1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Exegeting Genesis 17: The Alpha and Omega of the Covenant.

Discussion in 'Scriptural Debates' started by John D. Brey, Mar 4, 2018.

  1. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    3,900
    Ratings:
    +428
    Religion:
    Christian


    "Listen to me, O Jacob, Israel, whom I have called: I am he; I am the first ראש and the last. . . From now on I will tell you of new things, of hidden things unknown to you. They are created new, and not long ago; you have not heard of them before today. So you cannot say, "Yes, I knew of them." You have neither heard nor understood; from of old your ear has not been open. Well do I know how treacherous you are; you were called a rebel from birth.

    Isaiah 48:12 & 6-8.​

    Brother Samson Hirsch was not as treacherous from birth as many of his peers; he circumcised his ears, and heard things few Jews have heard, wrote of things few Jews could stomach. -----Alas, even brother Hirsch had to cover his ears when the alpha of the covenant was seen, retroactively, to in fact be the omega of the perceived covenant. Perhaps no Jewish writer has inched so close to the divide between modern Judaism and Christianity as did Rabbi Hirsch. And in no place did he come so close to crossing the line as he does in his exegesis of Genesis chapter 17 where the alpha and omega of the covenant are both hidden and revealed.

    To some degree we're all no doubt treacherous and hard of hearing. Nevertheless I sit here with bleeding ears and eyes trying to take in and put out the hard to hear whispers of a very great man and friend, brother Samson Raphael Hirsch.



    John
     
  2. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    3,900
    Ratings:
    +428
    Religion:
    Christian
    . . . Here's the thing that bothers Rabbi Hirsch as it bothers Rashi . . . as it bothers any serious exegete (as it should bother you oh bible thumper). -----In the most important foundational covenant passage in the scripture, Genesis chapter 17, God says, in the very genesis of the establishment of the covenant, that he's going to make Abraham the father of a "multitude of nations." -----The phrases, "multitude or nations," and or, "many nations," is never, throughout the Tanakh, used in any way relating to Israel. -----Israel is never, not once, spoken of as a "multitude of nations" גוים המון or "many nations" גוים רבים, not once throughout the Tanakh. These terms, to include "multitude of people" is always used exclusively for non-Jewish peoples. . . And get this: Israel is never even included in the "multitude," in the "many," nations. They are (these terms) applied only ---exclusively----to non-Jewish nations and peoples.

    Rabbi Hirsch knows this. Rashi knows this. But they both know something you probably don't. That if you interpret Genesis chapter 17 without these phrases speaking of Israel, then the primary covenant established with Abraham isn't about Israel but about Gentiles, which does more damage to modern Jewish sensibilities than does presenting a complete sham that any serious exegete knows is a complete sham. Almost nothing scrabbles up the foundation of modern Judaism like interpreting Genesis chapter 17 as any serious exegete would interpret Genesis chapter 17 if they weren't beholden to religious orthodoxies established to keep the peace, and assuage the ethnicity-publicizing instincts of the religious masses.



    John
     
    #2 John D. Brey, Mar 5, 2018
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2018
  3. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    3,900
    Ratings:
    +428
    Religion:
    Christian

    Israel is not a "multitude of nations" גוים המון . The phrase speaks exclusively of Gentiles (throughout the Tanakh). So Rabbi Hirsch says:

    What is the meaning of this latter phrase ["multitude of nations" גוים המון]. To maintain that it refers to Avraham's physical descendants is difficult, for they are mentioned only in verse 6. [And, the] . . . name "אברהם" shows that, here, the phrase is not to be taken in the physical sense. Were אב meant to be taken literally, in the physical sense, the form of the name would be "אבהם," and the ר would be meaningless and disruptive.

    The Hirsch Chumash, Genesis 17:5.​

    This is rich. . . A rabbi, and excellent exegete of the Hebrew scripture, says that it's difficult to maintain that the covenant established with Abraham refers to Abraham's physical descendants. --------Because it doesn't. -----The covenant established with Abraham doesn't refer to Abraham's physical descendants, Israel. It refers to a Gentile "multitude of nations," גוים המון.

