July 10, 2016, lecture discussion number 246 on the Book of Romans, and all or none of what I just said may be correct. It may be, it might be July 10, or lecture number 246, or neither. I have apparently become unreliable on such matters. I said something completely wrong last week, and I was told so by the vast Internet audience. It's a pre-indicate of things to come, I suspect. So prepare for it. It will happen again, if not every week. Well, well, well. Much has occurred since we last had class. Took a week off for the July 4th holiday, as did every other church in the world, just some didn't know it. Okay, the United States. As will become usual now. Israel is increasing its political activity. It is dialoguing with Turkey. That's the most prominent, I think, interaction between Israel and another country. Israel also has tremendous amounts of diplomatic movements into Saudi Arabia and Egypt. They are accelerating their agreements, and the agreements are being made. between countries, as you know, that are not normally predisposed to cooperate or even communicate, which presents the obvious question, what is Israel's motivation now to accelerate this? There's an urgency here that is rising up. What causes these generational enemies to ramp up a mutual effort? And generally, there's only one thing. We've talked about it before, impending threat. Israel, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, are recognizing the threat is growing, it's rising, it's a menace to their existence, and Israel and the other countries are making the appropriate preparations, as they should. And I'd hoped to intend today, notice the redundancies, the redundant disclaimers there. It's purposeful. Don't write me. OK, write me. It's kind of funny, actually. I wanted to today go into the history of Great Britain, include the history of Great Britain and that relationship that Great Britain or England has to Israel and Islam. I covered it last week briefly prior to the lecture. I wanted to do it more in depth. I wanted to do the history of the Balfour Agreement. I wanted to do Allenby's Declaration, Harry Truman, the Battle of Jerusalem. Extraordinary piece of history that is recent. We all can see the aftermath of that battle. It's close enough to us. So I wanted to do that. And I probably will not today. Unfortunately, as I kept going, I couldn't fit it in. And all of that, the relevance is the Brexit or the withdrawal of England from the European Union. I think that's extraordinarily significant. The immediate financial support that rose up from the United States for England, from the United States and from Australia and from Canada. All of the United States and Australia and Canada rose together. They unified to protect England from Germany. The point was to restrain Germany's inclination to initiate punitive measures economically, because Germany is a large market for England. And that market, if it's withdrawn from England, that would put England's currency in great stress. So they needed to have some kind of tension relief, for lack of a better explanation. The United States provides a fantastic market for England. All we have to do is make it attractive in the sense of tariff elimination or crediting or whatever else is necessary to keep England functioning. So here comes the United States and Australia and Canada rising together to restrain Germany. And what does Germany do? See, we have England, the United States, Canada, and Australia. That's essentially the same alliance that fought the Iraq War. Then now we have Germany, France, and who else? Russia. So on one side, England, United States, Canada, Australia. On the other side, Germany, France, Russia, Eastern Europe, essentially all the allies of Iran. Meanwhile, the Chinese Navy continues unabated. I'll repeat for the Internet audience, Xi Jinping says that the world is collapsing economically and only Russia and China will prevail. Within ten years we will have a completely different economic structure in the world that we have now. Unforeseen, unseen ever. So the expansion of China and Russia, the togetherness of Russia and China. That is amazing. The world is coalescing again into the same defined entities of World War II. Israel, therefore, recognizes it. The Jews know what happens when the Germans side with Islam and Russia. Who gets killed? It's the Jews. They know that. Anyway, the world is on edge, certainly in this country. We're on edge. We have immorality that has never had this height to it before. We have entire family structures now disappearing all over this country. And there is no longer a floor, I guess, to the immorality here. When godlessness is condoned, it will always escalate. It will expand. Coexistence with godlessness or evil is futile. It cannot be done. You cannot condone it. Evil must be resisted, must be met with force, Revelation 