Are the Rabbis correct about PaRDeS? Ask a teen!

Think It Through: Allusion Or Meaning Cannot Contradict Literal : Written by my son C. Acred (16yrs)

top secret

C. A. Acred 2014

Joh 6:53  Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.54  Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.55  For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.56  He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.57  As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

Many anti-Missionaries would say that Yeshua is clearly not according to the  Torah, and most definitely not the Messiah, because here he says a statement that is clearly cannibalistic in the literal, and that the literal must always ‘make sense’, or the figurative meaning cannot contradict the literal.

Is that always the case though? Is everything said meant to have a literal meaning? Is there no such thing as allusions and figures of speech? Any who believes the above statement, I would like to ask, “Is everything you say always literally true and makes sense?” If anyone who is asked this is honest, they will say no. They use figure of speech many times… But yet Yeshua is forbidden to use such things?  This is a double standard, just in their own lives.

There is a deeper problem, however. These same people firmly believe in the Tanach, and  stand on it as God’s word, which is true. However, using the following  Torah principle, we start to see problems.

 Lev 19:35  Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in meteyard, in weight, or in measure.

Lev 19:36  Just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin, shall ye have: I am the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt.

 Pro 20:10  Divers weights, and divers measures, both of them are alike abomination to the LORD.

 Pro 20:23  Diverse weights are an abomination unto the LORD; and a false balance is not good.


The Lord is clear about it. Injustice in measure and judgment is clearly wrong and something God abhors. Logically, this only makes sense. If you’re going to point out a problem with someone else, and yet you have the same problem, then that’s unjust, and something The Lord abhors.

So, are they using equal weights and measures? Let’s see.

When you get angry, does your nose burn? Does it actually catch on fire and start burning? Of course not… But what’s this?


Gen 30:2  And Jacob’s anger was kindled against Rachel: and he said, Am I in God’s stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb?

 Gen 44:18  Then  Judah came near unto him, and said, Oh my lord, let thy servant, I pray  thee, speak a word in my lord’s ears, and let not thine anger burn  against thy servant: for thou art even as Pharaoh.

Exo 4:14  And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Moses, and he said, Is  not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And  also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee: and when he seeth thee, he  will be glad in his heart.

 Num 11:1  And when the people complained, it displeased the LORD: and the LORD heard it; and his anger was kindled; and the fire of the LORD burnt among them, and consumed them that were in the uttermost parts of the camp.

 Deu 6:15  (For the LORD thy God is  a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled  against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.


In every one of these  verses, the Hebrew actually says “nose burned” for anger. In Hebrew,  “ויחר־אף”, or another form saying the same thing. Literally, this makes no sense, and is actually a lie, as we all know noses don’t burn when angry. Clearly though, this is a figure of speech. It is not meant to be literal, but rather has a different meaning, using an allusion.

Let me ask you this, was Israel flowing with milk and honey? Were there flows of milk and honey in Cannan then?


Exo 3:8  And  I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to  bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a  land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanites, and  the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and  the Jebusites.

The Hebrew for “Flowing with milk and honey”, literally says  “Flowing with milk and honey”. In Hebrew, “זבת חלב ודבשׁ”. Using the  premise and standard of these anti-missionaries, this is yet another lie  found multiple places in the Tanach. It is literally untrue. But the truth is, this refers to the land being plentiful.

Here’s something else. Is anyone ‘like a lion’? Does anyone  crouch down, roar, have a tail, have claws, and have a mane like a lion?  The answer is no. But then we read:
2Sa 23:20  And  Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, the son of a valiant man, of Kabzeel, who  had done many acts, he slew two lionlike men of Moab: he went down also  and slew a lion in the midst of a pit in time of snow:


What? Lion-like? The word used does mean that, and is “אראל” in Hebrew. Looks like another lie, as no one looks like a lion. Literally,  this is a fallacy. Figuratively though, it doesn’t mean that they  looked like lions, but rather is an allusion to their strength and how  they were held in the people’s eyes – like lions, but not literally.

As clearly seen, not everything is meant literally. Those who reject and renounce Yeshua on this basis have no problem with the same ‘error’ in their own faith.

There’s more though. What about prophecy? All would agree that a lot of prophecy in the Tanach is very figurative, and literally, makes no sense. But, using the anti-missionary ‘weights and measures’, this presents a bunch of problems.

For example:


 Isa 11:10  And  in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an  ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall  be glorious.


This clearly messianic prophecy makes no sense literally, and in two ways. For one, a “root of Jessie?” A root is going to gather the people? Certainly not, this is talking about a “he” that will gather the people, certainly not a plant. What about this being an “ensign”, or  standard? So, people from all over are going to see a flag, and come running home, right? Wrong. A flag isn’t living, and what is being  described here most certainly is. The messiah is being described here,  fulfilling one of his tasks. But, since it makes no literal sense, it is faulty, according to the anti-missionaries who believe this  way. They should rip this out of their Tanach(Old Testament). In fact, they have a  bunch of ripping to do…


Isa 11:15  And  the LORD shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea; and with  his mighty wind shall he shake his hand over the river, and shall smite  it in the seven streams, and make men go over dryshod.


Just a few verses later, Isaiah mentions the “tounge of the  Egyption sea”. In Hebrew, it says exactly that, “את לשׁון ים־מצרים”.  Isaiah clearly has problems with everything making sense literally. Or  is it that those who deny figures and allusions have a problem? Just a thought, as otherwise Isaiah should be ripped out of the Tanach(Old Testament) according to their belief of nothing contradicting the literal.

What  about Daniel? We all know the story about the dream of Nebuchadnezzar  about the statue. It is recorded in Daniel 2. The dream had a statue in  it, that was eventually destroyed, and a mountain filled the earth in  the end. Now, literally, this isn’t right. The meaning was explained as different kingdoms, having nothing to do with statues. The dream was an allusion to  something that would literally be. It itself however, makes no sense.  The literal interpretation of this is ludicrous, and, using the logic in  question, would render this void and meaningless. The allusion  contradicts the literal. The allusion is talking about kingdoms, whereas the literal is talking about a statue.

The literal meaning of many things in a Daniel, such as Daniel 7 and 9,  make no sense, and have nothing to do with what it is alluding to. It  looks like Daniel has to go too… Unless of course you realize that the  logic in question is false, and that things can be said that are not literally true.

There are many other prophecies that do not make sense literally, but have a figurative meaning, such as the two men in jail with Joseph, who had dreams.

Yeshua, just like in  the Tanach, used sayings and allusions, that didn’t always make sense  literally, but they did have a meaning in a deeper sense.

This denial of Yeshua because of his sayings that are not literal is both hypocritical, and unreasonable

Next time, let’s think it through. Thanks for reading.


©C. A. Acred 2014

3 thoughts on “Are the Rabbis correct about PaRDeS? Ask a teen!

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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