go of, because those were things they were doing in their pagan temples.  In their (Gentiles) worship they had idols, they had orgies, they strangled their animals and drank their blood.  They did many other things, but these 4 were a part of the worship in pagan temples and it was a start.  They would cross the other bridges as they got there, but surely the goal was that eventually they would be totally transformed out of their paganism and conformed into all of Torah.  This was their baby step, and had to be first because they could not enter the synagogues and temple with such practices -- that would be defiling the temple!  They wanted to enter the synagogues to learn, but the order was that they had to set aside their worship defilements first.  That being said, the command in Torah is easier to understand.  Eating blood was mingled with sorcery and enchantments.  It was a barbaric, pagan practice.

That is the point we must rest upon.  We cannot take the world's practices and bring them into the temple without defiling the temple.  It should be detestable to us to see a congregation claim set-apartness while having pagan decorations and practices within.  
"Also you are to make a distinction between the clean animal and the unclean, and between the unclean bird and the clean.  And you are not to make your souls detestable by an animal or by a bird, or by anything with which the ground teems, which I have set apart as unclean for you."  -- Leviticus 20:25
This is regarding food, and yet goes to show that we cannot manipulate YHWH to make something clean and accept it because we do it or eat it.  We do not choose what is clean or unclean, but He does.  Eating something unclean and asking Adonai to bless it does not make it blessed, but it does make your soul detestable.  This parsha was ended with food, before the Lord said, "You are to be holy to Me, for I, Adonai, am holy, and have set you apart from the peoples, so that you would be Mine." (Leviticus 20:26).

This food command is the final before He seals it with the bookend, the beginning bookend being "Be kedoshim," and the final one being "be holy."  Why is food so important that the Lord would end it on this note?  First of all, first sin was dietary.  YHWH cared about food all the way back in the Garden.  Food is something we need to fuel our bodies.  It is something we are often thinking about, and it is easy for our tongues and stomachs to become an idol because we put so much attention to them with food.  It is so much of an idol that people will defend the eating of abominable things, and claim that those who don't and are the food-conscious ones are the ones treating food as an idol.  A true test of whether something is an idol or not is your willingness to give it up.  Considering the one excusing the eating of abominable things is doing so to prevent giving it up, they are unwilling to give it up, they have exposed their idolatry though their mouths deny it.  We are lying to ourselves that we are giving up our lives to the Lord, but we cannot even give up ham for Him.

Why is it important?  The Lord says, as He ends it, that the soul is made detestable by unclean foods.  How can anyone know set-apartness when their soul has been made detestable?  How can we uphold each other to holiness over our bacon and eggs?  It's like parenting advice from someone who neglects their children.  We cannot move forward in growing in set-apartness if we cannot even get passed the first fall.  The detestable soul cannot properly discern holiness.  The Gentiles in Acts 15 had to start somewhere because of what was going in their time.  In today's world, it seems our start is kosher eating and the Shabbat, which so happens to be what made up the beginning and end of this parsha's commands.  Eat kosher and keep the Shabbat.  We've got to start somewhere and if we haven't even started in these, then perhaps it is time to test if we truly be His arrows.

Set-apartness is the heart of Leviticus.  If everything is set-apart, then nothing is set-apart.  He set Himself apart and us apart.  We ought to do so the same.

Shabbat Shalom,

Natasha

*Disclosure:  With the exception of Scripture and quotations, the information on this site is meant to be viewed solely on this site.  Any reference of its contribution is not to be parted with the reference of this site, nor without reference to its contributor.  Therefore, please cite properly.    

Friday, April 8, 2016

Tazria: Light or leprosy

It is interesting to notice how the Lord prepares us for the portion which we are about to read.  There have been countless times I have been face to face with a situation or in a conversation that got the wheels moving and next thing I know it happens to be the very subject discussed in the parsha.

Last Shabbat, the rabbi of our synagogue made his rounds to saying hello before starting the service.  We were the last ones he talked with before the music started.  We talked about the current week's parsha, and I was discussing with him what I wrote last week in a blog about the fire sacrifices and the word ishah (female of ish, wife) being used, to then give Paul what he was talking about when he said the bride is to be a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to Elohim as our reasonable service.  It was right in the parsha.  This got him to explain to us how we are fire and YHWH is an all-consuming fire.  We are made to be little ambassadors, little fires, of our Creator.  He went further in what happens when male and female, ish and ishah don't control their fires and they consume each other and the result is divorce with the only ashes left over.  We connected the dots in conversation with him about YHWH, the all-consuming fire, being in the burning bush but not consuming it.  It the example of the frail body of the human and the fire of YHWH within him.  The containment is to God's glory.  Of this was then brought up the subject of spontaneous combustion, which he mentioned was simply someone breaking out of their flesh.  Then right as the music started, as he walked away, he mentioned, "You know Adam was able to transfigure in the garden...." No I didnt, but the conversation would have to continue to another time.