19.21. Okay, that pretty much ends the fuzzball, seeker-sensitive portion of the lecture today. Fortunately, we have no visitors. That is a joke. Can you imagine some pastor watching this somewhere in the church and I make a statement? Fortunately, we have no visitors. It would blow his mind. That's why I do it. What do you mean? You like not having? Yes, we do. OK, where were we? What were we doing? Same thing we're always doing, Pinky. We're up here. We have the bleeding woman, Luke 8, 41-56, Mark 5, 25-43, and Matthew 9, 18-26. Let me change that to 18 for somebody that will say, hey, why didn't you have 18 on there? That's the problem I'm having, as you know. I have way too many eyes now on me. This is the same church, but with a different tie. Now, the reason I'm doing that is they want to be able to go immediately and tell which outfit corresponds to which lecture. So I'm under this tremendous pressure from a wardrobe situation. I have to figure out the mathematics. I only have so many ties and so many shirts and one pair of pants. So that's a joke. Don't send me pants. The point of it is, is that if I If I constantly pay attention to the different mathematical combinations, I can last about ten sermons before I have to repeat. That tells you how insignificant my wardrobe might be. All of that to say that it has been very interesting to be under the scrutiny that I am under now. There are way too many people paying attention that ought not to be. Get a life. Last time we were here, we have the resurrected girl, the bleeding woman. We're still focusing on the bleeding woman. We will eventually get to the resurrected girl, or actually the ruler of the synagogue, because I think that he has great significance. And the last time we met, the bleeding woman, we had decided, I had decided, I hope you're going along with me, had solved the mysteries of the man gathering wood on the Sabbath, Numbers 15, 32 through 41, and the rebellious son, Deuteronomy 21, 18 through 23, and then the subsequent chapter 22, which ends with the establishment again, or the reestablishment of the blue tassels or the blue fringes on the ends of the pallets. of the Jewish people. So the bleeding woman solved that, and in doing so, she resolved the Christology of the blue fringes. She figured out why the man-gathering wood was executed, why the rebellious sun was executed, and what the purpose was of the blue fringes, and what the meanings were of all of those things. And she put it together. I think it's obvious she did. And by that I mean she understood the ultimate symbolism, what the blue tassels revealed. She learned the truth, if you will, of the blue tassels, why blue tassels were commanded by God as his response. Now, that's a human-based vocabulary. God doesn't respond. He's omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent. But go with me here. Concede the language so that we can figure it out. Why God responded by commanding Israel to have blue tassels, blue fringes on the talots because of the rebellious son and the man gathering wood. The bleeding woman, twelve years bleeding, figured that out. And now she possesses this great truth and she disguises herself, fights through a multitude to touch the blue tassels of Christ. She knew that was a good thing to do. She knew it. Matthew 9.21, Mark 5.28, she knew it. It says, If only I may touch his blue fringe, it says hem of his garment, but that means the blue tassel. If only, she says, I may touch his blue fringe, I shall be made well. Had it figured out. So that's where we've been mostly lately. Trying as we might to retrace this bleeding woman's process. This woman who had been bleeding for twelve years, she spent all that she had. There is an important clue. She spent all that she had, Luke 8.43, on physicians. All means all. She had suffered many things from many of these physicians, Mark 5, 25-26. And nothing made her better. The condition worsened and now it is grave. In those verses, again, we find clues. This woman, I submit, was dying and she knew it. Eventually, she concludes that the friends of Jesus Christ, his talents, would cure her. But I get ahead of myself there a little bit. She is broke. Absolutely nothing left. She spent everything she had, and worse, she's abused by her doctors. The doctors she went to made her worse. What do you suppose they did to her, these first century physicians? Now, who's writing this? Oh, another question. How old do you think she is? Get an idea in your mind. She's been bleeding for 12 years. Bleeding to death. Every time she goes to a physician, she comes out worse. Spent all her money. How old do you think she is? Or was at the time this was written? Luke is the writer. Duh. Where can you get this kind of insight for free? Nothing's free but the grace of God. Luke wrote Luke. In case there was any controversy. Who's