Ezekiel 37 tells us the House of Ephraim will undergo a spiritual resurrection, and then will be brought back to the Land of Israel. If we read the language closely, we may see that the majority of the Ephraimite people may not fully understand what is happening to them until after they have already been brought back to the Land.

 

This First Resurrection is likely the same resurrection Shaul speaks of in First Corinthians Fifteen, since both of these events are spiritual (rather than physical).

 

However, as we explain in The Post-Millennial Return, Scripture also describes a Second Resurrection, which takes place at the end of earth’s history. This is when Yeshua returns (at the very Last Trumpet), and we will be caught up to be with Him in the air.

 

From there we will go and stand before the Great White Throne, in the Day of Judgment.

 

 

After we are caught up into the clouds to be with Yeshua we will no longer have regular physical bodies, for Yeshua tells us that in the Second Resurrection we will be neither male nor female. That is, we will not have any gender at all, but will be as the messengers (angels) of Elohim.

 

 

Then, after the Judgment, those whose names are found in the Book of Life will go on to the New Earth.

 

 

Then, some time later, the Renewed Jerusalem will ‘come down out of heaven from Elohim.’

 

 

Not everyone who goes on to the Renewed Earth will enter into the Renewed Jerusalem. Instead, those who are ‘dogs’ (Hebraic idiom for ‘non-believers’), sorcerers, sexually immoral, murderers, idolaters, and those who love and practice lies will not enter into the city: yet they will exist outside of the city gates.

 

Interestingly, Isaiah tells us that there will be sin and even death in the New Earth (verse 20).

 

 

Even though Yeshua tells us that we will not have physical bodies during the Second Resurrection, it stands to reason that when we get to the New Earth we will have physical bodies once more, because if there is an infant in verse 20, it only stands to reason that this infant will have parents: and that probably means that there will once again be males and females.

 

In The Post-Millennial Return, we explain how YHWH is in the process of restoring the kingdom to Ephraim; and that this renewed Ephraimite kingdom will be used to move Judah to jealousy, so that he accepts Yeshua as his Messiah. Then, after all twelve tribes are reunited in Yeshua, this renewed twelve-tribe kingdom will reign for the last thousand years of earth’s history, while Yeshua is ‘with them’ in Spirit.   This period is popularly known as ‘the Millennium.’

 

There are a number of popular misconceptions about the Millennium. Among other things, some people teach that because we will not have physical bodies (or gender) during the Second Resurrection, that we should dispense with the traditional sex roles between men and women right now. However, considering that we will still be flesh and blood during the last thousand years of earth’s history, and seeing that we will again have flesh and blood when we get to the Renewed Earth (after the Second Resurrection), are the sex roles YHWH gave to men and women really unimportant? Can we really safely ignore them?

 

Wouldn’t it be funny if those who are men in this world became women in the next one? And wouldn’t it be funny if those who are women in this world became men in the next? But whether or not that will be the case, should we not treat the members of the opposite sex as if we would become one of them? But why not treat the members of the opposite sex like we would like to be treated, if we were one of them?

 

 

Perhaps because of abuses that men have committed against their wives in the past, some believe we should attempt to erase all sex role differences between men and women in the Body today. However, whether we like it or not, biology is a reality, and it really does not erase very well. Because of this, would it not actually make more sense just to educate people as to what Elohim really wants from each of the sexes, and then punish those who abuse their roles?

 

In His infinite wisdom, YHWH gave men and women animal natures that are the complete opposite of the spiritual natures which He wants them to develop. In order to please Him we have to do more than just keep the Sabbath and Festival days: we also have to put off the ways and the desires of the flesh.

 

 

But just because Messiah is all, and is in us all, does this make us the Messiah? And just because there is neither male nor female in the Second Resurrection, does this mean we no longer have male and female bodies today, and no specific sex roles to play?

 

Orthodox Judaism suggests that the three traditional male sex-roles are those of the “Three P’s.” A man is to be the:

 

 

These “Three P’s” give a fairly accurate description of the role that Scripture tells us most men are to play. In Scripture, men are basically warriors who protect their family, provide for it, and serve as its representative during the festivals. However, in contrast, traditional Judaism suggests that a woman’s sex roles include:

 

 

While there is much wisdom in these traditional Jewish descriptions of a woman’s role, really these just scratch the surface of the many roles that a real woman of Torah must play, not just as a wife, but also as a mother, as a daughter in connection with her extended family, and as an member of Israelite society at large.

 

Because Judaism’s description of a woman’s role is inadequate, some look to the traditional Christian roles for women. Some feel that what is needed is simply to ‘turn back the clock’ to the simpler times of yesteryear, with stay-at-home mothers who only work inside of (and never outside of) the home. Yet King Solomon tells us that to it is not wise for us to think that today is not as good as the former days.

 

 

While there are many benefits to the traditional Ephraimite homeschooling model, our sisters in Judah have raised their children in community-based schools for thousands of years. In fact, the Apostle Shaul was one product of such community-based schooling.

 

While it is true that women were created as helpers for their men (e.g., Genesis 2:18), and while (at least on average) most women do tend to desire the traditional mothering roles, we need to remember that Scripture does not confine women to the home. For example, Proverbs 31 sings the praises of a “woman of valor.” 

 

 

In Hebrew, the word ‘valor’ is Chayil (חַיִל), which means essentially a warrior, a trooper, or a soldier.

 

 

The name YHWH Tzavaot means “YHWH of Armies,” or “YHWH of Legions”; and the tribes of Israel are (at least some of) His armies. Indeed, the Torah shows us that Israel is a martial culture. Therefore, as is the saying of our fathers, one of the ideals of a virtuous woman is not just that she is successful in business, and a giving person, but that she is ‘a real trooper.’

 

 

The word Hayil (חַיִל) means more than just a soldier. It means a strong, resilient, ‘stand up’ kind of woman who is eager to take life head-on, and do what she can for herself, her family, for YHWH and for all Israel with the tools and abilities she has been given. Reading Proverbs 31 in this context helps us to understand why our Jewish brethren value resilient, successful, practical and even business-minded women. It also helps to explain why they do not hinder women from getting an education, when they feel led to get one.

 

While life is more than just serving in the army, if we remember that Israel is described as the Army of the Living Elohim, and if we remember that Yeshua will return as the Conquering King, let us extend the warrior analogy to men as well as to the women, and see what kind of ‘big picture perspective’ it gives us.

 

For the sake of discussion, let us consider the men to be the ‘officer corps’ of YHWH’s army. Traditionally, an officer corps is called upon to make the big decisions, whereas it is the responsibility of the NCOs (the sergeants) to make the reality match those decisions at the practical level.

 

Officers are generally expected to set the example, and also to lead by example. If they do not set a good example then it is difficult for the unit to function well.

 

Once they have set a good example, officers typically also are responsible to exercise what is known as “command and control.” This means that they are the ones who have the authority, and they are the ones to make the decisions. There are many reasons for this, but the most important one is that the responsibility rests with them. As the saying of our fathers goes, “The buck stops” with the officer corps, whether for good, or for evil: either way, they are responsible.

 

 

The first Adam tried to shift the blame for what had happened onto his wife, even though verse 6 tells us that he was probably standing right there with Havvah (Eve) when she made her decision. This may be one reason why Adam also suffered punishment. Yet YHWH also told Havvah that she needed to submit to Adam’s authority, since he was the one responsible.

 

 

If the officers’ job is to lead the troops in battle, whether that battle is physical or spiritual, then the NCO’s job is to help the officers carry that mission out, while at the same time looking out for the needs of the soldiers.    The job of an NCO is traditionally to make sure that the troops (or in this case, the children) all have the food, clothing, water and the rest of the things they need. Further, both officers and NCO’s often work together to make sure that the equipment is all accounted for, and that it is all in excellent working order.

 

If this model holds true, then the NCOs (i.e., women) are to make sure that the privates (i.e., the children) are where they need to be, when they need to be there, with the things that they need to have. They are to make sure that they look after their hygiene, and to ensure they are in the right place at the right time, doing the things that they need to be doing. This is by no means an easy task, and this is why the officer corps (or in this case the men) usually delegate full authority over their soldiers to their NCOs: yet the full responsibility always remains theirs.

 

While this model may at first seem a far cry from the love and courtship that first brings a couple together, the important thing here is that in the military model, women are an essential, integral part of the day-to-day operations. Women are not just merely ‘backdrop’ or ‘background’ figures. Without the active inclusion and participation of the women, things fall apart. That is why not just a good working relationship but also a strong two-way love relationship is vital to success.

 

The military model works in other passages as well.

 

 

As we explain in The Torah Calendar, Joseph brought Miriam up to the Feast of Tabernacles when it was her time to give birth to Yeshua. This shows us that a man should bring his wife and children up for the feasts whenever he can. However, if this is not possible, all of the males need to be there as a minimum, in order to represent the house before YHWH.

 

The festivals are a family re-union; but they serve many other purposes as well. The feasts are the time when the faithful of Israel confer, network, and coordinate plans. Information is also spread. Notice how Ya’akov had Shaul separate his Nazirite Vow in a very public manner, so that “all would know” that the Apostle Shaul still kept the Torah.

 

 

By separating his Nazirite Vow at the festival, “all” would know that Shaul still obeyed the Torah of Moshe because when these pilgrims went back home to their assemblies it was expected that they would talk, and then “all” would hear that Shaul still kept the Torah.

 

But in addition to the misinterpretations, there are also issues in translation. One misunderstood passage is First Corinthians 14:34-36.

 

 

This is a very interesting passage. In verses 34 and 35, Shaul seems to be saying that women need to keep silent in the assemblies, citing the Torah as his authority. However, this is very curious, since the Torah says nothing at all about women being silent; and so it seems as if Shaul is adding to the Torah. 

 

Then, to make matters even more confusing, verse 36 makes a statement that seems to come completely out of nowhere, and which is entirely incongruous with the two verses preceding it. In fact the whole thing seems entirely out of place; and yet there it is, both in the Greek and in the Aramaic. So what do we do?

 

The problem in the Greek Textus Receptus lies mainly in poor translation. Verse 36 of the Textus Receptus begins with the Greek preposition word “ay” (h'). Strong’s Greek Concordance NT:2228 tells us that this word describes a distinction. It indicates disjunction.

 

 

In simpler words, this particle “ay!” indicates a sharp contrast between the things it joins together. It tells us that there is a real contrast between verses 34-35, and verse 36. When used at the beginning of a sentence this word can mean “or,” but it usually means something more along the lines of "What?!?" (as in, "What nonsense!"). This word has much the same meaning as the Jewish expression “Oy!” (meaning, “Oh, my enemies!”); and as we will see, Shaul likely wrote it as “Oy!” in the Hebrew originals.

 

In the first century, there were no quotation marks in Hebrew, in Aramaic or in Greek. Therefore, even though Shaul does not specifically tell us he is quoting in verses 34-35, the fact that he indicates a sharp contrast at the start of verse 36 tells us that verses 34-35 are not his own words. Bearing all this in mind, let us take a fresh look at this passage.

 

 

In essence, Shaul is flat-blasting the author of verses 34 and 35, saying, “Where is this Torah commandment that no one has seen, except you?? Did you give the Torah?? Who do you think you are, anyhow, making up rules which no one else has even heard of?”

 

While the Church Fathers tell us that the Renewed Covenant was written in Hebrew, or possibly also Aramaic, we will show in another place that the Peshitta is not the inspired original. Nonetheless, the Peshitta gives us some very important insights. 

 

When we check First Corinthians 14:34-36 in the Peshitta, the Hebrew word “ay!” appears as the Aramaic word “oh!” (או). J. Payne Smith’s Compendious Syriac Dictionary tells us that the Aramaic word “Oh!” (או) indicates an expression of simultaneous wonderment, grief, and reproof:

 

 

This confirms that Shaul was probably saying, “Oy!”

 

 

Shaul’s sarcasm is obvious. He is saying, “I was raised at the feet of Gamliel, and I have never heard of any such Torah commandment, which tells us that women are supposed to be silent in the assemblies. So then, did you write this command? Or are you the only one who heard it?”

 

However, some modern authors, seeking to prove that women should be silent in the assemblies, suggest that Shaul may have been referencing Genesis 3:16.

 

However, while Genesis 3:16 does imply male headship, both in the assemblies and in the home, nowhere does it suggest that women should not speak.

 

The problem is that the original author of verses 34 and 35 (whom Shaul is quoting) is attempting to construe Genesis 3:16 as a commandment for women to be silent in the assemblies. However, this verse does not say that women are to be silent in the assemblies (as if they are to be “seen, but not heard”); and if we try to make Genesis 3:16 say that, then we are essentially adding to Scripture (which is prohibited in Torah).

 

The Torah is not intended to impose blanket rules that limit communication between Israelites, and destroy morale. Instead, the Torah is intended to give us rules that help make Israelite society orderly, and band us together in order to bring the Nazarene Israelite faith to the world. The Torah asks everyone to do his best, and to pitch in and help with the effort of evangelism. This is just not possible without good communication.

 

When all parties are doing their best to help further the Nazarene Israelite cause, then there is automatically a sense of order, cooperation and goodwill between all parties; and the result is a natural sense of Shalom.

 

While there clearly are times it is better for both men and for women to be silent, from the standpoint of the military model, giving women a blanket commandment to be silent makes no sense. While NCOs never run command and staff briefings, they do frequently need to speak, and also to help present information.

 

While it certainly indicates a wrong spirit for a woman to try to take over an assembly when qualified men are present, armies also have a specialized class of soldier known as the Warrant Officer. The Warrant Officer is usually an NCO who has skills that are so special that it warrants treating him (or in this case, her) almost like an officer. Deborah and Priscilla are perfect examples.

 

Judges Chapter Five relates the story of Deborah the prophetess, who both judged the Nation of Israel, and led it in war.

 

 

As we discuss elsewhere, a ‘judge’ is a special type of prophet who also serves in the kingship role. While his or her children do not inherit the kingship after him, he has the authority to establish secondary laws (i.e., laws that help to apply the Torah to specific cases), and he also sits in judgment of disputes. In many cases, judges are called to lead the Nation of Israel in war.

 

What makes judges so special is their Elohim-given ability to prophecy, to hear and articulate YHWH’s voice, and to rightly-divide His Word. Without all three of these attributes (as well as a specific anointing as a judge), they are not qualified to lead the Nation.   However, while Scripture gives us examples of women judges such as Deborah, women prophetesses, and even women military leaders, nowhere in Scripture is there any record of a woman acting as a priest, as a synagogue leader, or as a teacher over men. In fact, we should note that the Apostle Shaul expressly forbids women to have ecclesiastical authority over men.

 

 

However, the Book of Acts speaks about a couple named Priscilla and Aquila.

 

 

While Luke generally records Aquila before Priscilla, Shaul generally does the opposite. Shaul records Priscilla before her husband Aquila in Romans 16:3, in 2^nd Timothy 4:19, and in 1^st Corinthians 16:19. 

 

Given that Hebrew is essentially a male-dominant (sexist) language, that Shaul would list Priscilla before Aquila is highly significant. It may even indicate that it was Priscilla (rather than Aquila) who had the real talent for tutoring students in the Way. Nonetheless, Scripture does not indicate that Priscilla ever headed an assembly in an official leadership capacity; and we should note that Priscilla and Aquila are always recorded together. What this may say is that while Priscilla did help tutor men, she only did so under her husband’s headship (and probably in his presence): Therefore, her example does not set a precedent for women to serve as pastors or ecclesiastical heads.

 

 

YHWH does not allow us to lead ritual worship when we are ritually unclean. If a woman of childbearing age were to try to pastor an assembly, then at least one week a month, and for several weeks after childbirth she would not be ritually clean, and therefore she would not be able to serve as a congregational pastor. Nonetheless, government service is in no way limited, and Deborah’s and Priscilla’s examples are consistent with the military model, in which warrant officers serve in a leadership capacity when no other qualified officer (i.e., no other qualified male) is present and ready for service. When no one else is qualified to do the job, the warrant officer steps up: Yet when a qualified officer (or in this case a qualified male) shows up for service, the warrant officer steps back down, or steps back into a supporting role (rather than a leading one).

 

Sometimes men use Judges 5:7 to suggest that there is no problem with allowing the women to take over the ecclesiastical leadership functions for them.

 

 

Notice, however, that it was a great shame to the men of Israel that a woman had to step up to fulfill their duties; and Deborah was rubbing their faces it in.

 

 

Genesis 3:16 tells us that it is the man’s responsibility to lead the Nation of Israel: and yet none of the men of Deborah’s time felt capable of doing the job. Can we imagine what kind of a disgrace to America’s men it would be if a similar situation arose in the Pentagon? How proud should the men of America be, if none of them were found capable of leading the nation in war?

 

Deborah’s husband was Lappidoth.

 

 

When we look up the reference at OT:3940, we see that it refers to someone who is a ‘flambeau’ (meaning someone who is flambuoyant, or a show-off, or a ‘show-boat’):

 

Deborah delivered a blistering rebuke to the men of her generation, reproving them that because of their incompetence and their flambuoyance, a mother in Israel had to do their job for them. Rather than being something to celebrate, it was a national dishonor.

 

While women can fill leadership roles, and while they can sometimes do a very good job at it, it is a burning shame to the men if the women have to do this, because it is a sign that they are not doing their jobs.

 

However, none of this is to detract from Deborah or Priscilla. What Scripture calls for is not strong men and weak women, but both strong men and strong women. The goal is for His people to work together in the natural order that Elohim has set forth, with the men submitting to Elohim’s leadership, and working to further YHWH’s kingdom, while the women do what they can to help their men succeed in that mission.

 

Thus what YHWH really wants is strong men and strong women working together to establish His Son’s kingdom here on earth. He wants them all working together in harmony and order, so that the nation will prevail, and the Hebraic Good News finally goes forth to the ends of the earth.

 

While the Ephraimites are used to the idea of strong men, the idea of strong women can still sometimes be difficult for them. Yet in Scripture, women do not hesitate to engage in warfare.

 

 

Our brothers in Judah understand that women are to be strong, and that they are to be capable as they can, without being hampered or limited. They are by no means ‘second class’ citizens, or inferior in any way. They are just called to supporting role, rather than a leading one.

 

Blessed is the man who finds a woman who is strong in YHWH, and who abides moment by moment in Yeshua the Messiah, and hears and obeys YHWH’s voice.