Or I should say the conversation prepared me for this week's Torah parsha, which we just began the day after.  The conversation was about the skin and the flesh, man and his wife, and here we are reading about disease of the skin and flesh.  How does this relate to a man and wife?  So glad you asked!

Those specific man and wife, male and female, wheels got turning with a phone call from my imprisoned brother earlier this week.  He asked, "Why does chapter 13 go back and forth with he and she?"  Huh?  I didn't know what he was talking about.  He told me the pronouns are not consistent in the chapter.  One second it using a pronoun that means he and the next it is using she.  I had to read this for myself.  

I was tickled to see that he was correct.  He is referring to the Hebrew #1931, the male of which is הוּא, and the female version being הִיא.  The male is written with a vav and the female with a yod.  I do understand that in the Torah the male version is often not gender-specific, and the version with the yod makes more distinction of female outside of the Torah.  However, the Torah is using this change within the text and I, just like my brohter, have to wonder.

Considering that leprosy is a matter for the priest to determine, and that sacrifices were done after cleansing, then we know that leprosy was a matter of sin.  It was the breaking out of sin in one's flesh.  With my mind on the conversation of last Shabbat, like combustion is the breaking out of the fire in one's flesh, so leprosy was the breaking out of sin in one's flesh.  

O that conversation of last week, ish and ishah...perhaps my mind would not have gone back in to Genesis when reading this week's portion if we hadn't so freshly discussed ish and ishah with the rabbi.  I went back to when sin first entered in and was clearly seen on flesh, as Adam and Eve knew they were naked.  They saw their sin in their flesh.  Talk about connection.  I went to the consequences of it and what the Creator said about it.  It is interesting to note that when talking to Eve in that passage, He called her "ishah" (Genesis 3:16), wherein He says that ishah will desire her ish (He uses ish here and not Adam) and her ish will rule over her.  Mind you, before we go claiming this is the will of God, we need to remember these words are the curse of sin.  

This language is also repeated very soon afterward in their offspring.  It is to Cain in Genesis 4:7 that YHWH says to Cain that sin's desire is to him but he should rule over it.  Same language, just remove "ish" and "ishah" and put in "sin" and "Cain".  What in the world is He saying?  He is saying that sin is a man's wife, or this man (Cain's) wife.  Truly, it is as Paul tries to explain to us in Romans 6 that a man has 2 masters to choose from, sin or God.  He will either marry sin or he will marry God.  The man of the flesh will marry sin and the spiritual man will marry God.  So when we fast forward to Leviticus 13 and we see the language of "he" and "she" as it pertains to a man whose sin has made its way forth into his flesh, we see a picture here of male and female, and therefore a conclusion that the leprous man is one who is not actively in marital relations with God, but rather married to sin.

All this said by skin.  Skin says so much, doesn't it?  Skin showed sin in Genesis and it shows sin in this week's parsha.  What I also came across this week was a Facebook post about how after the first sin God clothed Adam and Eve in garments of skin (pronounced or, Hebrew #5785, Genesis 3:21), whereas their original skin was not so.  This final thought is the final words the rabbi said to us as the service started last week..."You know Adam was able to transfigure in the garden..."  The Hebrew word used for the nakedness of their flesh is #5903, arom, quite similar and of the same root as the word used to describe the serpent as subtle, which is #6175, arum.  This is no surprise.  Since they partook of the serpent's deeds, they are now like the serpent.  A man walks like the serpent he will be likened unto him; a man walks like YHWH, and he will be likened unto Him.  So man is now arom, serpent-like.  Both #5903 (describing man's nakedness after sin) and #6175 (describing the serpent) have the same root -- #6191.  These are all completely different words from that word used to describe the skins the Creator used to cover Adam and Eve after sin -- the garment of skins is ayin, vav, resh, whereas the nudity of skin is ayin, resh, mem -- but there is a similarity in them, and that is that they begin with the ayin, which means eye.  They saw (eye) that they were naked -- notice this is exactly what Scripture says of them, that they eyes (ayin) were open, of which even the serpent claimed opened eyes and therefore they in the that likeness.  Another similarity is that both roots (garments of skin, and the nude flesh from sin) have resh, which means head.  Sin is the head, which makes man the slave of it.  This goes deep, and you will have to take this down the Hebrew trail on your own time, but I need to stick to the point. 