Luke? What's his job? He's a physician. That's absolutely right. This is a doctor writing about going to doctors and getting butchered. What did they do to her? Luke, a physician, says that she is incurable. Luke 8.43. How did he know that? Did he see this woman? He's a physician. Luke was not an eyewitness to Christ. He wrote that which was given to him by the apostles. Luke is this incredible, meticulous researcher and historian. He's a scholar. He's highly educated. He's a Gentile. This is a Jewish woman. How did he know that her condition was incurable? He says he was doomed, no cure, no hope. So, I wonder about Luke. How much money, let's go back a second, how much money had this woman spent? How much is all? Twelve years, doctor after doctor after doctor. This is going to surprise you, but there are people in the medical business that are not honorable. Some of I could make so many jokes here and I just won't do it. Because it'll be very offensive. This is really hard for me. I'm going to have to bite my tongue to keep from talking about chiropractic. Never mind. I had a friend of mine, we would lie to the chiropractor. We'd go in and tell him that we felt horrible when we felt great, to see if he'd tell us that there was something wrong, because it was part of the school district system. And they'd say, well, he utilized his service. He was part of that. So we'd tell him, boy, we feel terrible when we felt great. And then if we felt bad, we'd tell him we felt great. Just do a double blind study. Never mind. I don't want letters. Yes, I do. I do want letters. Please. woman's fund, all of her wealth. How much is all? Let me repeat that. What is the source of her wealth? Where did her money come from? How old is she? Again, I keep asking the same questions. Figure out, I have a wealthy woman. It took twelve years to get rid of her wealth. And as she's making her move towards Christ, she makes sure that She's hiding herself. She attempts to hide her actions. And what did God do? God made certain to reveal her. So, she tried to hide. God made sure that he healed her. By the way, box, in case you were counting, what else was wrong with her? Well, we know that she was pretty well cut to pieces by the medical community of that time as they attempted to cure the incurable, according to Luke. Christ, God, fixed it. There is a really wonderful thing here. All the others were unable to cure her, in fact made her worse and in the process probably disfigured her greatly, and God cures her. So how did she look before she grabbed that tassel? What did she look like after she grabbed that tassel? How good a job did God, the great physician, do on this woman? So I want you to try to imagine all of that. And then how many in the multitude saw it? saw the before and the after, how many in the multitude knew who she was. Remember, she's disguised herself. She's expecting somebody in that multitude to know her. That's the only explanation for that, I believe. So that makes me ask, were there Pharisees and temple police in the crowd? Duh! There's always Pharisees and temple police in the crowd. Did the Pharisees then know this woman? If she's disguising herself, who is she disguising herself from? Did the Pharisees know this woman? This woman who had enough money to seek out continuously medical professionals for 12 years. How much money did that take? How much in today's contemporary currency? Let me say this for the Internet audience. My sister, very gravely ill. hospitalized now, sedated into or put into a sedated state, put on ventilation. She has made it through the worst of it, and we are grateful and hopeful. That's where we've been the last week or so, if you've been trying to find me. How much money did my sister rack up? It's going to exceed $100,000. It's going to be ten days. critical care, emergency surgery. It's going to be brutal. And we'll deal with it. This woman does this for 12 years. How much did it cost her? What would you think contemporarily? How much money do you think she had? How much money do you think it would take to spend today to get twelve years, physician after physician after physician of medical help that did not make any difference. Yeah, and some of you were suggesting a million dollars. Okay, how did this woman, how old is she, where did she get that kind of money? She's a woman. No offense. Okay, little offense. Think of the culture. How in this culture does this woman amass this kind of wealth to do what she did? I see some of you mumbling, and they will not tell the Internet audience what they're thinking. They're doing it very quietly, but the Internet audience is doing it likewise. What made her, what attribute, in other words, she thought this blue tassel of Christ, she knew this was the direction to go. So what attribute did Christ's blue tassel possess that moved her to reach for it in her thinking? And I asked earlier in this series, but let me re-ask this. Had she gone to others? This is the first tassel she's reached for. Has she touched anybody else's tassel? Another rabbi's talot. Was she a talot blue fringe expert? I think she knew the meaning. Did the ruler of the synagogue know this once rich, now bleeding to death woman? Did they know each other? They are tied together in Scripture in an incredible, marvelous way. The ruler of the synagogue comes to Christ. He says, you can resurrect my dead daughter. People tell him, worthless as he can't do it. Don't trouble him. The daughter is dead. But he is relentless. He is going to go to Christ. Christ can save his 12-year-old. He can resurrect his daughter. This woman goes after that blue tassel like a pit bull. I'm not going to let go of it. The two of them behave very much the same. So I want to know. One of them is very rich, the ruler. The other one is very rich, the woman. Do you think they knew each other? One of them is disguised. The other one's out in the open. Both of them end up in the open. Christ makes sure everyone knows who this woman is. It's in that multitude. And everyone knew who that ruler of the synagogue was because he's the ruler of the synagogue. So, obvious question. Do rich people know all the rich people? Well, they don't know me. I don't know them. That's pretty obvious. Back to the wardrobe thing. As you can see, that's a lot of questions. I was going to put them on the board for you. Maybe I'll do that next week. There's quite a few trails we could pursue. Which should be first? probably we should establish where we should go first to answer all those questions, is that Israel has a tendency, has an inclination, they lose things. And we can make a list of things they lose. That comes into play here. The first and foremost thing that they lose is the ineffable name of God, God's name. the four letters, the sacred name. That's the foremost of examples. Israel has lost the pronunciation of the sacred name. They cannot pronounce the sacred name. And that means no one can pronounce God's name. He has a name. That's it. No one can pronounce it. YHVH, the great name, again, the four letters, the sacred name of God is the most holy word of all words. Whenever you see in the Bible God's name being referenced, ask yourself, how do I pronounce it? It is all over the Bible. It's important to know and recognize when it shows up. We'll have to do that in order to solve this because that is something that Israel has lost. I'll change this from lose things to lost things. Things isn't really applicable, so we'll make it a little bit more respectful as we describe them. As you can see, we're going to go on a real long journey trying to deal with this. Jesus' name literally means YHVH is salvation. That's what his name means in the Hebrew. It should be inserted here that the deeply religious Jews today and back then considered it to be blasphemy to say aloud the name of God. It's equivalent to taking his name in vain to say it. So they would never say it aloud. I even get one part of it out and I'll have to take a demerit. This is the origin of Yahweh. Let me make sure I spell it correctly for the people that will want to know. Yahweh and its derivatives. You might say Yahweh. You may think it is a significant origin. Most scholars believe that the source of Yahweh and its variations, Yahweh or Yahwah and others that are there, is because the Jews would never allow YHVH to be said aloud. And so they invented, they contrived something to placate the Christians. That would be us. And it's Yahweh. So it's an attempt to get us off of the true path. Misdirection. So, it's given to the Christians because the Jews considered it to be incorrect. So, we will give to the Christians something we know is wrong. And they can say that. That will make them happy. It's like giving you Skittles. And therefore, by doing this, no one would or could pronounce the four letters. You see the plan? That is likely the case, and that would maintain the belief that it is blasphemous to do so. But they would still know. Their little sect, if you will, would know. They, however, would never say it. What did they do? Does anybody know? They think it. The true sound in their mind is all they would do, all they will do, and it's never allowed. And that process has resulted in the correct pronunciation to be lost. So that is the one thing, if you will, that is lost that is incredibly significant. And it plays into this bleeding woman and the ruler and the 12-year-old girl. I hope you're ahead of me and you have figured out why. Josephus, the first century Jewish historian, proposed this. He said that that he had the pronunciation. So it would be E-A-U-E. That is God's name. There are many who think that may be absolutely correct. But for today, a couple of