Moses, Isaiah and Yeshua
So Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on a pole. And if a serpent bit anyone, he would look at the bronze serpent and live. Numbers 21:9 ESV
Pole – I recently received an email that provided more insight into the remez Yeshua employs when He points Nicodemus to this verse (John 3). It’s all about nes, the word translated “pole” in this verse. The author quoted a comment by Athol Dickson: “In other Scriptures, ‘nes’ is translated as ‘example’ or ‘banner.’ In Isaiah 33:23, the word is translated as ‘sail,’ and another word entirely is used for the pole or mast upon which the sail hangs. In fact, I can find no other place in the Hebrew scripture where anything else was mounted on a ‘nes.’ Except for the bronze snake it is always the other way around. The ‘nes’ is never the pole; it is always the object lifted up on the pole. But here at the story of the serpents in the wilderness, the bronze serpent is mounted on the ‘banner’ or ‘example’—the ‘nes.’ In other words, here in this enigmatic little story I find a symbol (the bronze serpent) hung upon an example (the pole, nes) …Could it be that this word has been deliberately chosen to hint that it was not the serpent Israel must look to for deliverance, but the One behind the serpent?”[1]
Consider the implications involved in Yeshua’s remez. Certainly Yeshua is aware that nes in every other instance means insignia or example. Therefore, the clue that he provides to Nicodemus suggests that Nicodemus will recognize the justification of Yeshua’s claim when he sees the Son of Man as the insignia or example of the Father’s handiwork. The Father will lift up the Son as a declaration of power and authority, just as Moses lifted up the serpent as an example of YHWH’s power and authority. When will Nicodemus see this justification take place? When the Son dies on the cross. The pagan symbol of death will be overcome by the transposition wielded by God Himself. If Nicodemus has any doubt about Yeshua’s claims he need only wait until the end and he will see how power and authority has been given to the Son. The proof is in the death.
We may add to this a comment by Marvin Wilson in TWOT. “It is not surprising that Isaiah, the Christological prophet par excellence, personifies nēs. He says, “in that day the root of Jesse shall stand as an ensign to the peoples; him shall the nations seek” (11:10; cf. 11:12). So Israel’s messianic king will be lifted up (cf. Jn 3:14; Phil 2:9) that all men might rally around him.[2] Wilson observes that raising Yeshua as nes is about king and kingdom, just as Yeshua notes in his conversation with Pilate. The serpent on the pole points to the sign of God’s victory over all pagan claims to power.
Forgiveness? Yes, it’s there too, but not on the cross.
Topical Index: nes, pole, Isaiah 11:10, Numbers 21:9, John 3:14, cross
[1] Athol Dickson, The Gospel According to Moses: What I learned about Jesus from my Jewish friends, p. 75.
[2] Wilson, M. R. (1999). 1379 נָסַס. In R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer, Jr. & B. K. Waltke (Eds.), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer, Jr. & B. K. Waltke, Ed.) (electronic ed.) (583). Chicago: Moody Press.
Hi Skip,
All you say about the cross is still difficult for me to grasp. The ‘nes’ part I understand. And I think I am starting to see how the cross is all about the kingdom of Yeshua. But how about forgiveness, than, if it is not to be found at the cross? Can you – briefly – answer that?
Before the foundation of the world Yeshua offered himself on the heavenly altar in the heavenly temple to provide forgiveness as required. THus Abraham and you and me are all forgiven on the same basis.
A lot more about this, including details on the apparent contradictory verses in the New Testament are going to be in my next book.
Hi Skip
Do you think Nadab and Abihu were forgiven too in Leviticus 10?
That scripture always bothered me because I never found a reason beyond their apparently innocent error. I would like to think that their standing with God remained intact while they got wacked for shock value. Aaron’s heartbreak is tough to digest too.
Blessings
Skip, I just saw a link to this article on facebook that relates quite nicely to what we’ve been discovering about the cross, atonement, forgiveness etc.
Disclaimer: The site on which this article is posted is a well-known Jewish anti-missionary blog and there is much that I have disagreed with that has been written there. That being said, this article provides another angle that I found interesting.
https://yourphariseefriend.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/psalm-110/
“In this Psalm we find that the Messiah (or his ancestor David) is designated with a priestly title.”
“The fact that the Psalmist refers to Melchizedek and not to Aaron, indicates that the Messiah is charged with the roles of teacher and judge (Isaiah 11:4).”
Hmmm
It seems to me that we have a “priestly” view of Adam and non-priestly view of Adam
And we have a “priestly” view of the Messiah ben David and non-priestly view of the Messiah ben David
Melchizedek seems ties the priestly view together quite nicely, but it almost seems superimposed to me
Rather than “growing organically out of the narrative” it seems more like an allegorical framework
But it is very interesting
Perhaps you should reread Hebrews. There is much that took place on the cross, and I beleive forgiveness is one of them. Even though Yeshua is the lamb slain before the foundation of the world and forgiveness was alsready in place, it is at the cross that His blood covered, atoned for, replaced the bulls and goats that could not take away sin, and at the cross the physical manifestation of His taking our sins was also accomplished. Yes, he conquered death, displaced pagan deities, etc. Why do you insist on removing His paying for our sins at the cross as well. Read Hebrews in light of the Day of Atonement. Maybe I just do not get it, but I think I do.
While I am not ready to “insist” that we remove forgiveness as we commonly understand it from the cross, I suggest that your reading of Hebrews is first conditioned by the theology of forgiveness on the cross. Hebrews also says that this sacrifice was made in a Temple not made with human hands. Where was that? And a sacrifice, even on the order of Melchizedek, must meet the requirements of a sacrifice, none of which are present on the cross. Are you willing to say that forgiveness for Abraham was only proleptic?
I would say that forgiveness for Abraham was the same as for anyone else, by grace through faith. I think the problem comes in that we are finite and Yah is infinite. He is not bound by time. He knows the end from the beginning. In Him it is all yes and amen. It is not different for Abraham or Moses or the apostles or us. We are all forgiven by His grace and His great love by which He loved us. Heb. 1:3b .. having made a cleansing of our sins throughHimself sat down. Heb 2:17 . . trustworthy High Priest . . to make atonement for the sins of the people .. Heb 9:22 withouth shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. Heb 9:26 But, as it is, He has appeared once at the end of the ages in order to do away with sin through the sacrifice of Himself. This sounds pretty clear to me. He appeared. That would be in the flesh I believe. As soon as we start picking apart the death, buriel, and resurrection and try to put it into categories we limit the Almighty.
Apparently you have not read God, Time and the Limits of Omniscience where I show that the idea that God is “outside” of time is really Greek philosophy, stemming from Parmenides, not found in the biblical text. The whole argument is long and complicated, but it not only clears up a bunch of theological problems, it also helps us see why the biblical God is not the God of philosophy. Most of your remarks, however well intentioned, depend on this Greek philosophical dogma. So, read the book and then see what you think. Blessings!
Why is the word “Saraph” used in the verse 8 and translated as “fiery serpent”:
And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a “fiery serpent”, and set it upon a pole.
Then, as you point out, in verse 9, Nachash, is used and translated as “serpent”.
Why was a specific Saraph sent to bite the people, and a specific Saraph commanded to be made, but instead, Moses makes a Nachash? Is it that a “Saraph” is a heavenly “supernatural” being, and the earthly counterpart is a more humble “Nachash”? That kind of sounds like Messiah’s supernatural and eternal pre-creation and post-resurrection self, versus his earthly human ministry self.
Reading too much into the story?
Good question, I would love to hear some more on that too!