    If you don't believe little ole Rabbi Hirsch, read Rashi. He knows the same thing as Rabbi Hirsch, that it's difficult to maintain that the Hebrew verbiage speaking of the covenant refers to Abraham's physical descendants. Because it doesn't. Rashi knows it doesn't. He says that it refer to the fact that Abraham is father אב to the whole world: the Gentile hordes, גוים המון.

    What a crazy little truism: the covenant of circumcision, established with Abraham, isn't, by any good exegesis, to include Rashi and Rabbi Hirsch, speaking of Israel.



    John
     
  4. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    3,900
    Ratings:
    +428
    Religion:
    Christian
    Rabbi Hirsch points out that the point of establishing the covenant is the corruption that's tantamount to a birth-defect מום. A bodily "defect" (in this case a birth defect, the evil-inclination) is what the covenant is going to obliterate.

    When God wants to re-establish the covenant he had before the beginning of this "birth defect" (the evil-inclination) he tells Abraham to cover up the defect מום with a cross תמים (the ktav ivri tav being a cross ✗ and representing the "it is finished" moment in history). . . Everything in the quotation from Rabbi Hirsch speaks of the "age old" defect (the "ingrained" defect) that's riddled man since the first case of mixing flesh to raise Cain. Here's Rabbi Hirsch's commentary on Moses statements in Deuteronomy 32:5:

    "Corruption is not His; rather, His children ---theirs is the fault.". . מום is only a personal defect, usually a bodily defect, and by extension it could also be applied to a moral defect . . . מומם: the character defect that clings to them from old . . . this defect is described by the expression "דור עקש ופתלתל." The meaning of the whole verse, then, would be: Their age-old defect so corrupted them that they became His non-children, and this ingrained defect of theirs is דור עקש ופתלתל. . . When applied to character, עקש is crookedness that opposes all honesty . . . disobedience that fights against any guidance of the Law.​

    In the Gospels Jesus is presented as the "it is finished," the tav, the final mark of the Torah, come not just to save himself, or his offspring, or his disciples, but all mankind, to include the leaders of the Jews who, because of the ingrained age-old defect (the evil inclination) are just as subject to corrupt motives and actions as anyone born with this birth-defect.

    The Gospels literally call Jesus' blood the "covering" that covers up the ingrained age-old defect (the evil inclination). And since that blood was acquired on the tav, the cross, it becomes the covering that covers up the מום creating perfection ת–מים.

    Point being, in the Gospels (and this is gospel truth about the Gospels) Jesus condemns no man for their personal sins and corruption. His disciples are no better than the Jewish leaders and no worse. They're all born with the ingrained age-old defect (the evil inclination) which is the target of Jesus' blood. The Pharisees aren't being demonized any more than Jesus calling Peter "satan" demonizes Peter. The Gospels are presenting the fact that no human being save one, the Savior, was conceived without the ingrained age-old defect (the evil inclination).

    The ingrained age-old defect (the evil inclination) is מום. The solution is to cover the birth-defect with the cross ✗ . . . מים-✗ (tamim). The ancient tav ת being a cross ✗ (תמים).

    But the symbolism goes deeper since the letter mem מ is spelled מם such that it's the sound of "mom" (R. Ginsburgh). If you add the Hebrew letter symbolizing "man" (the sixth letter) into the "mom" מם you get "defect" מום. But when you cover the word for "defect" מום with a cross ✗ not only do you transform the "defect" מום into "perfection" תמים, but the careful Hebrew reader will notice that the ithyphallic vav ו in the middle of the "mom" מם, is cut (milah) down to size becoming a yod י. The knowledgeable Hebrew reader will know that the yod י is the mark of circumcision.

    If the ithyphallic vav ו is in the "mom" מום the word is "defect" (the age-old, ingrained, defect, the evil inclination). But if you cover up the defect with the cross, the tav (the ktav ivri tav being a "cross" ✗) you not only transform the age-old "defect" מום into "perfection" תמים but in the process the ithyphallic vav ו is cut down to size becoming the yod י.


    John
     
    #4 John D. Brey, Mar 18, 2018
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2018
  5. John D. Brey

    John D. Brey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Messages:
    3,900
    Ratings:
    +428
    Religion:
    Christian
    Since the fundamental point of the Jewish mother is to transform the מום into ת–מים (defect into perfection) . . . and since the way to do this is circumcision, cutting the extended yod (the vav) down to size (ו becomes י), every Jewish virgin remain perpetually a virgin because her groom has been, unlike the Genitile, cut down to size.

