Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

Authored By  :
Published On :
Last Updated :



Continuing our discussion from part two, notice the stark contrast in the previous verses. Just as the Lord smote the wicked unbelieving Egyptians with death during the darkness of the night in order to liberate His children, the wicked unbelieving Jews also smote the true Son of God during the night with a sentence of death as well. After an all night trial at Caiaphas' house, in the early morning hours, we are told that the Jewish elders brought Jesus before the Roman procurator, Pontius Pilate, at the hall of judgment. We all know what happened after that.

Just as the Lord had told the ancient Israelites to destroy in the fire any meat which remained in the morning from the Passover meal, some fifteen hundred years later, the wicked, unbelieving Jews likewise "destroyed" Jesus on the Cross between the hours of twelve o'clock noon and three o'clock that same afternoon. This they did after they had beaten, slapped, whipped and spit upon the meat of His flesh earlier in the day through their proxies, the Romans. Consider the following group of verses:

"Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover."


"And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him into their council, saying . . . And they said, What need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth. And the whole multitude of them arose, and led him unto Pilate . . . And as soon as he knew that he belonged unto Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who himself also was at Jerusalem at that time . . . And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour. And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst. And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."


The sharp contrast in these parallel Passover stories is quite amazing. In the original Passover, the Lord sent His Prophet Moses to free His children from physical bondage in Egypt. After performing many mighty miracles, this mission was finally accomplished; but not before the Lord had taken the lives of the firstborn of the Egyptians. Now consider the parallel which occurred during the First Century. First of all, remember that Moses had prophesied that the Lord would send another Prophet similar to himself. I discuss this topic in a number of other articles, such as "The Two Sackcloth Witnesses of Revelation 11", and "Famous Forties: One of God's Special Numbers?". Consider this verse:

"The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;"


Some fifteen hundred years later, some of the descendants of these very same Israelites, would kill their Liberator who sought to free them from the bondage of sin, death, and the Mosaic Law. Just as the Lord smote the firstborn in the land of Egypt, the unbelieving elders smote the Firstborn of the Dead, who was also the Firstfruits of the Resurrection. Just as God had performed many mighty miracles through Moses prior to their liberation, we are told that the latter day Moses -- that is, Jesus -- also performed many mighty miracles during the time of His earthly ministry, before He also gave us true liberation through His Death on the Cross.

In other words, while the ancient Israelites were liberated from physical bondage in Egypt, the unbelieving Jews of the First Century rejected the truth, and thus forfeited their liberation from the spiritual Egypt of being enslaved to the Mosaic Law. The Apostle Paul seems to clearly indicate that this is why the Apostle John refers to Jerusalem as Egypt in the Book of Revelation. The unbelieving Jews were -- and to this day remain -- enslaved to the letter of the Law, and have never experienced the freedom of the Spirit, and the Salvation, which is obtained only through faith in Christ. This is why in his Epistle, Paul writes that Jerusalem is still in bondage with her children. What an amazing truth! Consider the following verses which clearly explain all of these things:

"Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free . . . If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed."


"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,"


"For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."


"For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father . . . Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God."


"And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:"


"But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?"


"Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all."


"Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage."


"And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified."


Having now thoroughly explained the deep significance of the Passover meal, let us return now to our discussion on sheep, lambs and goats. Several hundred years before Ezekiel, about the time of the Assyrian invasion, Isaiah was inspired by the Lord to write the Messianic fifty-third chapter of his Book. As some of us are aware, this prophetic chapter deals with the sufferings of Christ, our Passover Lamb. Allow me to bring verse seven to your attention:

"He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth."


In the above verse, the word "lamb" is translated from the Hebrew word "seh"; which as we already know, can mean either a lamb or a goat. In the same verse, the word "sheep" comes from the Hebrew word "rachel", pronounced raw-kale', which means a female sheep. That is, a ewe. The fact that these two words are used in the same verse, may imply that "lamb" is meant to be understood as being a young sheep, and not as a goat. This may indicate that by Isaiah's time, the coming Messiah was beginning to be symbolically viewed more as a young sheep, and not as a young goat.

Regardless of when this change may have occurred, one thing is for certain. In the New Testament, the word "lamb" is translated from the Koine Greek word "arnion" -- pronounced ar-nee'-on -- as well as from the Koine Greek word "amnos", which is pronounced am-nos'. Both of these words mean a lamb, or a young lamb. It does not seem likely that these words are referring to a young goat, because the one time that the word "kid" is used in the New Testament, it is derived from the Koine Greek word "eriphos" -- pronounced er'-if-os -- which means a young goat. This one occurrence is in the following verses which are found in the Parable of the Prodigal Son:

"And he said unto him, Thy brother is come; and thy father hath killed the fatted calf, because he hath received him safe and sound. And he was angry, and would not go in: therefore came his father out, and intreated him. And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends: But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf."


The more I study the Word of God, the more I am amazed by how many precious jewels are hidden within its pages. I must admit that for the first time, I fully understand what the above verses are all about. You see, perhaps like some of you, I have always assumed that this man simply held a party because his wayward son had come to his senses and returned home. However, there is much more to this story than what meets the eye. Let me explain.

Based upon everything that we have studied thus far in this series, I believe that what the Lord may really be describing in the previous verses, is that this thankful father offered a sacrifice and an atonement for the sins of his foolish son, who had abandoned the ways of his Father in Heaven. Remember, Jesus is using this particular Parable to show the contrast between a repentant sinner -- such as the common people who received Him -- and the self-righteous people, such as the Scribes and the Pharisees, who did not embrace Him as their much-needed Savior. This is verified by simply looking at the verse which leads into this Parable:

"Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth."


In the Parable of the Prodigal Son, the "fatted calf" is none other than the sacrificial bullock which we find being used throughout the Old Testament, as well as in the New Testament. Concerning the "kid" which the man killed, it was for the sins of his son. In my view, it is easy to see that the Lord was using the kid to represent Himself, who as we already know, was indeed the Sacrificial Goat who was slain for the atonement of our sins. Notice that the jealous son makes a clear connection between the goat and the sins of his brother with the phrase "neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid"; as well as with the phrase "which hath devoured thy living with harlots".

Can you see the profound lesson in the Lord's words? He is actually showing how deeply deluded the Jewish elders really were. The elder son was basically saying "Father, my younger brother is just a dirty sinner; yet you have gone and killed both the fatted calf and the kid for him! He doesn't deserve it!". The elder son was very self-righteous -- just like the unbelieving Jews -- and so blind to the truth, that he did not even realize that this is precisely why his father had killed the goat. That is, because it was necessary to make atonement for his brother's sins. In like manner, the Scribes and the Pharisees didn't understand why Jesus had to die for their sins either. Just like the elder son, they believed that they merited God's favor due to their own "goodness", and their supposed adherence to the Mosaic Law. Of course, Jesus thoroughly exposed their hypocrisy when He said the following in the twenty-third chapter of Matthew's Gospel:

"Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not."


You see, in his pride, just like the self-righteous Scribes and Pharisees, the elder son was very careful to keep all of the rules which had been laid down by his father. Perhaps like them, he felt that he didn't even need a sin atonement, because he was so perfect. Yet the minute his father killed the goat in order to atone for the sins of his younger son, the elder son became jealous. In like manner, God the Father sent His Son to die and atone for our sins, and we humbly and gratefully accept His Sacrifice, and repent of our sins; while the foolish nonbelievers of this world believe that there is nothing wrong with them. In fact, they make up new rules as they go along to try to justify and normalize their sinful behavior.

This is nothing more than the modern, deceptive, liberal, New Age belief of "I'm okay, you're okay. There is no right and wrong. There is no such thing as sin. There are really no absolutes. Just do what feels good, and seems good, in your own eyes." Or in the words of Aleister Crowley, "Do as thou wilt." Only too late will these foolish people realize the folly of their ways when we are happily received by the Father, because we have accepted the Sacrifice of His Son, while they have rejected it, have felt that it was not even necessary because they think they are okay just the way they are, and will thus not even be allowed into the Kingdom of Heaven.

Let us return now to our main topic of discussion. In the New Testament, the word "sheep" is derived from the Koine Greek word "probaton". Thayer's Greek English Lexicon states that this word means any four-footed, tame animal which is accustomed to graze. It refers to small grazing animals, as opposed to larger cattle, horses, etc. It is most commonly used to mean a sheep or a goat. After this definition, the lexicon then states that "probaton" always means sheep in the New Testament.

To be honest, I was rather taken back by this discovery; not only because I had assumed that the word "sheep" in the New Testament always means exactly that -- that is, a sheep -- but also because it seems that "probaton" is as flexible a word as the Old Testament word "seh". As we have already seen, "seh" can also refer to either a sheep or a goat. The fact that the Greek lexicon makes the claim that "probaton" always means "sheep" in the New Testament, bothered me even more. In fact, I questioned upon what basis Joseph H. Thayer made this claim. As I looked through the New Testament, I quickly discovered a number of verses where "probaton" could easily mean either sheep or goats, or even both. Consider the following example verses:

"But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd."


"And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?"


"How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?"


"And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;"


"Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches."


Obviously, a flock of goats can just as easily be scattered on the mountainsides as a flock of sheep. Not only that, but it is quite normal for sheep and goats to be mixed together. As we will see shortly, it is for this very reason that the the Lord warned that He would have to divide the sheep from the goats. In like manner, a caring shepherd will just as quickly pull one of his goats out of a pit, as he will one of his sheep. In addition to this, being as it is his means of earning an income, a man will just as quickly look for a goat lost in the hills, as he will for one of his sheep; even if it means leaving the other ninety-nine in safe hands.

