The Priest of Midian

“Jethro, the priest of Midian…” –Exodus 18:1

Moses’ father-in-law Jethro is described as the “priest of Midian” at two different times in the story of the Exodus. The first time is when Moses flees from Egypt and encounters Jethro’s daughters (Ex. 2:16, 3:1). The second time occurs when he returns Moses’ wife and sons, at the beginning of the Torah portion bearing his name (Ex. 18:1). Jethro’s title is important because of its universal association with his name. Whether Jethro was a priest of the God of Israel or some pagan order is not given explicitly in the scriptures, but the probability of each will be examined in the context of both appearances of Jethro in the narrative of the Exodus.

In Moses' first encounter with Jethro, the Midianites had been separated from the children of Israel for over 500 years. Midian was a son of Abraham through Keturah (Gen. 25:2). To sketch in the timeframe from the birth of Midian to Jethro’s encounter with Moses, several assumptions must be made. If the time that Israel dwelt in Egypt was 430 years, then Moses would have met Jethro about 390 years into that period (Acts 7:23, 30). Jacob was 130 years old at the beginning of the stay in Egypt (Gen. 47:9), so from the time from the birth of Jacob to the meeting of Moses and Jethro would be about 520 years. To measure the period from Midian’s birth to Jacob’s birth, it is assumed that Midian was born shortly after Sarah’s death (Gen. 25). Since Midian is listed fourth, perhaps six years elapsed between Sarah’s death and his birth. The age of Isaac at Sarah’s death is 37 at the most (Gen. 17:17, 23:1) and Rebekah bore Jacob and Esau when Isaac was 60 (Gen. 25:26). Adding these numbers together, the period from Midian’s birth to the birth of Jacob would be about 17 years (37+6=43; 60-43=17). This makes for a period of about 537 years from Midian’s birth to the meeting of Moses and Jethro.

With this period in mind, it is important to consider whether Midian and his sons would have continued in the faith of Abraham or would have fallen into the idolatry of the nations around them. In the immediate context, this consideration is entirely speculative. Using a broader context, there are examples in the scriptures where faithfulness to God is both brief and enduring. During the time of the Judges, a typical period of faithfulness is around 40 years (Judg. 3:11, 5:31), which doesn’t leave much hope for Midian. However, in Jeremiah 35 there is a story about a clan of Israelites called the Rechabites who had kept the word given to them by Jonadab the son of Rechab from the time of Saul (c. 1010 B.C.) to the time of Jehoiakim (c. 600 B.C.), a period of over 400 years. It may be that at least some of the Midianites were like the Rechabites, and although the Levitical priesthood had yet to be established Jethro could have been a priest of God in the same manner as Melchizedek.

On the second encounter, the scripture sheds more light on the content of Jethro’s faith and it is probable that he was indeed a priest of God. In Exodus 18, Jethro rejoices at the news of Israel’s deliverance and offers a short hymn to God where he says, “Now I know that the LORD is greater than all the gods” (v. 11). Whether this statement reflects a recent change of heart or is an expression of continuing faith can be debated. Nebuchadnezzar makes a similar statement in Daniel 4:37: “Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and extol and honor the King of heaven.” In this case, the now implies a recent change of heart. Job, in contrast to this, also says, “I have heard of you by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees You” (Job 42:5). Job had been previously considered a righteous man and his expression of now is one of deepening and continuing faith. Jethro could be in either category, depending in particular on his spiritual state at his first encounter with Moses. Further demonstration of Jethro’s faith in God is seen through the wisdom he gives to Moses about delegating responsibility. Had it not been God’s wisdom, Moses would not have heeded it and since “the fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom” (Ps. 111:10) Jethro would have needed the fear of the LORD to impart the wisdom that he did.

The story of Jethro, priest of Midian, raises almost as many questions as answers as we dig deeper into this enigmatic character. However, may we not miss in the details in the story the unequivocal honor and respect shown to Jethro by Moses. This speaks both of Moses' humility and Jethro's eminence. May we learn from both.

Questions for Parashah #51

Exodus 8:20 – 9:35

Isaiah 34:11 – 35:4

Hebrews 12:14-17

Torah Resource Commentary

This is the last part of the annual portion of Va'era. We are continuing through the administration of plagues, signs, and wonders upon the Egyptians, ultimately leading up to the death of the firstborn. This portion covers the plagues of swarms, cattle disease, boils, and hail.

