Torah Pearls #25 – Tzav (Leviticus 6:1-8:36)
In this week’s episode of The Original Torah Pearls, Tzav (Leviticus 6:1-8:36), we discuss what exactly is the JEPD theory otherwise known as the Documentary Hypothesis? What is the role of the the Aaronic priest and is it fulfilled by … Continue reading →
In this week's episode of The Original Torah Pearls, Tzav (Leviticus 6:1-8:36), we discuss what exactly is the JEPD theory otherwise known as the Documentary Hypothesis? What is the role of the the Aaronic priest and is it fulfilled by any particular order today? Is the command to not drink blood just for Israel or does it apply to all the peoples of the earth? All this and more in this week’s Torah Pearls!
I look forward to reading your comments!
Transcript
Torah Pearls #25 – Tzav (Leviticus 6:1-8:36)
You are listening to The Original Torah Pearls with Nehemia Gordon, Keith Johnson, and Jono Vandor. Thank you for supporting Nehemia Gordon's Makor Hebrew Foundation. Learn more at NehemiasWall.com.
Jono: G’day to Jillian in the Netherlands, Tim in Ohio, Janice in Indiana, Fredrick and Jennifer in Hawaii. “Shaloha” to you guys, and wherever you may be around the world, it’s good to have your company. It’s time for Pearls from the Torah Portion with Keith Johnson and Nehemia Gordon.
Nehemia: Hey, Shalom. A shout-out to Avichayil Ben Avraham in Florida, thanks for listening.
Jono: And today we are in Tzav, is that right?
Keith: I just have to ask a question. What was that you said to the people in Hawaii?
Jono: Shaloha.
Keith: That was really impressive.
Jono: I remember someone in Hawaii said “Shaloha” to me; it’s kind of the combination of shalom and aloha, I guess. Is that right? I’m not sure, maybe we just made up a word. Anyway, it’s a good one.
Similar Content
Comments
uncleaness does transfers cleaness does not.
About the forbidden fats to eat… Is it talking about animal (i.e. lamb) when the animal is offered as sacrifice? Reading Dt. 12:20-28 seems to be allowed when is about the person wanting to eat. It says (at least on Spanish) that you can eat all what you desire, as long as you don’t eat the blood.
Deut 18:3 And this shall be the priest’s due from the people, from them that offer a sacrifice, whether [it be] ox or sheep; and they shall give unto the priest the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw.
> Shoulder = זְרוֹעַ zer-o’-ah the arm (as stretched out), or (of animals) the foreleg; figuratively, force:—arm, help, mighty, power, shoulder, strength
> Cheeks= לְחִי lekh-ee’; from an unused root meaning to be soft; the cheek (from its fleshiness); hence, the jaw-bone:—cheek (bone), jaw (bone).
> Maw= קֵבָה qêbâh, kay-baw first stomach of ruminants.
Why were the Priests given these parts?
“ You are what you eat”
I believe that these parts of the sacrificed animal represented the priest’s duties in regards to Children of Israel.
> Shoulder = They had a duty to enforce the Laws, Commandments and statutes of GOD. To teach the people how to be obedient to GOD. The responsibility was on their shoulders!
> Cheeks = Their cheeks held the WORD and delivered the WORD to the people.
> Maw = The Priests had to digest the WORDS OF GOD and break them down so they would be easier for the people to understand and apply to their daily lives.
Just like the rudimentary animals these parts came from, the Priests had to take the WORDS of GOD, chew on them for awhile, pre-digest them, and spit them back up and re-chew them before giving them (speaking) to the people. Once the Laws were given to the people the Priests job was to lean in towards the Children of Israel and enforce the Law according to YeHovah’s standards.
In the economy of Yehovah where there is the expectation of mankind to populate the earth, including those of his people who would be faithful to Torah, how could the role of the priesthood in offering sacrifices be carried out in remote places? The issue is relevant today where the existence and functioning of the priesthood is not apparent; what does one do? It seems to me that Yehovah does not leave us as orphans, but helps us through other prophets, such as David, who said so eloquently in Psalm 51, among other things “The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and contrite heart, O God thou wilt not despise.” Where does a heart like that come from? In realizing that one has disappointed the Father and “crushed’ Him by one’s unfaithfulness to the covenant. Psalm 51 is the quintessential “sinner’s prayer.”
any animal with split hooves and also chews the cud should be able to be offered??
isn’t that correct? one of the speakers today said only some can be offered.
The Documentary Hypothesis was devised so that militantly secular scholars could argue in the literature about who wrote what parts, while never actually having to consider “What does it say?”
@57:00 “There’s always a weekly Sabbath during Passover…”
Amein, brother, Passover the 12 day event starting with choosing ur lamb on The Aviv 10th, n keeping it up for 4 days til the passover (small p), or sacrifice.
Well done all 3 y’all n yes, I know this is old….
What does it mean when it says “shall be cut off…”? Is it saying that should be executed/killed? expelled?
all blood is to be poured out upon the ground.
if the animal has split hooves and chews their cud, then animal is clean to eat. and they be able to be offered.
to be a priest, one has to be of the family of Zadoc and levi. Right???
uncleaness does transfer, but cleaness does not. if u r in a state of cleaness then u touch the unclean, then u r unclean. no way around it.
A question regarding the ‘holy’, clean or unclean things, and touching them… Yehovah God knows our hearts and our desire and attempts to be holy as He is holy… if we have accepted Him as The Creator God, The Most Holy One… for those of us who are Christians, having accepted Jesus as His Son, Who also is Holy… does His Spirit not reside within us?… Would not that make us holy… as holy as any ‘temple’ can be living in a world full of ordinary living where we might ‘defile’ our body unintentionally by touching things not to be touched.
The word for shoulder ( zerowah ) is also in Genesis 49:24. I guess it can mean arm too. Shoke also means shoulder.
Nehemia, you’re beginning to paint me a good picture. Thanks, and keep up the good work. Shalom.
Ellen you can download the teachings and listen in car or whenever you want.
In re-reading it, I now see the two different altars. It seems the distinction is whether or not the sin offering is from the Priest or the people and that determines whether or not it is taken inside. But I still do not see that any animal from any sin offering (not burnt offering) is consumed. The only thing consumed is the remaining portion of the grain offering wherein the poor person could participate in the sin offering without blood but by sprinkling their offering ON TOP of someone else’s blood offering (fat portion). Does the Hebrew say differently?
In fact, since you are telling us that these verses in Lev are simply the execution of the command in Ex 29, Ex 29 says that the animal is not eaten at all but burnt completely. I do not see where any animal is eaten if offered as a sin offering.
I’m unclear about your distinction in the sin offerings (internal/external). I read that a sin offering’s blood is put on the horns of the altar of incense inside the Tabernacle. The fat is burned on the altar outside and the animal itself is taken outside the camp and burned. I do not see any contradictions in this based on the animal containing blood at all. It seems to read that a bull or goat or lamb is treated the exact same way, blood carried inside and placed on the interior altar, fat is burned on altar of burnt offerings in courtyard and the rest of the animal is treated the same way and burned outside of the camp. Nothing left to be eaten by anyone.
The only difference is a grain offering wherein a portion of that person’s offering is sprinkled on top of someone else’s fat offering and the rest is given to the Priest. In other words, I do not find an interior/exterior differentiation. Nor do I find that a Priest ate any of the animal at all. What am I missing?
Thank you guys for being brave and honest in bringing up some of the topics and questions that you do, specifically Keith in this particular portion. Hard topics to bring up but absolutely necessary!!!! I only wish we didn’t have to tread so softly and that everyone was willing to throw out traditions of men for the truth of the Torah.
IMHO, based on study and experience, the Documentary Hypothesis was devised so that [secular] academics could make a living arguing in the literature about who wrote what, all without ever actually considering “What does it say?”.
Nehemia, your BOOKS are such a blessing! I don’t have a life that allows me to SIT and LISTEN so I miss all these lessons on vocal download. Is there a way to get these in print, or voice-on-CD, or (even better) DVDs? Even my one-year-old grandson watches your DVD over and over! Thanks and may Yehovah bless your life and work!
The discussion raises two important issues among many – !) The role of the modern pastor/teacher, which appears to be both individually and institutionally self-appointed; and the contrast of tabernacle/temple regulations and timings versus our Father’s instruction that his people be obedient to his set-apart Word. Unless I am missing something, we moderns are missing the mark far worse that our predecessors, indicating that the judgement we will receive will be likewise far more severe. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth for all who do not hear his voice or do not respond when they do. Pray that your flight be not in the winter or on the Sabbath.
Shalom. My understanding of the word Shok is leg, hind leg or fore leg or lower part of leg. Zeroa i understand to mean the arm, lower arm, shoulder but can also mean strength, power, might, army and violence. I guess further study on these things may shed light…
Toda
Stay Connected
Subscribe to receive new teachings, event updates, and special announcements.

