Meat How can we believe in "Magic" - but not Scripture?

[Mark C]

This one I almost didn't put up, but was urged by my wives to do. It really doesn't belong in the Ghetto, anyway, since much of the impact would be on those who would "skip over" those parts of Scripture that don't seem "relevant" to them. Which is the point. So, skip over the reading part up front, if you must, and come back to that later if the rest resonates.

Because I suggest it will, eventually.

Metzora: How can we believe in ‘magic’ but not Scripture?”

Mark Call – Parsha “Metzora” teaching from Shabbat Shalom Mesa

Parsha “Metzora” (Leviticus chapters 14 through 15) is almost like “part two” of something many people might tend to skip over anyway. But don’! After all, this malady…

hebrewnationonline.com

Parsha “Metzora” teaching from Shabbat Shalom Mesa | Come out of her, My people…

 

[MeganC]

Magical beliefs seem to be part of people.

The utterly unfounded belief in the mRNA shots, the utterly unfounded belief in global warming, and the utterly unfounded beliefs in medical quackery are all examples of magical thinking.

The problem some people have with Scripture and belief in Jesus is that it's too easy.

Salvation is a free gift. All you need to do is to accept it.

There is no magical incantation needed, no sacrifice of blood needed, you don't need to give money to a soothsayer, you don't need to say fifty Our Fathers and twenty Hail Marys as if doing so will save you. Twiddling the voodoo beads won't help.

Just say "yes, Jesus, I am yours."

It's too simple. And powerless people like to think that some ritual will give them control when what they need to do is give up their control to Jesus.

 

[Mark C]

The utterly unfounded belief in the mRNA shots, the utterly unfounded belief in global warming, and the utterly unfounded beliefs in medical quackery are all examples of magical thinking.

Which was at least part of the point.

More of the point had to do with how you can't see a radio wave, OR a 'virus,' or a demon. But I can at least measure the frequency and amplitude of a radio wave, whereas we can't even really prove a virus actually exists as such. But far more people believe that than in demons, which is ironic, to say the least.

What I thought was far more interesting was how they reject other things, too, that Scripture actually DOES say, like about the no-longer extant 'plague' of tzaraat (which is NOT 'leprosy') and think the the process outlined there (and confirmed by Yahushua) is superstition, WHILE believing that something that destroys their immune system and their heart is "safe and effective."

And what kind of magical, er idiotic thinking does it take for a dude to believe that cutting off his johnson and taking estrogen will turn him into a woman?

But the real point of the midrash is a question:
What ELSE is there in Scripture that seems "olde" and irrelevant now that just might end up being vital?

And how will we know?

 

[Earth_is-]

Take a man that was living isolated on an island - with zero contact with the outside world - and bring him into the year 2024. Wouldn’t he consider a lot of the things we take granted for as “magic?” The same principle would apply if you take a man living in our generation - and take him back to the time that the House of Jacob were in Egyptian captivity. Perhaps some of the technology they had in possession of - would seem like magic to someone living in the 21st century.

This is in part due to our Babylonian upbringing - that we are an “evolving species.” And the earlier people were the cavemen - with their multiple wives - and their patriarchy headship. But they may very well of had certain technology more advanced than ours.

 

[Mark C]

Take a man that was living isolated on an island - with zero contact with the outside world - and bring him into the year 2024. Wouldn’t he consider a lot of the things we take granted for as “magic?”

While Arthur C. Clarke turned out to have been a new-age (early on) reprobate, he did pen a few truly notable insights. One of them, upon which I based part of the thesis in this midrash, was,
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

I contend he could have seen that by reading the early chapters of Exodus, and the 'magicians' of Pharaoh.

But the point here had to do with 'rituals' and procedures that seem us to be nothing but Biblical 'superstition,' or worse, and that thus have no value to today's enlightened, modern, oh-so-advanced 'society.'

As an engineer, who spent an entire career working to design circuits that in many cases can't even be seen with the naked eye, and sometimes employ even-more-invisible RF emanations that are even more invisible to our senses, it occurred to me that, without modern instruments (from network analyzers and oscilloscopes to DVMs) I couldn't even debug a failure in most of 'em, "post-apocalypse," without my tools.

And 5 GHz cellphone signals wouldn't have even been visible to a $50,000 scope that I used only a couple decades ago.

Yet YHVH once sent mankind a 'plague' or malady that was essentially a public humiliation. It seems to have been intended to allow His people, at least, to "clean up the camp," and put the unclean (tameh) out where they couldn't infest others. And what the Bible called "tzaraat" (again, NOT = "leprosy", or Hansen's Disease) hasn't been seen on the planet for many centuries. Why?

Can you even imagine a swamp full of lying, filthy scum politicians having the skin on their bodies flake off and being compelled (by Who?) to announce that they are "unclean, UNCLEAN!"? No? That speaks volumes.

We don't see that mechanism either.

What we see instead is an injection with invisible ingredients, allegedly to fight an equally invisible "virus" that causes people to be unclean in a way never seen before, but which often kills them. While they attempt to put OTHERS, who won't volunteer to be similarly unclean, 'outside the camp.'

But that's now pretty much the whole, fetid, world.

Could there be a message here?

 

[Bartato]

I've seen little structures that we call viruses, but still have lingering questions about viral theory.

The viral structures I saw (using an electron microscope at university) were the rod-like "tobamovirus" (tobacco mosaic virus) particles. I extracted these from a tomato plant displaying symptoms characteristic of tobacco mosaic disease.

That's the only time I've ever used an electron microscope. The plant pathology department didn't have one, and we had to use the one in the microbiology department.

As a side bit of trivia, the tobacco mosaic virus was the first virus to ever be "discovered".

 

[MemeFan]

And what kind of magical, er idiotic thinking does it take for a dude to believe that cutting off his johnson and taking estrogen will turn him into a woman?

There were scientists claiming mouses come from undead matter.

Proof: live sack of grain during night. Just because you can see mouse arrival doesn't mean mouse is grain-born.

Humanity doesn't have scarcity of stupidity.

EDIT: Corrected last sentence to proper meaning

 

[MemeFan]

There were scientists claiming mouses come from undead matter.

Proof: live sack of grain during night. Just because you can see mouse arrival doesn't mean mouse is grain-born.

Humanity does have scarcity of stupidity.

I would also add that some people believe people wear gender as suit. Some hormones and little surgeon attention and voila....new suit.

 

[MeganC]

And what the Bible called "tzaraat" (again, NOT = "leprosy", or Hansen's Disease) hasn't been seen on the planet for many centuries. Why?

I am often fascinated by the potential for certain things in the Bible to have been metaphors of the time in which the particular Books were written.

In our time we may well be taking certain things literally when in fact they were figurative or rhetorical.

Just my own opinion here but tzaraat may not have been one specific disease but instead a general reference to certain skin afflictions that had certain symptoms.

Like for instance millennia from now someone might wonder what specific virus or bacteria caused venereal disease when in fact it is a general reference to genital infections and sexually transmitted diseases.

This said, I do not believe that tzaraat went away but instead what was a group of diseases are all now referred to by specific names and not referred to as a group.

The different symptoms of tzaraat would appear to me to be manifestations of vitiligo (white patches of skin), smallpox (localized petechiae) , shingles (localized sores on the abdomen and chest), and sores caused by pests like chiggers, ticks, and fleas.

 

[Mark C]

I am often fascinated by the potential for certain things in the Bible to have been metaphors of the time in which the particular Books were written.

In our time we may well be taking certain things literally when in fact they were figurative or rhetorical.

Just my own opinion here but tzaraat may not have been one specific disease but instead a general reference to certain skin afflictions that had certain symptoms.

Like for instance millennia from now someone might wonder what specific virus or bacteria caused venereal disease when in fact it is a general reference to genital infections and sexually transmitted diseases.

This said, I do not believe that tzaraat went away but instead what was a group of diseases are all now referred to by specific names and not referred to as a group.

The different symptoms of tzaraat would appear to me to be manifestations of vitiligo (white patches of skin), smallpox (localized petechiae) , shingles (localized sores on the abdomen and chest), and sores caused by pests like chiggers, ticks, and fleas.

I disagree; very, very much, in fact.

But that was the point of the midrash. People tend to discount, or 'spiritualize' things that fall outside their 'comfort zone,' especially when they don't like the implications.

And, I add, that includes the Great God Science, and his high priest, Fauci. Why can't we just take Him (YHVH, the Real God) at His Word?

 

[MeganC]

Why can't we just take Him (YHVH, the Real God) at His Word?

I am not laughing at you here but I am laughing.

I do take God at His Word.

But the only actual and literal Word of God that was inarguably WRITTEN by the Hand of God was the Ten Commandments. And even that actual Word of God was rewritten by the Catholics and misinterpreted by so many others (Thou Shalt not murder being a different thing than Thou Shalt not kill.)

