Home (Netzarim Logo)

Pl. , a formal pact, treaty or alliance—a form of , not a unilateral promise nor an informal

The theme of a contract between mortals and the Meta-world that we read relative to Av•râ•hâm, Yi•tzᵊkhâq, Yi•sᵊr•â•eil, Mosh•ëh and Dâ•wid ha-Mëlëkh is intrinsic to, and typical of, many, perhaps virtually all, ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian religions. A negotiated contract with the Meta-world was the rule, not the exception (though other religions were subject to continual renegotiations, including sacrifice of firstborn males, whenever things went desperately wrong).

What separated the religion of Av•râ•hâm, Yi•tzᵊkhâq and Yi•sᵊr•â•eil was the incorporation of the Meta-Party as the Singularity Creator, abandoning the idolatry of the pantheon of all other peoples (the ).

The theme of a negotiated pact evolved from Egyptian and Mesopotamian mythology into Hellenist Roman mythology as pax deorum.

A , then, is a , which entails:

Rainbow Rule
Validity of a

As a kind of contract, a is only valid and in force when certain factual elements are present and satisfied.

(The elements of a valid contract are counted differently depending upon how the concepts are dissected. The following is based on my decades of business experience, my B.S.B.A. (UF '68), including courses in business law and contract law, and e-law.bc.ca.)

Elements of a contract
  1. Offer (Shᵊm•ot 20.1—23.33; Dᵊvâr•im 6.4-9; 11:13-21; bᵊ-Mi•dᵊbar 15:3741; Dᵊvâr•im 27.1—29.8; 30.11-20)

  2. Acceptance of the offer which results in a meeting of the minds (Shᵊm•ot 24.3) Competence:

    There can be no contract without competency, which includes reasonably informed consent.

    Relative to the , if you are born a Jew then you in an "opt out" status while gentiles are in an "opt in" mode. What this means is that those born into the remain in the unless they breach it, by violating its terms—transgressing

    Gentiles, by contrast, are born a non-party to this and, therefore, must develop a working knowledge of the terms of this contract before they can make an informed—competent—consent. To become party to this , gentiles must agree to its all of its terms, by performance (not mere words of assent), in order to "opt in" to the . Gentiles – born a non-party to this contract – who simply presume themselves in the are in immediate breach by not satisfying the terms of this , which require obtaining recognition from the Biblically-ordained Beit-Din system.

    Agreement:

    Agreement is essential to any contract.

    Before there can be a contract, there must be a consensus ad idem: that is, there must be a meeting of the minds… [T]here must be an offer by one side and an acceptance of the offer by the person to whom the offer was made. Without both an offer and an acceptance, there can be no consensus ad idem or a meeting of the minds which is essential to form a contract… Acceptance is simply some indication by the person receiving the offer that the offer is accepted. The acceptance must be clear and absolute and [Christians note] without conditions attached… No conditions can be attached to the acceptance and the terms of the offer can not be changed. If conditions are attached or terms are changed, the parties are merely negotiating… there is no contract. You have made a counter offer…

    There is no such thing as acceptance of part of the terms of a contract. In such case, that is simply no agreement and no contract.

    The terms of the is Tor•âh shë-bi•khᵊtâv complemented by Tor•âh shë-bᵊ•al pëh. In a nutshell: "the person must demonstrate his or her exclusive fealty to -- by doing his or her utmost to live according to the mi•tzᵊw•ot in exchange for -- providing ki•pur for shortcomings and a portion in hâ-o•lâm ha-bâ."

  3. Promise to Perform The contract constitutes a bargain. The acceptance of the offer is the bargain the parties have struck (Shᵊm•ot 24.7)

  4. Valuable Consideration (which can be a promise or payment in some form),

    When an exchange of a promise for a promise or act has been made this is consideration, which makes the contract binding.

    Consideration is some benefit or advantage to the person making the offer and a corresponding cost or prejudice to the person accepting the offer… It is left to the parties to determine whether or not the consideration is adequate; only the parties can judge whether or not it is a good bargain. The law only requires that there be sufficient consideration; something of value must be given. The consideration can not be something given or promised in the past. To be valid, the consideration must be a new promise or some fresh benefit exchanged for the offer.

    The Divine side of consideration is provision of ki•pur and hâ-o•lâm ha-bâ.

    The human side of the consideration is our performance—doing our utmost to live according to Tor•âh (loosely based on e-law.bc.ca).

    See also Dᵊvâr•im 11.26ff; 28.1-69; but especially Dᵊvâr•im 30.16 elucidated by Yᵊkhëz•qeil 13.19; 18.9,13,17,19,21-23,28; 33.11-13,15-16,19; 37.5-6,14; Khav•a•quq 2.4 (the tza•diq shall live by his ë•mun•âh); Mi•shᵊl•ei Shᵊlom•oh 4.4; 7.2.

  5. Time or Event when performance must be made (meet commitments), during one's lifetime;

  6. Terms and Conditions for Performance, including fulfilling promises, see citations above;

  7. Performance—living according to the mi•tzᵊw•ot Tor•âh.

Rainbow Rule
Origins of the
NewNew idea: A Contract, a deal, between a deity and a people

"The idea of a [] between a deity and a people is unknown from other religious and cultures. It seems that the [] idea was a special feature of the religion of Israel, the only one to demand exclusive loyalty and preclude the possibility of dual or multiple loyalties; so the stipulation in political treaties demanding exclusive fealty to one king corresponds strikingly with the religious belief in one single, exclusive deity."

Ël•oh•im as husband to Yi•sᵊrâ•eil the Wife

"The prophets, especially [Ho•sheia, Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhu and Yᵊkhëz•qeil], expressed this idea of exclusive loyalty by speaking of the relationship between Ël•oh•im and Israel as one of husband and wife, which in itself is also considered [a ] (cf. above and especially [Yᵊkhëz•qeil] 16.8)… Furthermore, the formula expressing the [] relationship between Ël•oh•im and Israel, 'you will be My people and I will be your [Ël•oh•im]' (wa-Yi•qᵊr•â] 26.12; [Dᵊvâr•im] 29.12, etc.), is a legal formula taken from the sphere of marriage, as attested in various legal documents from the Ancient Near East (cf. [Ho•sheia] 2.4). The relationship of the vassal to his suzerain or of the wife to her husband leaves no place for double loyalty, and they are therefore perfect metaphors for loyalty in a monotheistic religion" ("Covenant," Ency. Jud., 5.1021).

During the era of Mosh•ëh, the Yᵊtzi•âh and Har Sin•ai, the was an ancient Near East treaty between nations or multi-nation powers. Negotiating a between Yi•sᵊr•â•eil and the Almighty was a monumental departure from all other religions and "a point of departure for understanding [Tor•âh of Yi•sᵊr•â•eil]. It now becomes clear that [Ël•oh•im] as [lëkh—more accurately, Suzerain] of [Yi•sᵊr•â•eil] is not an idea born during the period of the monarchy, as scholars used to think, but, on the contrary, is one of the most genuine and most ancient doctrines of [Yi•sᵊr•â•eil]" (Ency. Jud., loc. cit.).

"The idea of a [] between a deity and a people is unknown from other religious and cultures. It seems that the [] idea was a special feature of the religion of Israel, the only one to demand exclusive loyalty and preclude the possibility of dual or multiple loyalties; so the stipulation in political treaties demanding exclusive fealty to one king corresponds strikingly with the religious belief in one single, exclusive deity."

The New Had To Be Written

"As the relationship between the suzerain and the vassal has to be based on a written document, i.e., a treaty, so the relationship between [Ël•oh•im] and [Yi•sᵊr•â•eil] had to be expressed in written form. It is not surprising, therefore, that the tablets of the [] played so important a role in the religion of [Yi•sᵊr•â•eil]. As already noted, the tablets had to be deposited in the sanctuary at the feet of the deity, a procedure known from the Hittite treaties. Moreover, it appears that, as in the judicial sphere, the written document expresses the validity of the given relationship. When the [] is no longer in force the document must be destroyed. Thus the worship of the golden calf[mask], which signifies the breaking of the [], is followed by the breaking of the tablets by [Mosh•ëh], the mediator of the [] (Shᵊm•ot 32). Indeed, the term for canceling a contract in Babylonian legal literature is ''to break the tablet'' (tuppam hepu). Following the judicial pattern, the renewal of the relationship must be effected by writing new tablets, which explains why new ones had to be written after the sin of the golden calf[mask], and why the ritual decologue was repeated in Shᵊm•ot 34.17-26 (cf. Shᵊm•ot 23.10-29). Renewal of the [] with a vassal—after a break in the relationship—by means of writing new tablets is an attested fact in Hittite political life" (Ency. Jud., 1019-20).

