The “Key” theme in Luke chapter 3 is Repentance/Teshuvah and Baptism/Mikvah that Yohanan the Immmerser/John the Baptist preached to prepare Israel for the Messiah- Yeshua.
Luke 3[1]
The preaching and
baptism of John:
1 Now in the fifteenth year of the reign
of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea, and
Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip
tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the
tetrarch of Abilene,
From John Gill’s Exposition of the
Entire Bible Commentary:
Now in the fifteenth year of the
reign of Tiberius Caesar,.... Emperor of Rome, and the third of the Caesars; Julius was the
first, and Augustus the second, in whose time Christ was born, and this
Tiberius the third; he was the son of Livia, the wife of Augustus, but not by
him; but was adopted by him, into the empire: his name was Claudius Tiberius
Nero, and for his intemperance was called, Caldius Biberius Mero; the whole of
his reign was upwards of twenty two years, for he died in the twenty third year
of his reign (g); and in the fifteenth
of it, John began to preach, Christ was baptized, and began to preach also; so
that this year may be truly called, "the acceptable year of the
Lord".
Pontius Pilate being governor of
Judea; under the
Emperor Tiberius, in whose reign the Jewish chronologer (h) places him, and the historian (i) also, and make mention of him as sent by
him to Jerusalem: he was not the first governor of Judea for the Romans; there
were before him Coponius, Marcus Ambivius, Annins Rufus, and Valerius Gratus:
and Herod being tetrarch of
Galilee; this was
Herod Antipas, the son of Herod the great, and brother of Archelaus; the above
chronologer (k) calls him also a
tetrarch, and places him under Tiberius Caesar: he is sometimes called a king,
and so he is by the Ethiopic version here called "king of Galilee";
and in the Arabic version, "prince over the fourth part of Galilee";
besides Galilee, he had also Peraea, or the country beyond Jordan, as Josephus (l) says, and which seems here to be included
in Galilee; See Gill on Mat_14:1.
And his brother Philip tetrarch of
Iturea, and of the region of Trachonitis: Pliny (m) makes
mention of the nation of the Itureans, as belonging to Coele Syria; perhaps
Iturea is the same with Batanea, or Auranitis, or both; since these with
Trachon, the same with Trachonitis here, are allotted to Philip by Josephus (n): it seems to take its name from Jetur, one
of the sons of Ishmael, Gen_25:15
Trachonitis is mentioned by Pliny (o),
as near to Decapolis, and as a region and tetrarchy, as here: Ptolemy (p) speaks of the Trachonite Arabians, on the
east of Batanea, or Bashan: the region of Trachona, or Trachonitis, with the
Targumists (q), answers to the country
of Argob. This Philip, who as before by Josephus, so by Egesippus (r), is said, in agreement with Luke, to be
tetrarch of Trachonitis, was brother to Herod Antipas, by the father's, but not
by the mother's side. Philip was born of Cleopatra, of Jerusalem, and Herod of
Malthace, a Samaritan (s): he died in
the twentieth year of Tiberius (t),
five years after this:
and Lysanias the tetrarch of
Abilene: mention
is made of Abila by Pliny (u), as in
Coele Syria, from whence this tetrarchy might have its name; and by Ptolemy (w), it is called Abila of Lysanius, from this,
or some other governor of it, of that name; and the phrase, "from Abilene
to Jerusalem", is to be met with in the Talmud (x),
which doubtless designs this same place: who this Lysanias was, is not certain;
he was not the son of Herod the great, as Eusebius suggests (y), nor that Lysanias, the son of Ptolemy
Minnaeus, whom Josephus (z) speaks of,
though very probably he might be a descendant of his: however, when Tiberius
Caesar reigned at Rome, and Pontius Pilate governed in Judea, and Herod Antipas
in Galilee, and Philip his brother in Iturea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias in
Abilene, John the Baptist began to preach and baptize; to fix the area of whose
ministry and baptism, all this is said.
(g) Suetou. Octav. Aug. c. 62, 63.
& Tiberius Nero, c. 21, 49, 73. (h)
R. David Ganz par. 2. fol. 15. 1. (i)
Joseph. de Bello, Jud. l. 2. c. 9. sect. 2, 3. (k)
Par. 1. fol. 25. 2. (l) De Bello Jud.
l. 2. c. 6. sect. 5. (m) Nat. Hist. l.
5. c. 23. (n) Ib. ut supra. (de Bello,
Jud. l. 2. c. 9. sect. 2, 3.) (o) Nat.