All the rest of it was repeated, translated, edited, retranslated, recopied, copied again, and etc. over the past few thousand years.

Which keeps people like you busy with correcting everyone else who might not understand a nuance of Greek or Aramaic that is lost in translation to Latin, English, or etc. yet may have great bearing upon the understanding of a particular passage of Scripture.

I don't think that we're that far apart here. Not at all. I agree with you that we all have much to learn about Scripture and that there are shades of meaning that are sometimes lost in translation or deliberate misinterpretation. Myself, I am rather dependent upon people like yourself for insight into these topics because I am not a scholar of Biblical languages. I have learned a lot from your posts here on BF and I am grateful for your wisdom.

I simply think that there may also be metaphors in the Bible whose meanings are lost to us.

Example: A 1957 Chevrolet Bel Air was a cool car.

To you and I cool is a metaphor that means good, exceptional, desirable, or nice.

To someone in the year 6024 they may wonder if cool is a reference to the cooling system for the power train, a reference to the windows that could be opened for fresh air, and I am sure some scholar will wonder if the vehicle had some amazing lost technology that allowed the surface of the vehicle to feel cool to the touch. And if so, why was this done?

Yet others may insist that this sentence means the Chevrolet division of General Motors in 1957 held dictatorial control over the Los Angeles suburb of Bel Air because in 4000 years the knowledge that a "Bel Air" was a vehicle was somehow lost.

 

[Mark C]

And, I add, that includes the Great God Science, and his high priest, Fauci. Why can't we just take Him (YHVH, the Real God) at His Word?

THAT, actually, turns out to be the central point of the midrash, which you obviously didn't listen to. I really don't care, but it certainly makes this seem a bit asinine:

I am not laughing at you here but I am laughing.

I do take God at His Word...
...Which keeps people like you busy with correcting everyone else who might not understand a nuance of Greek or Aramaic that is lost in translation to Latin, English... [or Greek! ...and THEN to others.]

Wrong. The Original that we DO still have was Written in Hebrew. SO, I correct people who ignore that.

But the only actual and literal Word of God that was inarguably WRITTEN by the Hand of God was the Ten Commandments.

Belly laugh, and a bit of derision. Unless you have the Tablets, that's a ridiculous statement. All you have are copies, so how do you KNOW? And there is PLENTY of evidence about the five 'Books of Moses,' too. (Discussed often, and even on this site.)

As for this, I agree:

I simply think that there may also be metaphors in the Bible whose meanings are lost to us.

Example: the "Day of Trumpets," or Yom Teruah (also shouting) which was colloquially referred to as the moed of which "no man knew the hour or the day." Because it was AT the sighted new moon, and you didn't know it until it happened.

But I contended that there was FAR more to the issue of 'tzaraat' than a metaphor, or some malady that still exists (it does not, say medical experts I trust more than those who prescribe Zykon-B) or even that did NOT exist until it was bio-engineered.

And that was the larger point of the midrash. You don't have to agree. But those arguments will be a full chapter, eventually, not a post in a thread.

So, I will say again,
How can we believe in magic (see Arthur C. Clarke quote) - but not Scripture? Which, in this case, I contend is not a "metaphor," or something that can't possibly ever matter.

But the real point of the midrash is a question:
What ELSE is there in Scripture that seems "olde" and irrelevant now that just might end up being vital?

And how will we know?

People (not necessarily you, Megan) seem to 'worship the great god 'science'. But still won't take the Real YHVH at His Word.

 

[Earth_is-]

We do have the original Hebrew. We also have tools online where we can see the meaning of the particular word in Hebrew. Then you can further research that word, and see how it's used elsewhere in Scripture. So with some diligent study (as the Word commands us to do), a person that has close to zero knowledge of the Hebrew or even the Greek (like me) - can still use the tools the Father in Heaven has given us - to decipher the actual meanings; or to test if something someone said is actually true - as the noble Bereans did with Paul.

I'd reckon - if people have the time to binge watch their favorite shows - keep track of their favorite sports teams - they can find time to dig deeper in the Word. Then there are men like Mark C - that fear the Word of the Most High - so they don't add or take away from what they see in the Word - and they share the fruit of their diligence with other believers. So they are a true blessing from the Most High. You won't find them teaching in a big fancy church, because they most likely wouldn't be welcome there.

