Passover On The 14th or 15th? (IIg)

This is a Critique of Fred Coulter’s The Christian Passover.

See the source imageDraft IIg

Chapters 12 – 13

II Chronicles 29:2 says “And he (Hezekiah) did that which was right in the sight of the Lord” and this, of course, includes sanctifying the house of the Lord cleaning the altar, all the vessels, and the table for the shewbread (verses 17-18). It was reemphasized in verse 15 that the commandment “were by the king,” as well as “by the words of the Lord.” The burnt offerings and peace offerings were accompanied by much rejoicing, enhanced by having music, songs, accompanied by various instruments—cymbals, psalteries, harps and trumpets—which were commandments of King David and other prophets, and they performed with praises and gladness.

In his account of Hezekiah’s Passover, Ezra records that “the runners went with the letters from the king and his princes throughout all Israel and Judah…according to the commandment of the king…” (II Chron. 30:6).

After taking counsel, the decree was to invite the other tribes, Ephraim and Manasseh— to make proclamation throughout all Israel, from Beersheba even to Dan—and the running and sending out letters to inform the other tribes, were the king’s command to keep the Passover in the second month. “So the posts passed from city to city through the country of Ephraim and Manasseh even unto Zebulun: but they laughed them to scorn, and mocked them” (II Chronicles 30:10).

In response to Hezekiah’s command to come to Jerusalem for the Passover, Ezra records that “…many people gathered at Jerusalem to keep the Feast of Unleavened Bread in the second month…” (verse 13). This is the first Scriptural record in which the Feast of Unleavened Bread and the Passover are used interchangeably in referring to the spring festival season (verses 1-2, 13).

No, not the first record. Earlier in Deuteronomy 16:1-8, when Moses wrote it in his last days (39 years after the original Exodus) the two feasts were already a composite, and the name used interchangeably.

See the source imageSecond, Hezekiah was a good king, who was righteous before God. The Scriptures speaks well of him: II Kings 18:3 And he did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, according to all that David his father did. 4 He removed the high places, and broke the images, and cut down the Asherah poles, and broke in pieces the brazen serpent that Moses had made; for until those days the children of Israel burned incense to it; and he called it Nehushtan. 5 He trusted in the Lord God of Israel, so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor any who were before him. 6 For he cleaved to the Lord and departed not from following Him, but kept His commandments which the Lord commanded Moses. 7 And the Lord was with him, and he prospered whithersoever he went forth; and he rebelled against the king of Assyria and served him not.

Fred Coulter continues:

This is also the first Scriptural record of killing the Passover at the temple and dashing the blood of the lamb against the altar instead of applying the blood to the door posts at home, as was done with the domestic sacrifice of the lamb. Why did Hezekiah institute these changes in the observance of the Passover?

In summary, Leviticus 17 says if one were to make a sacrifice, in the camp or out of the camp, the blood must be brought to the tabernacle, and the priest shall sprinkle the blood upon the altar of the Lord at the door of the tabernacle (verse 6).

In verse 8, it says, “And thou shalt say unto them: ‘Whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers who sojourn among you, who offereth a burnt offering or sacrifice. In the Good News Translation, it says “who offer a burnt offering or any other sacrifice.” Referring to the phase “that offereth a burnt offering or sacrifice,” John Gill says “any other sacrifice besides a burnt offering.” All indications are that the sacrifice mentioned would inevitably include the Passover sacrifice, only that the GNT made it clearer.

The Targum gave the reason why this is so important in God’s sight: “In order that the sons of Israel may bring their sacrifices which they have [heretofore] killed on the face of the field, they may [henceforth] bring them before the Lord, at the door of the tabernacle of ordinance, unto the priest, and sacrifice their consecrated victims before the Lord.”

The critical performance of any sacrifice is that “the priest shall sprinkle the blood upon the altar of the Lord at the door of the tabernacle.” Since memorial time, the priests had sprinkled the blood upon the alter evidently from the time of Moses, down to Ezra, and then during the time of Christ. If Moses had any doubt, he had all the opportunity and time to ask God who dwelt between the cherubim in the Sanctuary for any further details.

The lambs that were killed at the temple were slain by the Levites, not by “the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel,” as in Exodus 12.

See the source imageThe Levitical duties of the tribe of Levites and the Sanctuary were not instituted at the time of the Exodus. Once instituted, “Thou mayest not sacrifice the Passover within any of thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee” (Deuteronomy 16:5) and in Jerusalem this Holy City was chosen. Hence most of the Exodus 12 requirements were a one-off situation, otherwise every Israelites would still be eating with their loins girded, sandals on their feet, staff in their hands; and they were to eat in haste, pretending to flee from a non-existing Pharaoh and his non-existing armies in an re-enactment of the Exodus.

Ezra’s account in II Chronicles 30 shows that God accepted this temple-centered Passover, although it was contrary to the ordinances that He had established, because of the prayers of Hezekiah and the repentance of the people. But God’s acceptance of this Passover does not mean that He intended this type of Passover to replace the domestic Passover. The commands for the domestic observance of the Passover, as recorded in Exodus 12, were still in effect. Consider this: If the ordinances of the Passover were not in effect at that time, there would have been no need for Hezekiah to pray for forgiveness for those who ate the Passover contrary to God’s requirements.