Hist. l. 5. c. 12. (p) Lib. 5. c. 15. (q) Targum Jon. in Deut. iii. 4. 14. 1 Kings
iv. 13. & T. Hiefos. in Deut. iii. 14. & Numb. xxxiv. 15. (r) De Excid. l. 1. c. 46. & 3. 26. (s) Joseph de Bello Jud. l. 1. c. 28. (t) Ib. Antiqu. l. 18. c. 6. (u) Lib. 5. c. 18. (w)
Lib. 5. c. 15. (x) T. Bab. Bava Kama,
fol. 59. 2. (y) Hist. Eccl l. 1. c. 9.
10. (z) De Belle Jud. l. 1. c. 13.
sect. 1.
2 Annas
and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the
wilderness.
From John Gill’s Exposition of the
Entire Bible Commentary:
Annas and Caiaphas being the high
priests,.... Some
difficulty here arises, how these two could be both high priests; when
according to the law of God, and the usages of the Jewish nation, there was to
be, and was but one high priest at a time: many things are observed by writers,
to solve this difficulty: some go this way; that though according to the divine
institution, and the practice of former times, there was but one high priest at
a time; yet now, through the corruption of the present age, there were two high
priests; or at least, which officiated alternately in the same year: but of
such a corruption, no instance can be given, even in those corrupt times; and
as Maimonides says (a), there can be
but "one high priest" Mlweh lkb,
"in all the world"; and besides, is contrary to their canons, which
were then in being, and still remain; one (b)
of which runs thus, txak Mylwdg Mynhk ynv Nynmm Nya
"they do not appoint two high priests at once". Others suppose, that
these two annually performed the office of high priests by turns; that Caiaphas
was high priest one year, and Annas another: it is true indeed, that through
the corruption of those times, this office became venal, hence it is said in
the Talmud (c),
"because they gave money for
the priesthood, they changed it every twelve months.''
And which is more largely
expressed by one of their commentators (d),
"because the high priests,
who were under the second temple, after Simeon the just, gave money to minister
in the high priest's office, and because they were wicked, they did not fill up
their years, therefore they changed every year.''
But though it is certain, that
there were frequent, and sometimes annual changes in the priesthood, hence it
is said of Caiaphas, Joh_11:49 that he
was "high priest the same year", yet it does not appear that he and
Annas took it yearly by turns: for Caiaphas continued in that office some
years, even till after the death of Christ: and besides, had this been the case,
as one of them could be but high priest for the year being, both in one year as
here, could not with propriety be said to be high priests. Others take another
method, and suppose Caiaphas to be properly the high priest, as he certainly
was; and Annas so called, because he had been one formerly, the same with
Ananus, the son of Seth; who was put into the priesthood by Quirinius, in the
room of Joazar, and was deposed by Valerius Gratus, and Ishmael ben Phabi was
put into his room: but though there may be instances of persons being called
high priests, who had been in that office, after they were removed from it, yet
no reason can be given, why Annas should be peculiarly called so, when there
were in all probability several alive, who had been in that office as well as
he; as Joazar his predecessor, and Ishmael ben Phabi, who succeeded Joazar, and
after him Eleazar, the son of Annas, and then Simeon ben Camhith; nor why he
should be put in the annals of the high priests, in a year in which he was not
one. It seems most likely therefore, that he was the "Sagan" of the
priests, of which office mention is frequently made, in the Jewish writings (e); yea, we often read of Chanina, or
Chananiah, or Ananias, perhaps the same with this Annas, who is called, Mynhk Ngo, "the Sagan of the priests" (f). This officer was not a deputy high priest,
or one that was substituted to officiate occasionally, in the room of the high
priest, when any thing hindered him, or rendered him unfit for his office; as
on the day of atonement, if the high priest contracted any pollution, they
substituted another to minister (g);
which was not the "Sagan", but another priest; and even such an one
was called an high priest, as appears from the following story (h).
"It happened to Simeon ben
Camhith (a predecessor of Caiaphas), that he went out to speak with the king,
on the evening of the day of atonement, and the spittle was scattered from his
mouth, upon his garments, and he was unclean; and his brother Judah went in,
and ministered in his stead in the high priesthood; and their mother saw her
"two sons", dxa Mwyb Mylwdg Mynhk ynv
"high priests in one day".''
But the "Sagan" was not
an officer pro tempore, or so much under the high priest, and one in his stead,
as a ruler and governor over other priests. Maimonides says of him thus (i);
"they appoint one priest, who
is to the high priest as a second to the king, and he is called
"Sagan"; and he is called a ruler: and he stands at the right hand of
the high priest continually; and this is an honour to him, and all the priests
are under the hand of the Sagan.''
The account given of him in the
Talmud (k) is this;
"in five things the
"Sagan" ministers; the "Sagan" says to him, my lord, high
priest, lift up thy right hand (i.e. when he took the lots out of the vessel
for the goats, on the day of atonement (l);
which should be slain); the "Sagan" is on his right hand, and the
father of the sanhedrim on his left (i.e. when he went to the east of the court
and the north of the altar (m), where
were the two goats, and the vessel in which were the lots); the
"Sagan" waved with the veils, or linen clothes; the "Sagan"
held him by his right hand, and caused him to ascend (by the steps to the
altar); and no man was appointed an high priest, before he was a
"Sagan."''
Now these might be as Serojab and
Zephaniah, the one chief priest, and the other second priest, Jer_52:24 where the Targum and Jarchi interpret
the text, the "Sagan" of the priests. And this being an office of
such dignity and authority, supposing Annas in it, though he was not
"the" high priest, yet being the head of the other priests, he might
be called one, and be joined with Caiaphas, and set before him; not only
because he had been an high priest, but because he was his father-in-law:
the word of God came to John the
son of Zachariah:
a priest of the order of "Abia"; and of Elisabeth, a daughter of Aaron,
and cousin of Mary, the mother of Jesus/Yeshua; as it had come formerly to the
prophets, and particularly to Jeremiah, who was sanctified from the womb, as
the Baptist was: he was blessed with a prophetic spirit, and with the
extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, and with a wonderful revelation of the
Messiah, and of the Gospel dispensation; and was abundantly qualified for the
work he was called to, and sent to perform: and this befell him
in the wilderness; that is, of Judea; where he had
been brought up and lived, and from whence and where he came, preaching: he had
lived a solitary life, and had not learnt his doctrine from men, but had his
mission, ministry, and baptism, from heaven.
(a) In Misn. Menachot, c. 13. sect.
10. (b) T. Hieros. Sanhedrin, fol. 29.
1. Maimon. Hilch. Cele Hamikdash, c. 4. sect. 15. (c)
T. Bab. Yorma, fol. 8. 2. (d)
Bartenora in Misn. Yoma, c 1. sect. 1. (e)
Targum in 2 Kings xxiii. 4. & xxv. 18. & in Jer. xx. 1. 3. & xxix.
26, & lii. 24. (f) Misn. Shekalim,
c. 6. sect. 1. T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 8. 1. Juchasin, fol. 57. 1. (g) Misn. Yoma, c. 1. sect. 1. (h) T. Hieros. Yoma, fol. 38. 4. Megilla, fol.
72. 1. Horayot, fol. 47. 4. T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 47. 1. Bemidbar Rabba, sect. 2.
fol. 180. 3. (i) Hilch. Cele
Hamikdash, c. 4. sect. 16. (k) T.
Hieros. Yoma, fol. 41. 1. (l) Misn.
Yoma, c. 4. sect. 1. (m) Ib. c. 3.
sect. 9.
3 And he came into all the country about
Jordan, preaching the
baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;
“Repentance”
Jewish New Testament Commentary
Turn from your
sins to God. The English language
has a perfectly good word for this, “repent,” used in the King James and most
other versions; but those who image an overwrought, undereducated charlatan
yelling it at a frightened and equally illiterate crowd can no longer hear the
message in the word. For this reason I have gone back to the original languages
to educe the original sense. The Greek word “metanoiete,” related to “nous”
(“mind”), means “change your mind, have a complete change of heart.” The
underlying Hebrew concept is expressed in the word “tÕshuvah” (“turning, returning”), which in the context of religious behavior
means “turning” from one’s sins and “returning” to God. Note that there is not
only a “from” but a “to,” for turning from one’s sins is impossible unless at
the same time one turns to God—otherwise one only turns from one set of sins to
another! The Jewish understanding of repentance, correct on this point, is that
each individual must do it, yet it requires God’s grace to be able to do
it—“Turn us to you, O Adonai, and we will be turned” (Lamentations 5:21).
It is not without
wisdom that a Jew raised with little knowledge of Judaism who later adopts an
Orthodox Jewish lifestyle is termed a “ba>al-tÕshuvah,” literally, a “master of repentance,” that is,
one who has “turned” from his nonobservant ways and “returned” to an attempt at
serving God in the manner prescribed by Orthodox Judaism. My heart’s desire is
that all Jews become true ba>alei-tÕshuvah through Yeshua the Messiah, and that all
Christians become truly repentant as well (1 Yn 1:9).
Yochanan’s message here is identical with Yeshua’s
at 4:17. [2]
Baptism/Immersion
From John Gill’s
Commentary
Preaching the baptism of
repentance for the remission of sins: this was the work and office of John, as signified by
Elias, in Mal_4:5 the Jews say (n),
"the Israelites will not
repent, till Elias comes; as it is said, Mal_4:5
in the land of Israel repentance delights.''
John came into this land,
preaching this doctrine; See Gill on Mar_1:4.
(n) Pirke Eliezer, c. 44.
This baptism is known as “Mikvah” or “Immersion”
Peggy Pryor –LaDabar Ministries
Ritual purification or immersion is a
Hebrew ritual, commanded by G-d and must be viewed in that perspective. Certain
guidelines were commanded by G-d to be strictly followed by the person entering
the Mikvah.
The method of immersion as practiced
by all the Old Testament people and including Yochanan haMatvil/John the Baptist was very different from what we
do today. The person was to already have taken a bath, washed his hair, pared
his fingernails and make sure that he was very clean. The Mikvah was not for
the purpose of taking a bath. The person being immersed went into the water by
himself, stretching out his arms, flexing his fingers, fluttering his eyelids
he squats down into the water until he is completely covered by water. Flexing
the fingers and toes, fluttering the eyelids was to insure that the water
touched every part of the body. Normally a person would do this three times.
The witness was the person that stood out of the water to make sure that the
immersing person was completely covered by the water.
From the
Completed Jewish New Testament Commentary
Yochanan the
Immerser, usually rendered “John
the Baptist.” The name “John,” along with numerous variants in many languages—Jan,
Juan, Jon, Jean, Ivan, Giovanni—comes from Hebrew Yo-chanan,
which means, “YHVH was gracious, showed favor.”
While the Greek
verb “baptizein” is obviously the source of the English words
“baptize” and “Baptist,” its root meaning is “to dip, soak, immerse” into a
liquid, so that what is dipped takes on qualities of what it has been dipped
in—for example, cloth in dye or leather in tanning solution.
But to understand what “baptizein”
means here one needs the Jewish background. According to the Torah
one had to be ritually pure before
entering the Tabernacle or Temple. Ritual purity could be lost in many ways;
the preeminent means of restoring it was through washing. A quick review of
Leviticus shows how frequently the matter is mentioned, and one of the six
major divisions of the Talmud (Taharot, “Cleansings”) is devoted to it. Even though there
is no longer a Temple, observant Jewish women immerse themselves in a mikveh
(ritual bath) after each menstrual period, in obedience to Leviticus 15; see MJ
13:4N. [3]
4 As it is written in the book of the
words of Esaias the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness,
Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
5 Every valley shall be filled, and every
mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight,
and the rough ways shall be made smooth;
6 And all flesh shall see the salvation
of God.
Reference:
Isa
40:3 The voice of
him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make
straight in the desert a highway for our God.
Isa
40:4 Every valley
shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked
shall be made straight, and the rough places plain:
Isa
40:5 And the glory
of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the LORD hath
spoken it.
7 Then said he to the multitude that came
forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to
flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring
forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within
yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones
to raise up children unto Abraham.
If a person is truly repentant his/her
life will bring forth fruit:
Galatians 5:
Gal 5:16 This I say
then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
Gal 5:17 For the flesh
lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are
contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
Gal 5:18 But if ye be led
of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Gal 5:19 Now the works of
the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication,
uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Gal 5:20 Idolatry,
witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Gal 5:21 Envyings, murders,
drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I
have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall
not inherit the kingdom of God.
Gal 5:22 But the fruit of
the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Gal 5:23 Meekness,
temperance: against such there is no law.
Gal 5:24 And they that are
Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Gal 5:25 If we live in the
Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
Gal 5:26 Let us not be
desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.
Jewish New
Testament Commentary
Don’t suppose
you can comfort yourselves by saying, “Avraham is our father”! The Messianic Jewish scholar Alfred Edersheim
wrote,
“[D]id
they imagine that, according to the common notion of the time, the vials of
wrath were to be poured out only on the Gentiles, while they, as Abraham’s
children, were sure of escape—in the words of the Talmud, that ‘the night’
(Isaiah 21:12) was ‘only to the nations of the world, but the morning to
Israel’ (Jer. Ta‘anit 64a)?
“For,
no principle was more fully established in the popular conviction than that all
Israel had part in the world to come (Sanhedrin 10:1 [quoted in Ro 11:26aN]),
and this specifically because of their connection with Abraham.” (The Life
and Times of Jesus/Yeshua the Messiah, New York: Anson D. F. Randolph and
Company, 2nd edition [1884], Volume I, p. 271)
God can raise up for
Avraham sons from these stones,
even as he raised up Isaac from the stone altar in figurative resurrection;
compare MJ 11:19&N. The English phrase, “sons from these stones” is
an attempt to preserve by alliteration the Hebrew wordplay which the Greek text
ignores. “Sons” in Hebrew is banim, “stones” is written abanim
(pronounced avanim). A less likely possibility is that “from these stones”
means “from these clods, these >am-ha<aretz” (see Yn 7:49N, Ac 4:13N). Wordplay has been
common in Jewish speech from ancient times to the present, with many examples
in the Tanakh itself; see 2:23N. [4]
9 And
now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: every tree therefore which
bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
10 And the people asked him, saying, What
shall we do then?
11 He answereth and saith unto them, He
that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath
meat, let him do likewise.
12 Then came also publicans to be
baptized, and said unto him, Master, what shall we do?
13 And he said unto them, Exact no more
than that which is appointed you.
14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of
him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no
man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.
15 And as the people were in expectation,
and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not;
16 John
answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one
mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose:
he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
17 Whose
fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will
gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire
unquenchable.
Jewish New Testament Commentary
Fire. Some commentators see this as a purifying fire
that will eliminate the wicked from the Jewish people along lines set forth in
Malachi 3:19–21(4:1–3) and Psalm 1:6 (“The way of the wicked will perish”); see
Rv 20:15. The same psalm also compares the ungodly with straw (Psalm
1:4). Others take it as enthusiasm for holiness, being on fire for God.
He will immerse you
in the Ruach HaKodesh, the
“Holy Spirit,” the Spirit of God. A promise made by Yeshua himself (Lk 24:49;
Yn 15:26, 16:13–14; Ac 1:8); its fulfillment begins at Ac 2:1ff. [5]
18 And many other things in his
exhortation preached he unto the people.
19 But Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by him for Herodias his brother Philip's wife,
and for all the evils
which Herod had done,
20 Added yet this above all, that he shut
up John in prison.
21 Now
when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus/Yeshua also
being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened,
22 And
the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice
came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well
pleased.
Voice from
heaven or bat-kol;
see Yn 12:28&N, Ac 9:4N. “Heaven” here has a dual meaning—(1) the
sky, (2) God; see v. 2N.
This is my
beloved son. While it is true that
everyone is in a sense God’s son, Yeshua is so in a unique way—his “only” (or
“only-begotten”) son (Yn 1:18&N). Two other passages come to mind: one in
which Adam is referred to as God’s son (Lk 3:23), and Psalm 2:7, “Adonai
said to me, ‘You are my son; today I have become your father.’ ”Combined with
1C 15:45, in which Yeshua is called “the last Adam,” and Ro 5:12–21, where
Yeshua and Adam are further compared, these texts show us that in thinking
about Yeshua’s person and ministry one must keep Adam in mind. This is
especially important in the verses immediately following, in which Yeshua, like
Adam, is tempted by the Adversary, Satan. See also v. 15N.
In whom I am well pleased. The language is reminiscent of Isaiah 42:1, one of
the “Servant” passages; Isaiah 42:1–4 is quoted below (12:18–21); see also
17:5. The “Servant” passages sometimes refer to the people of Israel and
sometimes to the Messiah, a fact which strengthens the point made in 2:15N that
Yeshua the Messiah represents and stands for the whole Jewish people[6]
23 And
Jesus/Yeshua himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of
Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
24 Which was the son of Matthat,
which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was
the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
25 Which was the son of Mattathias,
which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the
son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
26 Which was the son of Maath,
which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei,
which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
27 Which was the son of Joanna,
which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which
was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
28 Which was the son of Melchi,
which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the
son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
29 Which was the son of Jose, which
was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the
son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
30 Which was the son of Simeon,
which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was
the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
31 Which was the son of Melea,
which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which
was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
32 Which was the son of Jesse,
which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the
son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
33 Which was the son of Aminadab,
which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the
son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
34 Which was the son of Jacob,
which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which
was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
35 Which was the son of Saruch,
which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which
was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
36 Which was the son of Cainan, which
was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the
son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
37 Which was the son of Mathusala,
which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was
the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
38 Which was the son of Enos, which
was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the
son of God.
(KJV)
Food For
Thought:
Do a
study on the meaning of repentance/Teshuvah
For a deeper study on Mikvah go to:
MIKVAH: A STUDY OF IMMERSION
Part I :
Immersion for Ritual Purity
Part II :
Immersion in the Holy Temple
Part III :
Customs of Immersion
Part IV :
Immersion into Messiah
Part V : A
Mikvah/Immersion Service