1. Concerning the ten plagues, the Sages teach that the ten plagues may be divided into four groups: those administered by Aaron (3), those administered by Moses (3), those administered jointly by Moses and Aaron (1), and those administered by Adonai himself (3). The teaching goes on to describe how Aaron's plagues (#1, 2, and 3) pertain more to the earth, water, and corporeal things while Moses' plagues (#4, 5, and 6) deal with air, fire, and ethereal things. Is this a valid or useful classification system for understanding the plagues? Why or why not? There are several other ways to diagram and interpret the plagues and each may reveal various perspectives on the purpose and meaning of the plagues.
2. In demonstrating His power to Pharaoh, Adonai systematically displayed mastery over all the elements and ideas that the Egyptians worshiped. How does this foreshadow the events in Yeshua's ministry when he displayed similar mastery over the natural and supernatural forces he encountered? Is it possible to cite examples from the gospel accounts that show Yeshua exercising authority over an element or symbol of each of the ten plagues? Be creative.
3. What is the signficance of ten plagues? Where else does this number show up in the exodus and wilderness journey? Does it have any prophetic signficance?
4. The plagues in Parashah #151 heavily emphasize the fact that Adonai is 'making a distinction' between the land of Egypt and the land of Goshen, the Egyptians and the children of Israel. This separation gives us an absolutely vivid illustration of what important biblical concept? How does this change or impact how we view specific instructions related to this concept?
5. From a few portions back, we recall that Pharoah declared that he did not know Adonai (Ex. 5:2). Legends of the Bible describes a curious unfolding of events(pg. 326), elaborating that Pharaoh asked for the archives containing the names of the gods of the nations, from which he read, "The gods of Moab, the gods of Ammon, the gods of Zidon—I do not find your God inscribed in the archives!" Moses and Aaron exclaimed: "O thou fool! Thou seekest the living in the graves of the dead. These which thou didst read are the names of dumb idols, but our God is the God of life and the King of eternal life." Wow! What gospel reference does the phrase "seekest the living in the graves of the dead" bring to mind? What is the scripture reference and context of that statement? Contrast this story with Pharaoh's hardened heart.

New Study: Gospel of Matthew

I would like to spend a few words introducing our new group study by Rabbi Bruce Booker from Priest River, ID. Rabbi Booker is a member of the council of the UMJA. The study is entitled The Gospel of Mattityahu (Matthew) from a Jewish Perspective and will cover, in eight sections, the major themes of the book of Matthew with many clarifications and expansions of the traditional understanding of the book by viewing it through the lens of first century Judaisms. The series will undoubtedly take longer than 8 weeks to complete, but we will proceed at the pace of a lecture per week with slides, audio, and handouts. In addition to the materials that are provided as part of the course, the following two textbooks are listed as part of the curriculum, so I am giving the reference for each book here with a link to purchase on Amazon.

• Jewish New Testament Commentary, David H. Stern, Ph. D., Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc., 1996.
• The Gospel of Matthew, A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary, Craig S. Keener, William B. Eerdman's Publishing Co., 2009.

Don and Judi have offered to print extra handouts and copies of the presentation slides to enhance our learning experience. The first session last week was a nice introduction to the book and a good functional test of our technical capabilities.

For this week, we will be covering Section 1, the genealogy of Yeshua. The textbook readings are pages 1-15 of Stern and pages 73-81 of Keener.

Questions for Parashah #50

Continuing in Parashah Va'era, here are several questions for our coming weekly study. The reading is #50 in the triennial cycle, a schedule of which can be found at Torah Resource.

Exodus 7:19-8:16
Joel 3:9-21
Romans 9:17-18

Link to Torah Resource Commentary

The questions are below. Please feel free to leave your thoughts, questions, and responses in the comments section.

1. Based on Exodus 7:25, "and seven days passed," and other textual clues, the Sages formulated that the period of each plague was one month total: approximately three weeks warning of the plague, and one week or seven days of the duration of the plague, after which the plague would end by default. In several cases in the administration of the ten plagues, Pharaoh pleaded for an earlier end to the plague, a plea that was granted by the Almighty through the agency of Moses and Aaron. This teaches us several things: 1) that Hashem does not send a punishment or judgment without a significant period of warning. Question/challenge: list several verses stating this principle and narratives in the Torah and prophets that emphasize this aspect of Hashem's mercy 2) The week, or seven day, duration of the plagues has eschatological overtones, especially since in the Sages' formulation the period of the week can be "cut short" by divine decree. Question/challenge: expound on the eschatological overtones and cite a reference(s) of the period of judgment being cut short.
2. This portion covers the first three plagues: blood, frogs, and lice. As the narrative progresses, Pharaoh is alternately adamant in his opposition to letting the people go and in his desire for mercy in the midst of the plagues, signs, and wonders. Is there a method to Pharaoh's madness, his swings between arrogance and entreaty? The Sages explain that whenever Pharaoh felt his own life at stake, he pleaded for mercy, but in all other cases the plague was irritating but not life-threatening so he hardened (literally, "made strong") his heart. Does this interpretive tool help explain Pharoah's actions? In what sense? In what ways is this interpretation a stretch?

I hope to add a question or two before Shabbat from the Haftarah and Apostolic portions. In the meantime, may the Holy One, blessed be He, enliven our minds to comprehend His Word in sincerity and truth.

Questions for Parashah #49

I will begin to use this blog to post weekly questions for the coming weekly study. Our reading cycle is the triennial cycle, a schedule of which can be found at Torah Resource.

Exodus 6:2–7:17
Ezekiel 28:25–29:31
Acts 7:17-22

Link to Torah Resource Commentary

Here are several discussion questions for this week's portion. Please feel free to leave your thoughts, questions, and responses in the comments section.

1. In the beginning of Moses and Aaron's confrontation with Pharaoh, the Egyptian court magicians could duplicate the plagues by their secret arts (staff to snake, water to blood, swarms of frogs). Why is it that they could not reverse any of the plagues? Hearkening back to last week's parashah (Ex. 6:1), we can ask again, whose hand is the strong hand, whose arm is the outstretched arm here? Are their parallels in the gospels and in the book of Acts where sorcerers or demonic forces caused harm and destruction to people or animals? Why were these same forces unable or unwilling to create life?
2. In the haftarah portion, Israel's leaning on Egypt is described as leaning on a reed that is unreliable, a reed that snaps and causes the shoulder to tear and the loins to shake (Ez. 29:7, ESV). Similarly, we may be tempted to rely on Egypt, and the things of Egypt, the river Nile and the self-made prosperity that flood irrigation represents. What are several ways that we can "lean on Egypt" and what, through personal experience, has the result been? This is more of a personal application question.
3. Ezekiel 29:11 declares that the Egyptians will be in dispersion as a result of the Babylonian conquerors and that the land of Egypt would be uninhabited for 40 years. Which parts of Egypt were included in this decree? What is the time frame of its fulfillment? Are there other biblical and historical references to this time of dispersion?
4. How does the time period of 40 years compare with the captivity and exile of Judah for 70 years? What does that teach us about how God judges the nations versus his own people? What does this communicate about his covenantal nature?
5. Ezekiel 29:16 labels Egypt as a "guarantor recalling sin" (Stone Chumash). We are not to return to the things that once enslaved us, no matter how tempting or comfortable they are. How do we know very specifically from the text of Exodus that the children of Israel were never to return to Egypt?

Questions for Parashah #48

Putting some discussion questions together mid-week is a feature that I want to commit to in order to help us think about the weekly portion and guide our discussion when we get together on Shabbat. So here are several questions on this week's portion.

Exodus 4:14 – 6:1
Isaiah 55:12 – 56:7
Acts 7:35-37

1. In Exodus 6:1, whose hand is the strong hand (compare to Ex. 3:19 and 13:3)? Are there any other biblical references as to what (or who) the strong hand or strong arm of the LORD represents? Besides examples from the Exodus narrative, list up to five other instances where the arm of the LORD is revealed.
2. Comparing Exodus chapters 4-6 to Stephen's defense in Acts 7, in what ways (2 or 3 specifically) is Yeshua the "prophet like Moses" (Deut. 18:15-18)? What does Yeshua have to say in the book of John concerning those who do not receive his words, but consider Moses a prophet?
3. Concerning Aharon as Moses' spokesperson, our passage records that Moses shall be to him as "Elohim" - literally God or gods. What is meant by this declaration? Is the LORD considering a man, Moses, to be God? Are there other examples in the scriptures where men or created beings are called gods?
4. How did Aharon get a day off from brick-making to go meet Moses in the wilderness (Ex. 4:27)? Did he have a place of prominence or authority among the slaves?
5. There are many questions, both linguistic and interpretive, concerning the circumcision of Moses' son. The text states that the LORD sought to kill Moses, and implies that he was a dead man on account of not circumcising his son. The translation in the Chumash is different from most English translations, but the explanation there is 100% satisfactory. Other there other data that need to be factored into this event to really comprehend what was going on?
6. In Isaiah 56, addressing eunuchs and foreigners, what in the consistent, specific action correlated with covenant membership and with "keeping justice, and doing righteousness?" What does the centrality of that action/observance teach us?
7. How does the context of Isaiah 56 help expand or elucidate the Synoptic gospel accounts (Matt. 21:13, Mark 11:15) of Yeshua's action of cleaning out the money changers and quoting Is. 56:7?

Interesting note: the Chumash picks up on the Hebrew grammar concerning the donkey that Moses placed his family on during the trip to Egypt. Because Ex. 4:20 uses the definite article, "the", in connection to the donkey, we might infer that it was no ordinary donkey but a special donkey. The sages infer that this was the same donkey as Abraham rode, the donkey that went to Mount Moriah, and it will be the same donkey that Messiah will ride (Rashi). The important thing to note is that even a small word in the Torah ("the") can reveal something about the Messiah, and so we should be careful with each word. Of course, it's stretching it to say that it was the exact, physical, literal donkey in all cases, but as a figure it points right to the triumphal entry. A very special little donkey, indeed, not just "a" donkey but "the" donkey!

Jack Sprat and Leviticus 7

With barbecue season underway, here is a blast from the past considering forbidden fats. Put a fork in it!

Drifting through the small group of friends and family is the familiar and pleasing smell of sizzling steaks and hamburgers on the grill. People chat amiably about the week as children play: work, the weather, life, and lessons learned. As the cook pulls the meat off the grill, the subject turns to the Torah portion for the week, Tzav. One of the men questions whether it is right to eat any of the meat because there is fat with it. The cook, obviously insulted, makes a wise crack about Jack Sprat and everyone else seems uncomfortable. Is he right? Finally, the cook recalls his study of the passage and replies that the fat prohibited in Leviticus 7:22-25 is limited to the fat of animals that died naturally, were torn by beasts, or were offered as sacrifices.

There is a principle of Torah interpretation that whenever a command that appears to be general in nature is elsewhere explained and made more specific, the more specific interpretation is correct. One example is the command not to wear a garment of different sorts (Deut. 22:11, Lev. 19:19). This could be taken to exclude any garment that is not made of only one material. Yet in the immediate context of both verses, the different sorts are described: linen and wool. There is to be no mixture of plant and animal fibers, reinforcing a distinction of creation. This principle of Torah interpretation will help explain the general command, “You shall not eat any fat,” in Leviticus 7:23.

There are two aspects of what “any fat” means. The first is what fat of any animal is included and the second is to what animals in what situations does the command apply. The type of fat is defined numerous times. It is only the fat that covers the entrails and all the fat that is on the entrails, the two kidneys and all the fat that is on them by the flanks, and the fatty lobe attached to the liver. With sheep the fatty tail is also included. The first aspect of “any fat” is thus limited.

The second aspect is clear from the next few verses. Fat of animals that die naturally or are torn by beasts shall not be eaten. This is sensible since the flesh of such animals should not be eaten. The fat of animals given as an offering by fire to the Lord must not be eaten, which accords well with a parallel passage where the justification for not eating the fat of the sacrifice is that “all the fat is the Lord’s,” as a type of food. To eat it would be to steal from the Lord. With the second aspect so defined, it would appear that the theology of fat is fairly complete but there is one objection that must be addressed.

In Leviticus 3:17, there is a perpetual statute forbidding the eating of fat and blood. When coupled with the command against blood, it would seem that the prohibition of fat would transcend the context of offerings as the prohibition of blood does. To address this possibility, a careful study of the occurrences of the prohibition of blood must be made to see if the prohibition of fat is connected to it outside of the context of offerings. In the passages I consulted, there is no mention of fat (Gen. 9, Lev. 17, Deut. 12, Acts 15). There is no theological principle for not eating fat that would permit it to be extricated from its connection to offerings.

One clear proof text is Nehemiah’s instructions to the people to “eat the fat and drink the sweet” at the conclusion of the reading of the Torah in Nehemiah 8. The people were taught and given the sense of the Torah, and if Ezra and his assistants had made a broad application of “you shall not eat any fat” Nehemiah’s instructions would have been aberrant. Ezra must have taught a limited and biblical sense of fat and it is this sense that saved the barbecue above from becoming a steak-trimming and burger-tossing affair.