Finally, as we previously discussed, oxen -- or bullocks -- goats, sheep, doves and pigeons were all an integral part of the various sacrifices which were mandated by God by way of the Mosaic Law. These sacrificial offerings were not done away with, and were still being practiced during the early part of the First Century. This point becomes quite evident in the four Gospels, as well as in the Book of Acts. For example, after Mary's period of purification following the birth of Jesus, notice what we are told by the writer Luke:

"And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord; (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;) And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons."


During the course of His earthly ministry, Jesus Christ also plainly indicated that the Mosaic Law, and the sacrifices which were mandated by it, were still in full effect. This becomes quite evident by the following example which we find in the Gospel of Matthew, where the Lord heals a man of his leprosy:

"And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed. And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them."


In the Old Testament, the final chapters of the Book of Ezekiel are the last place where instructions regarding the various sacrifices are mentioned. In those verses, which I shared with you in part two, a goat was still being used for the atonement of sin. What that means is that unless some unrecorded revelation was received from the Lord during the final hundreds of years prior to the birth of Christ, goats were still being used for the required sin offering in the New Testament. As such, when we read about the sheep market which was located by the Pool of Bethesda, it could very easily -- and in my opinion, most likely did -- refer to a marketplace where both sheep and goats were kept and sold to visitors to Jerusalem, who required the animals for their temple offerings. This would be in perfect agreement with the true meaning of the Koine Greek word "probaton".

This same possibility applies to when Jesus drove the sheep and the oxen from the temple grounds. The oxen, or bullocks, were present. The sheep were present. The doves were also present. So where were the goats? In my opinion, the truth of the matter is that based on the flexible meaning of the Koine Greek word "probaton", there were also goats present. However, when the New Testament was translated into English, the word "probaton" was made to mean only sheep, when in reality, it should have been translated as sheep and goats. It doesn't seem likely that the Lord would just drive out the sheep, and allow the goats to remain, does it?

The only way I see to deny these truths, would be to suggest that goats were no longer being used as sacrificial animals during the New Testament era. However, as I have now clearly demonstrated, such an idea is totally contrary to everything we have seen regarding the sacrifices and offerings which were mandated by the Mosaic Law, which were still in effect up until our Lord's own Sacrifice on the Cross. Furthermore, let us not forget that the Lord did mention the kid in His Parable of the Prodigal Son, which I believe was meant to be understood as a sin offering.

In reading the New Testament, we discover that some of the Jewish Disciples continued to observe the Jewish feast days, even after our Lord's Crucifixion. In fact, if you read the fourteenth chapter of Paul's Epistle to the Romans, you will see that even a few decades after Jesus' Crucifixion, there were still some contentious arguments occurring between the brethren regarding which foods could be eaten and which not, and which Jewish holy days should be observed, and which not. Following Jesus' death and resurrection, the big difference was that the Apostles and Disciples eventually came to see that certain practices -- such as circumcision, and animal sacrifices -- were no longer required.

Why was this? As we learned in part two, it was because Jesus became the Final Sacrifice for sin, and the only Sacrifice that's acceptable to God. Thus, from that point forward, they were required to place their faith in His blood Atonement for their Salvation -- and not in animal sacrifices -- just as we are likewise required to do today. In essence, as the Apostle Paul wrote, through Jesus' one-time Sacrifice, we become dead to the requirements of the Mosaic Law for our Salvation, as is evident by the following group of verses:

"Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God."


"But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance."


"For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins . . . For by one offering he [Jesus] hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified."


"For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love."


"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature."


As we dig deeper into the New Testament, it becomes obvious that during His earthly ministry, Jesus did make a clear distinction between the spiritual sheep who believed in Him, and the rebellious spiritual goats who rejected Him. While we could assume that the following verses refer to sheep or goats, it seems to me that Jesus is specifically focusing on only one of them, and not on both. In other words, either He was telling His Disciples to go to the sheep, or else to go to the goats. Either He Himself was sent to the sheep, or else He was sent to the goats. Finally, the only ones who could be offended -- and thus be scattered the night that He was betrayed -- could be those people who actually followed Him in the first place. That is to say, the sheep:

"But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."


"But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."


"And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered."


The fact that the Lord was specifically focusing on God's hungry sheep as opposed to the unbelieving, rebellious goats, becomes absolutely clear when we read the following Parable which is found in the twenty-fifth chapter of the Gospel of Matthew. Here we see that while sheep and goats were used in the animal sacrifices, and while sheep and goats are mixed in the herds of men, just as the wheat grows along side of the tares until the day of harvest -- Matthew 13:24-30 -- Jesus clearly tells His listeners that the day is coming when He will separate the flocks -- the sheep from the goats -- and they will be going to two very different places:

"When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world . . . Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels . . . And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."


Please note that in the previous verses, the word "goats" is derived from the Koine Greek word "eriphion", which in turn is a derivative of the word "eriphos", which we saw earlier in the Parable of the Prodigal Son.

Please go to part four for the conclusion of this series.

⇒ Go To The Next Part . . .

Click or Tap Icons to Share! Thank you!

---

---

Please avail yourself of other areas of the Bill's Bible Basics website. There are many treasures for you to discover.