"The prophets, especially [Ho•sheia, Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhu and Yᵊkhëz•qeil], expressed this idea of exclusive loyalty by speaking of the relationship between Ël•oh•im and Israel as one of husband and wife, which in itself is also considered [a ] (cf. above and especially [Yᵊkhëz•qeil] 16.8)… Furthermore, the formula expressing the [] relationship between Ël•oh•im and Israel, 'you will be My people and I will be your [Ël•oh•im]' (wa-Yi•qᵊr•â] 26.12; [Dᵊvâr•im] 29.12, etc.), is a legal formula taken from the sphere of marriage, as attested in various legal documents from the Ancient Near East (cf. [Ho•sheia] 2.4). The relationship of the vassal to his suzerain or of the wife to her husband leaves no place for double loyalty, and they are therefore perfect metaphors for loyalty in a monotheistic religion" ("Covenant," Ency. Jud., 5.1021).

Countless words have been written about the . Yet, without recognition that a is a pact—a contract, one cannot understand how to become a legitimate party to the .

Without a basic understanding of the concept of a legal contract, none truly grasp its import. Lacking the fundamental understanding of the , one cannot recognize the terms, obligations, conditions, performances or consideratons of the contractual relationship with -- defined and imposed by the . Yet, the between Yi•sᵊr•â•eil with the Singularity is the core contribution of Tor•âh to the world and the core definition of any possible relationship between man and Singularity. Nothing is more important to understand than the .

Rainbow Rule

"The high points of the sacrificial service were the two daily offerings constituting the , one at daybreak [] and the other in the afternoon [], which began and concluded each day's sacrifices. All other individual and public sacrifices were brought in between them… The offering of individual sacrifices was completed by half past the eighth hour of daylight, and the sacrifice of the concluding afternoon then took place. It was slaughtered and offered up an hour later (Ma•sëkët Pᵊsâkh•im 5.1)." (Sacrifice, Ency. Jud., 14.608-10).

Thus, is a metonym specifying the entirety—the "A-Z"—of the symbolic performance of a .

Rainbow Rule
Tor•âh

The Tor•âh / Har Sin•ai (Shᵊm•ot 24.1-11) is a bilateral – 2-way – contract: a contract in which each party promises to pay, or give other consideration, in return for actual performance, a tâ•mid validated by ha-Tâ•mid. Reaching agreement on a occasioned a qâ•dosh Banquet, which entailed the prerequisite qâ•dosh sacrifice for its main course. Since the destruction of the Beit ha-Mi•qᵊdâsh, this tâ•mid validation was, necessarily, transferred, without sacrifice (unless one accepts the symbolism of the Mâ•shiakh Bën-Yo•seiph), to the individual table of the Yᵊhud•i and geir; especially the Shul•khân Ërëv Shab•ât and A•rikh•at ha-Shukhân.

The Promise of consideration: a portion in hâ-o•lâm ha-bâ for actual performance: you to do your utmost to live according to My mi•tzᵊw•ot Tor•âh

Duration of contract: until your physical expiration date.

The Performance: doing your utmost to live according to My mi•tzᵊw•ot Tor•âh Duration of contract until your physical expiration date.

Like any contract, to be valid a , must set forth—and all parties must agree to and perform all terms, conditions, obligations, considerations and performances (referred to metonymically in the Bible as " ") of all parties to the contract. Rejection, or failure to perform, any term of the contract breaches, and annuls, the contract. "Selective observance" – non-selection of one or more terms of the – constitutes breach of contract, annulling the contract.

Rainbow Rule
Christian Misconceptions of "Covenant"

is a term that Christians have loaded with erroneous connotations deriving from the Hellenist (Greek) διαθηκη, the corresponding term from the LXX.

Commenting on the Hebrew term, Vines Expository Dictionary of NT Words, for example, is contradicted by A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language For Readers of English. Vine asserts that διαθηκη "is the rendering of a Hebrew word meaning a covenant or agreement (from a verb signifying to cut or divide, in allusion to a sacrificial custom in connection with covenant-making."

"In contradistinction to the English word 'covenant' (lit. a coming together), which signifies a mutual undertaking between two parties or more, each binding himself to fulfill obligations, it does not in itself contain the idea of joint obligation, it mostly signifies an obligation undertaken by a single person." The Hellenist Greek term, yes. With respect to the Hebrew term, however, this is just plain wrong:

The term was later Hellenized / de-Judaized to "covenant" in order to dilute and divert attention from the Biblical terms and conditions of performance.

Rainbow Rule © 1996-present by Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben-David,
Google+ registered author-publisher
Go Top Home (Netzarim Logo) Go Back

Nᵊtzâr•im… Authentic