Edit:
One more thing I want to add - the parable about Lazarus and the rich man. Abraham told the rich man that his brothers (whom were still alive), have the scripture from Moses and the prophets. They can listen to them. So it’s not just the 10 commandments. However, the 10 commandments covers many things. But it doesn’t cover more specific things, for example, a man pretending to look like a woman (or vice versa), by wearing opposite gender clothing. Today they dial it up with transgenderism. Another thing I’ve noticed - many of the most popular comedy movies involve men dressing like women. There are numerous actors that have cross dressed - even in non comedy movies.

 

[The Revolting Man]

I’m always confused by this claim that we have the original Hebrew. Does anyone have any sources on this? I’m under the impression that the Septuagint is the oldest version of the Old Testament we have other than some fragments.

 

[Bartato]

I’m always confused by this claim that we have the original Hebrew. Does anyone have any sources on this? I’m under the impression that the Septuagint is the oldest version of the Old Testament we have other than some fragments.

Some of the Dead Sea scrolls apparently contain portions of the Old Testament in Hebrew, and might be almost as old as the Septuagint. My understanding is that these texts are in closer agreement with the Septuagint than the Masoretic text.

Michael Heiser talks about some of this and also the Jewish "two Powers in Heaven doctrine".

This causes me to wonder if certain Christ rejecting Rabbi's later altered parts of the Hebrew text during the Christian era as part of their rejection of YAHWEH.

I now wonder if the Septuagint is more trustworthy than the Masoretic text, seeing that it is older and wasn't maintained by people who we know for a fact explicitly rejected the Son of Man.

 

[Mark C]

I’m always confused by this claim that we have the original Hebrew. Does anyone have any sources on this? I’m under the impression that the Septuagint is the oldest version of the Old Testament we have other than some fragments.

The 'Torah codes' (including the encoding of 'YHVH' and the Hebrew 'torah' itself, at ELS, are an incredibly good proof, and certainly indicate 'which came first' - since they are not in the Septuagint.

The Masoretic texts, which included added vowel pointers and word parsings that aren't in an original Torah scroll - are MUCH later, and without question more 'controversial'.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Some of the Dead Sea scrolls apparently contain portions of the Old Testament in Hebrew, and might be almost as old as the Septuagint. My understanding is that these texts are in closer agreement with the Septuagint than the Masoretic text.

Michael Heiser talks about some of this and also the Jewish "two Powers in Heaven doctrine".

This causes me to wonder if certain Christ rejecting Rabbi's later altered parts of the Hebrew text during the Christian era as part of their rejection of YAHWEH.

I now wonder if the Septuagint is more trustworthy than the Masoretic text, seeing that it is older and wasn't maintained by people who we know for a fact explicitly rejected the Son of Man.

This my understanding. The Masoretic text is a strategically flawed response to Christianity.

 

[The Revolting Man]

The 'Torah codes' (including the encoding of 'YHVH' and the Hebrew 'torah' itself, at ELS, are an incredibly good proof, and certainly indicate 'which came first' - since they are not in the Septuagint.

The Masoretic texts, which included added vowel pointers and word parsings that aren't in an original Torah scroll - are MUCH later, and without question more 'controversial'.

So what original Hebrew texts are we talking about?

 

[FollowingHim]

As I have stated before, the ELS codes are by design extremely resistant to edits - you can change a lot of things and still leave most of those codes intact. Obviously the original was written in Hebrew, and they don't appear in any translation, including the LXX, as they're specifically about the Hebrew spelling so cannot translate. But if they were in the original, they'll probably appear in every version available, both the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic. Which doesn't tell us anything much.

So @The Revolting Man asks a very valid question. Given the Masoretic texts are "much later" and "controversial" as both @Mark C and @The Revolting Man have stated, which Hebrew text are people referring to when they say things like:

We do have the original Hebrew.

Personally I think people making that statement are simply mistaken, and think the Masoretic text is the original when it is not.

All we have is the Masoretic text (which is late and controversial, likely edited by Christ-haters but to an unknown extent), the Dead Sea Scrolls (which to the best of our understanding are reliable but are only fragmentary), and the LXX (which is a translation but largely agrees with the Dead Sea Scrolls).

So would not the closest we can get to the original be a patchwork of every DSS fragment available, while filling in the remainder from the LXX?

 

[FollowingHim]

Of course, if there were ELS references that appeared in the DSS but had disappeared in the Masoretic text, that would be evidence of edits... I wonder if anyone has done that study? I suspect the DSS may be too fragmentary for it though.