As was said earlier, it is believed that their skin wasn't originally so.  Of course it wasn't because clearly we can see that their skin (ayin, resh, mem) was a result of being the likeness of the serpent.  So what was it before?  We can only really speculate, by connecting dots with the rest of the Scriptures.  However, it is said the midrash that their skin was originally "or"...yet, a different or and not like the or used to describe the garments of flesh YHWH used to clothe them after sin.  This "or" is not ayin, vav, resh, but rather aleph, vav, resh -- aleph representing the Father, of whose likeness they were originally created.  To add to this, this sort of "or" (aleph, vav, resh) means light.  So their skin was light.  Hence, they were able to transfigure.  I guess this is why Moses' skin was shining brightly after being in the presence of YHWH and why he was present during the transfiguration of Yeshua.

Have you ever studied so much and saw so much revealed in the Scriptures that you almost had to ask God to back off a bit?  Like you would explode if you received any more insight.  It is said that on that glorious day when we will see Him face to face we will have had new bodies.  This old one would combust.  This flesh could not contain the fire within it, once this fire is joined to its originator.  I get it.  Or at least I'm starting to.

Shabbat Shalom,

Natasha

*Disclosure:  With the exception of Scripture and quotations, the information on this site is meant to be viewed solely on this site.  Any reference of its contribution is not to be parted with the reference of this site, nor without reference to its contributor.  Therefore, please cite properly.    

Saturday, April 2, 2016

Sh'mini -- Biblical Divisions

The past couple of years I've really liked to linger on the strange fire of Nadab and Abihu.  Perhaps it is because of the many different considerations on what it means to have strange fire.  I've held onto the belief that it was because the fire [for the incense] did not come from the coals of the burnt offering, as was commanded, but the source of the fire came elsewhere, thereby making it strange.  When I look up the Hebrew, the word for fire is "esh" (remember this from my post earlier this week, regarding the sacrifices?); and the word for strange is pronounced as zoor, which does mean strange but also in line with committing adultery.  There are many things regarding worship that can be considered spiritually adultery.

I heard it best explained to me a few years back in an example between a man and his wife.  Let us say that the wife had former lovers before she married her husband.  Now when she married her husband she did indeed celebrate his birthday and celebrate their anniversary; howbeit, not on the exact days.  Let us say that she decided to celebrate her husband's birthday on her former lover's birthday and her anniversary with her husband on the day that she started dating her former lover.  Now, what do you think her husband's reaction would be?  Can we honestly say that a woman like that is in love with her husband and that she has forsaken her former lovers, or is she committing adultery in her heart?

 This really brings a honest perspective on what it means to celebrate Yeshua's birthday and the moedim on days that commemorated other gods that were put in YHWH's place.  It is spiritual adultery. 
Now Aaron's sons Nadab and Abihu each took his own censer, put fire in it, laid incense over it, and offered unauthorized fire before Adonai -- which He had not commanded them.  So fire came out from the presence of Adonai and consumed them.  So they died before Adonai.  Then Moses said to Aaron, "This is what Adonai spoke, saying:  To those who are near Me I will show myself holy.  Upon the faces of all the people I will be glorified."  Then Aaron kept silent.  -- Leviticus 10:1-3 TLV
They offered strange fire and THE fire (YHWH) consumed them.  In some way, this somewhat connects to those who use the sword die by the sword.  It's not about using the sword (as the sword is the Word), it is about using the wrong sword and for the wrong reason.  Those who shed blood will perish by blood shed, and we know this earth will be threshed with bloodshed for all the blood that was shed upon it.  Death by fire after bringing strange fire...it just added to a principle the Word is trying to tell us.

I'm convinced more than ever that this strange fire is directly related to burnt offering.  Above I said that perhaps it was strange because the fire came from other sources rather than from the coals of the burnt offering.  This is why I say I'm more convinced -- rereading verse 3, Moses reminded that Adonai says, "To those who are near Me I will show myself glorified."  If you read my blog earlier this week, you'll remember that I pointed out the word used for the offering (that is, the burnt offering), starting in Leviticus 1:2, is a word whose root is Strong's 7126, "to draw near."  This tells us the purpose for the offering is to draw near.  Now back to this week's text, the word used in verse 3 of this passage of Nadab and Abihu has the same root.  Hence, the text says, "To those who are near Me...."  In a nutshell?  To those who are near YHWH, there is no spiritual adultery, there is no mixing of the nations' and pagan's worship, but as He said, "...I will show myself holy [set apart]."  Adonai is not set apart if He is likened to the rest of them, worshiped like them, and in their ways.  It is always a good time to test our nearness to YHWH, which can be tested by our set-apartness of Him in our worship.
"You are to make a distinction between the holy [set apart] and the common and between the unclean and the clean."  -- Leviticus 10:10 
I was just telling my husband this past week about my trip to South Beach of Miami, FL some years back.  I was there visiting my cousin and had not been told of what to expect on the beach.  What I saw was so much nakedness of women.  South Beach is topless.  I thought it was such exploitation of women because it took what was beautiful and made it common.  I looked upon those women and there was nothing of a treasure of them, because the nakedness was so common...and what is common is not set-apart, and what is not set-apart is not (as YHWH describes) "a peculiar treasure."

Oftentimes set-apartness comes in time with reading and understanding of the Scriptures.  It is, sadly, not immediately observed...not because that is the way Adonai set it up, but because of the lack of "church" responsibility.  The way Adonai set it up, you teach a child in the faith and in Torah, and that child does not depart from the teaching of Torah.  The way it happened is not so, but mixing has come with teaching lies to our children and letting our children deal with the lies when they become adults.  They filter through which lies of their Gentile church fathers (and even pagan holy days for fun and entertainment and manipulation) that they want to hold onto and start churches with as foundation, and which they will depart with.  We leave our children with more work than YHWH intended, all by forsaking Torah as parents.

Nevertheless, oftentimes when those children become adults and, because of the lack of upbringing in Torah from the parents, those adults will hear the Word in perhaps an ear-tickling church.  We get into many arguments amongst one another on the topic of where we have convocation and if that location is Biblical or if it is the school of demons, and if it is okay because, hey, at least they are getting the Word (even using the passage of Paul's words on at least the Gospel is getting preached).  We might even say the Lord can speak through anyone, even a donkey!  From the parsha we have an answer, found right in the middle of the kosher eating.  I mean, getting fed the Word from a "church" is considered nourishment, correct?  Our nourishment, then, must be kosher.
"If part of a carcass falls on any seed for sowing that has yet to be sown, it is clean.  But if water is put on the seed, and part of a carcass falls on it, it is unclean to you."  -- Leviticus 11:37-38 
We can break down the statement to the carcass being a dead man, the seed being the Word, and the water being the feeding to germination/growth, to make a Biblically accurate principle and answer.  This seed has yet to be sown, meaning that we are talking about people who need the Word.  The source can be a carcass, a dead man, giving them the Word and it is still "kosher," but that carcass cannot grow them in the Word.  They are not to get their nourishment from such sources.  It is unclean eating.  I went to a church recently where God told me to leave and said, "The food is unclean."  I guess I know why such a statement was said to me, considering the place had sorely tainted the Word.  One could not be watered there and be clean, because of its unclean attachments and leaven of the teaching.  So is it okay that someone goes into Osteen's Lakewood church (that was not the church I'm referring to, by the way) and hears the Word?  Perhaps, but it is certainly unclean if they continue to allow themselves to be watered there.  Choose wisely where you have have convocation as you observe the Sabbaths.

Shabbat Shalom,

Natasha

*Disclosure:  With the exception of Scripture and quotations, the information on this site is meant to be viewed solely on this site.  Any reference of its contribution is not to be parted with the reference of this site, nor without reference to its contributor.  Therefore, please cite properly.    

Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Levitical Sacrifice -- Is It for Today?

It was a few months ago when my idea of the sacrifices had been radically changed.  One day, in discussion of the sacrifices and offerings, my husband said, "There is no sacrifice for intentional sins."  Of course I had to test that and look into Leviticus.  What I found was that for sacrifices regarding sins, these pertained to sins done in ignorance, unintentional sins, sins of bearing false witness, hidden uncleanness that is made known.  

Talk about understanding not having an allowance to sin so that grace may abound!  To the person in fellowship and Covenant with YHWH, it seems that sins committed are not really purposeful, and if they are (like in bearing false witness) there is some restitution that is to be considered to make amends.  Otherwise, though we fall daily, it is not our intention as lovers of Elohim to dishonor our covenant with Him.  

Though what of the burnt offering?  Many would consider that the burnt offering paid for the sins that are not otherwise specifically stated that I paraphrased above.  Yet, I have been challenged in considering that to be true, all the more when I looked into the Hebrew.  

First, we have to realize that the burnt offering didn't exactly pay for sin.  We get this from the Hebrew. --  
"If his sacrifice is a burnt offering from the herd, he is to present a male without blemish.  He is to offer it at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, so that he may be accepted before Adonai."  -- Leviticus 1:3 TLV
This offering is to be male.  When I looked up the Hebrew word used here (there are many that could be used to signify male), I was satisfied to see that the word used is "zakar."  In my Hebrew primer, I've first learned that zakar's immediate meaning is to remember.  Male and remember are the same Hebrew characters in this case, because male's job is to zakar/remember, as opposed to a woman's job as ezer kenegdo.  Now this possibly will answer some questions as to why sacrifices make a comeback in the Ezekiel temple.  They are a remembrance of what was done.  I can now also understand why some people say that the mitzvah regarding tzitziot only applies to men, as males are given the job to remember and that is the purpose of the fringes.

When we consider Adam as male and his job, we also realize that zakar's alternate meaning is to act in place.  Adam was to rule/dominate as God's ambassador on earth.  In this thought, the sacrifice is acting in place of Yeshua, until Yeshua came.  In the future (prophecy at the end of Ezekiel), it will be looking back in remembrance of Yeshua.  All of this we get from the sacrifice being zakar.

What we also see of the sacrifice is written even before verse 3:
Now Adonai called to Moses and spoke to him out of the Tent of Meeting, saying:  "Speak to Bnei-Yisrael, and tell them:  When anyone of you brings an offering to Adonai, you may present your offering of livestock, from the herd or from the flock."  -- Leviticus 1:2-3 
I found this very interesting.  The Hebrew text shows יַקְרִיב מִכֶּם קָרְבָּן .  That middle word means is telling us "from," but the words surrounding that middle word are of the same root -- Strong's #7126, to draw near.  With a double word statement, there is an emphasis here on that word.  Now you may say this is because the sacrifice is to brought near.  Yet, it is the sacrifice that you bring so that you may draw near.  If you want to really draw near, then this is how it is to be done.  Being stated first in Leviticus, it is like the head of the following offerings, as the peace and meal offerings are simply for fellowship as well.  The sacrifice is to draw near so that there may be fellowship with Adonai, and it is in this fellowship with Him that, working chronologically in how He mentions the sacrifices, that you are made aware of sins that you possibly didn't know existed, uncleanness you didn't realize you had, false witness you've born, especially that of YHWH Himself.  In order, the sacrifices state this process:  draw near, fellowship, cleansing and remittance of unknown uncleanness, hidden sins, and false witness.  Yet what of intentional sins?  A good tree does not bear bad fruit.  The heart is deceitful and commits lies about who we are and where we are found in Elohim.  If intentional sins are the fruit, it is time to test if we be found in the faith or if we are indeed faithless. 

There is one final thing I saw of this burnt offering, this offering made by fire. -- 
"Then Aaron's sons, the kohamin, shall arrange the pieces, the head, and the fat upon the wood that is on the fire which is atop the altar.  But its innards and its legs he is to wash with water.  The kohen should burn it all up as smoke on the altar, for a burnt offering made by fire -- a soothing aroma to Adonai."  -- Leviticus 1:8-9 
There is a switch here regarding the fire.  The first sentence that talks of the head and the fat uses the root word "esh," simply meaning fire.  However, when talking of the legs and body parts, the word used here is "ishah," a female version of this root.  Ishah also means wife.  It is the wife of Messiah who is His ishah, and of whom it is also said that she is His body [parts], extremities, like that which is burnt here and considered ishah.  It is the wife of Messiah who also is commissioned by Paul to present herself as the living sacrifice in Romans 12:1.  Paul, well-studied in Torah, could see that the sacrifice is placed down in 2 segments -- the head and the fat first, and then the legs and rest of body.  The head is said to be "esh," though the body parts are "ishah."  

The Head has offered Himself first as sacrifice before the rest of the body, as it is written even in Leviticus and seen in Yeshua's sacrifice.  In order to draw near for fellowship, His Body and Bride then offers herself in response.  Relationship.  Marriage.  Covenant.

Shalom,

Natasha

*Disclosure:  With the exception of Scripture and quotations, the information on this site is meant to be viewed solely on this site.  Any reference of its contribution is not to be parted with the reference of this site, nor without reference to its contributor.  Therefore, please cite properly.