    We see this in symbolism when the virgin daughter בת becomes a the "home" for her groom, becomes בית, after the marriage. The mark of circumcision (the yod י) is added to the virgin daughter בת to become the "house" בית where a circumcised man dwells.

    All of this symbolism finds its genesis in, well . . . . . Genesis. Chapter 17. Where God tells Abraham that the covenant is such that Abraham will become the father of a "multitude of nations." This "multitude of nations" גוים המון is never used to speak of Abraham's natural posterity, either through Ishmael, or Isaac, which presents a gaping problem as noted by Rabbi Hirsch, Rashi, and any other knowledgeable Hebrew exegete.

    That said, Rabbi Hirsch, per usual, gives us the most to chew on when he points out (and actually Rashi points this out as well) that the reish ר in Abram's new name אב–ר–הם "Abraham" is problematic since it's superfluous. If ---- and Rabbi Hirsch points this out, with Rashi, the covenant was being established with Abram and his natural posterity (Ishmael or Isaac) Abram's name should be changed to "Abhamon" and not "Abraham." The reish ר throws a wrench into vision of Jewish grandure since it justifies the fact that the covenant is being established with a "multitude of goy" (Gentile nations) and not with Abraham's natural posterity (Ishmael or Isaac).

    But it gets worse for poor ole Israel since when God says he will establish his covenant ברית with a multitude of goy nations גוים המון the word he uses for the "covenant" is ברית the word for a Jewish wife בית with the very reish ר added to Abraham in association with him becoming the "father" of the "multitude of nations" forming the covenant.

    This isn't complicated stuff.

    God establishes a "covenant" with Abraham. The word "covenant" is a wife, home, בית with the addition of a reish ר forming ב–ר–ית. A wife becomes "covenant" when the same reish ר God puts into Abram אברם to become "Abraham" אב–ר–הם is put into the Jewish bride/house ב–ר–ית. Even the basest knowledge of Hebrew reveals that the reish ר represents the "head" or better "fountain head" --- the "first," such that the first actual member of the covenant, the head, or fountainhead, of the covenant, is placed into Abram to become Abraham, and then is placed into his "wife" ב–ר–ית to become "covenant."

    Ok Hebrew kindergarteners . . . listen up! -----Let's connect all the dots and then you get an all day sucker if you pay attention.

    If, says R. Hirsch, and Rashi too, the covenant were with Abram's natural posterity (through Ishmael or Issac) then God should have changed his name to "Abhamon" and not "Abraham." The R (reish ר) throws the exegesis into a tail spin. . . But, the exegesis can be corrected if the reish, the R, isn't making Abraham the father of his own offspring, but the father of a "multitude of goy" (as pointed out by R. Hirsch and Rashi). . . But how can Abraham be both the father of his semite offspring, through Ishmael (the Arabs) and Isaac (the Jews), and also be the father of the third of the "People of the Book" (the Gentile hordes)? And worse, why, why, why, is this "multitude of goy" associated with the "covenant" while Abraham's posterity through Isaac are merely the "guardians" of the covenant (they guard the covenant by cutting its emblem in their flesh)?

    Well, the last comment sums it up. The covenant cut has caused Rabbis like Boyarin and others to say: "Why there," Why that"?

    Place the "head" of the covenant ר into a Jewish virgin whose husband cut all the way into the fleshly mark of the covenant (ergo her perpetual virginity--- בת with the mark of circumcision in her ב–י–ת ) and viola! you get the word "covenant" ברית.

    If the head of the covenant ר comes out of a closed-womb, he opens the womb, because his mother is a virgin, and his father goes all the way, cuts all the way into the symbolic flesh of the covenant, so deep he loses the mark of the covenant becoming the true father of the covenant head, then this "head" ר of the covenant, found in a virgin home, is both the natural posterity of Abraham, a Jew, and the Head of the "multitude of goy" who are the true target of the covenant therein forming the trinity of the People of the Book: the flesh, Ishmael, the spirit, Israel, and the union of the flesh and the spirit, the multitude of nations: the Church.


    John
     
Loading...