During the Exodus the command to kill the lamb in their houses (a domestic passover) were obvious in a one-off situation. Later, other laws and ordinances were established, like the command to commence a holy assembly on the first and last days of Unleavened Bread, which wasn’t in the original Exodus.

See the source imageHezekiah’s prayers were for the fact that they were late for the Passover, which should be on the first month, but they celebrated it on the second month, which is contrary to the law. But the main reason was stated in II Chronicles 30:18 For a multitude of the people, even many from Ephraim, and Manasseh, Issachar, and Zebulun had not cleansed themselves, yet they ate the Passover otherwise than it was written. But Hezekiah prayed for them, saying, “The good Lord pardon every one 19 who prepareth his heart to seek God, the Lord God of his fathers, though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the sanctuary.” 20 And the Lord hearkened to Hezekiah, and healed the people.

We should refer back to Chapter One, this is what Fred Coulter wrote: “Anyone who twists and distorts the Scriptures is “using the law unlawfully,” as Paul said, and will end up believing false, satanic doctrines, which subvert the souls of men.” Has any of his sleepy sheep awaken by now? Can this be brought to Fred’s attention?

{}13{}

II Chronicles 34:1 Josiah was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem one and thirty years. 2 And he did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, and walked in the ways of David his father, and declined neither to the right nor to the left. Adam Clarke comments further, “He never swerved from God and truth; he never omitted what he knew to be his duty to God.”

See the source imageThe description of the sacrificing does not fit the ordinances that God established for the domestic observance of the Passover. There is no mention of the lambs being killed by “the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel,” as in Exodus 12. Rather, the account gives a detailed description of the slaying of the lambs at the temple by the Levites, and the sprinkling of the lamb’s blood against the altar by the priests.

The sacrificing that was performed by the priests and Levites in this account was not conducted according to the ordinances that God gave to Moses for the observance of the Passover.

And there were no mention of the lambs being killed by “the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel,” was because the Exodus 12 experience was a one-time incident. The Levites and priesthood were instituted so there was also a change in the practice of killing the lamb as the Scriptures say: “And they (the Levites) killed the Passover lamb, and the priests sprinkled the blood from their hands (at the alter), and the Levites flayed them, (II Chronicles 35:11). Josiah was a good king, but Fred Coulter is trying to make him a bad one, one whose conduct: He alleges the Josiah’s Passover “was not conducted according to the ordinances that God gave to Moses for the observance of the Passover.” But this is what the Scripture says: “And like unto him was there no king (referring to Josiah) before him, who turned to the Lord with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his might, according to all the Law of Moses; neither after him arose there any like him” II Kings 23:25.

Notice the four “ALL”

(1) with ALL his heart;
(2) with ALL his soul;
(3) with ALL his might,
(4) according to ALL the Law of Moses;

Can we say any one of our religious leaders today has all these qualities today?

See the source imageThe phrase “as it is written in the book of Moses” is not referring to the ordinances for the Passover, but to the ordinances that God established for peace offerings, which required that the blood of the sacrificial animal be sprinkled against the altar, and the fat and certain organs be burnt on the altar (Lev. 3).

No, II Chronicles 35:6 says “So kill the Passover lamb (not the peace offering) . . . that they may do according to the word of the Lord by the hand of Moses.” So much twistings of God’s word! The verse actually reaffirms that the blood of the sacrificial animal should be sprinkled against the altar. Josiah was a righteous king.” And he did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, and walked in all the way of David his father, and turned not aside to the right hand or to the left” II Kings 22:2. Fred Coulter has so much problems reading the Scriptures or has he got memory lapses. Instead of sending tithes to Fred, his sleepy sheep should send him to the nearest hospital for a thorough clinical checkout.

Bashal is never used to signify the act of roasting. The use of the word “roasted” in II Chronicles 35:13 is a blatant mistranslation of the Hebrew text. Bashal is first used in this verse to indicate that the sacrifices were cooked over fire, and then to specify that the cooking was done by boiling the flesh of the animals in pots and pans. None of these sacrifices were roasted, as God had commanded for the sacrifice of the Passover lambs (Ex. 12:9).

See the source imageThe KJV translates Strong’s H1310 (bashal) in the following manner (and times): seethe (10x), boil (6x), sod (6x), bake (2x), ripe (2x), roast (2x). The KJV and most translations translate the verse “roasted” correctly: ”And they roasted the Passover lamb with fire according to the ordinance.” The Bible says they did the roasting “according to the ordinance.” The same word bashal is used in Deuteronomy 16:7 “And thou shalt roast (H1310 bashal) and eat it in the place which the Lord thy God shall choose.” Only “A Faithful Version” by a “not-sure-what-his-level-of-Hebrew-is” author translates it as “boil.”

Bear with me that I should dive deeper into this leather bound Faithful Version. II Chronicles 35:13 is translated as “And they boiled the Passover offerings over fire according to the law.”

If it is “according to law” it is correct to translate it as “roast.” But what this translator means is that what they did is contrary to the law. In which case it should be translated, “And they boiled the Passover offerings over fire contrary to the law” if he insists bashal should be translated as “boil.” Hope one of his sleepy devotees will finally wake up, do a favor, and inform the author of this paradox, or at least to ask for clarity how boiling is “according to law?

{}{}{}

 

~ by Joel Huan on August 9, 2019.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: