Text Box: Is a woman's word as good as a man's? This week's parasha talks about vows and how they are binding. These ruling as outlined in this week's portion does give insight to the roles of women in the Middle East where many of the customs are held in the same manner as they were thousands of years ago. G-d instructs Israel that when they take an oath or bind themselves to an agreement they are to keep it. This was held even when it caused great personal loss of a loved one as shown in Judges 11. But what is laid out here shows the oath of a woman for business could not be as reliable as that of a man. You see, if a woman was a widow and lived alone, her word was binding upon her, but if she got married and her husband saw her binding agreement as a rash utterance he could overrule it on the day he heard it. The same is true of his daughter while she resides in his house. Also if a man has his wife make an agreement, he has the authority and power to overturn the agreement if he does it on the day of his hearing of the agreement. With this in mind, is it any wonder that women in the business world are not held in as high regard? The woman's word can be overturned by her husband, father, or future husband on the day he hears of it. But the father/husband must do so on the day he hears of the agreement or it is binding in the same manner as if he made it himself. A second point that came out in our study this week was the great miracle that occurred in the carrying out of G-d's judgment on the Midianites. While going to war against the Midianites not a single man of the 12000 sent to war were lost during this battle. (The Midianites were a large tribe. The captured young women who had not yet known a man were counted at 32,000!) From each tribe 1000 went to war. It seems unfair as the smaller tribes are sending the same number of men as the larger tribes. But G-d already knew the outcome and that no one would be lost during the battle. G-d has great insight to the future. G-d told Abraham what the land would be in which his descendants would reside. He also told Moses that he would not be allowed to lead the people into the promised land. But here we see Moses in what is currently Jordan, just the other side of the Jordan river. This is part of the land promised to Abraham as a place of his descendants residing. How can this be? Moses is in the place G-d promised to Abraham's descendants although this area is not in Israel. This is fulfilled by the tribes of Gad and Reuven requesting to reside in the land east of the Jordan for the great grazing land for herds of livestock. Moses allows them to stay and assigns part of the tribe of Manasseh to stay also. Through this, the promise to Abraham and the punishment of Moses are allowed to take place. Abraham's descendents are residing in the larger area promised to Abraham, while Moses does not enter into the land of promise that has the Jordan river as the eastern border. Wow, even back when G-d was speaking to Abraham, G-d knew of the future request of these two tribes to reside east of the Jordan river. That's something amazing to think about when trying to envision the greatness of G-d. Chapter 35:34 says, "And you shall not defile the land whereon you dwell, on which I dwell in the midst of you; for I am the L-rd dwelling in the midst of the children of Israel." G-d chooses to live among his children. There was no need for a temple, He was happy in a tent of meeting where He was easily seen to travel from place to place and never leave, regardless of where they were. Selah —

This week’s Parasha

Standing Strong

A Messianic Jewish Congregation with an outreach to Believers in Israel

 July 14/28 Tammuz—Tribes and Journeys

Num 30:2-32:42        Num 33:1-36:11

Jer 1:1-2:3                   Jer 2:4-28 3:4

With additional readings for Christians

Matt 5:33-37                Acts 7:37-43

Phil 3:7-21                   Jam 4:1-12