things you should know. The four letters are probably not consonants. They are very likely vowels. So Josephus would be correct to make this assumption. If you try to read them as consonants, you will be off track. Understand that they are vowels, and you will have a closer understanding of how this will all work. For today, just recognize the unpronounceable name of God has not been uttered aloud for centuries. It is lost. What else is lost? Come on, you've went to the movies. The Ark of the Testimony. The Ark of the Covenant, if you wish. That has also been lost. That is, I believe, the second great example of something that is lost that is incredibly important to find. Now, what do I think is the third? What's that? No? No, that hasn't been lost in my view. It's just been withdrawn. This has been lost. We can't find it. It's something that was possessed by Israel, both of these. is in the category that they cannot locate it. The last of these three, and I know there are others that people will give me, but it is the blue die, the fringe of the talent. It is also lost. So those three extraordinary symbols, the blue die for the blue thread that is in Numbers 1537-41, the YHVH and the Ark of the Testimony, those three extraordinary They are symbols of Christ himself. They are testimonies of Christ and they are missing from Israel, all three of them, which is part of the blindness of Israel, I believe. They had those. If they find those, they will point that nation, direct that nation to Christ. A little history here. The Romans seized Israel in 63 B.C., the Roman military, the Roman Empire, and immediately one of the first things they did is issue edicts to prohibit the wearing of the blue dye. I'll give you the Hebrew name and the derivatives next week, but don't worry about it today. The blue dye, the Romans saw it as exceedingly beautiful, it was rare, it was precious, and they said no one can wear it. Only the Roman emperor, Roman royalty, could have this. So anywhere they found it, they confiscated it. And that sent the Jewish makers of the blue dye into secrecy. They had to do it under great risk. Now, ninety years of Roman authority over the blue dye now pass until the bleeding woman comes after the talent, the fringe of Christ, the tassel, which makes me ask the most obvious of the obvious questions. Where did God get his blue dye? Where did God get his talent? Is God capable of making clothing? Is he good at it? Did he make his own talent? If we get to five, what is that? That's pizza for everyone? Is that how it works? I can't remember. I'll have to look at the edict. Where did God get his talent? Do you suppose that God's palette has the true color thread? Duh. He made the garments of Adam and Eve. What did they look like? How good a job did He do on those? How good a tailor is God? Who's going to wear the true color? The Roman army prohibited you from having it. If you were wearing it, what are you calling yourself? You're calling yourself Roman royalty. You're calling yourself the Empress reserved fourth season, essentially. And you've got it on. How's that going to go for you? Not good. That was an incredibly brutal military. Is it your view that God did not wear it? Did he have the true color? Did he have the blue dye? Did he have his own supply? Duh, duh. That's more duhs. How many duhs can we have? If you have the view, as some do, that Christ did not, would not, did not have the blue dye on his talot, then you have God violating his own commandment, Numbers 15, 37 through 41. That's an indefensible position. God would not violate his own commandment. So, Christ has the correct, perfect blue dye thread on his talot fringes. And the bleeding woman, who I think was a talot fringe expert, she knew it. How did she know it? It should be noted that today many Jews, the majority in fact, do not wear blue tassels because no one knows the true origin of the blue dye. It's lost. We'll go over that in the coming weeks. They have white fringe talots. Yes, the fringes are white. There's no blue thread. Let me put it this way. Where can I write this? I'll get rid of all. We decided all meant a million dollars for those of you who keep score. What we have today in the majority is a blue-less fringe. Blue-less. I submit that God knew this would all happen, being omniscient, duh, duh, duh, duh. So consider this, do it next week, cover this group of three, the name is lost, the ark of the covenant is lost, the blue dye is lost. I would think this would be catastrophic to Israel. I would think that because it is catastrophic to Israel. They have blueless fringes. Big problem. I think you can make the connection to where I'm heading here. Anyway, back to the woman who knows that touching the blue dye, the blue thread, will stop her bleeding. And oh, by the way, Deuteronomy 22. Does anybody remember the list from Deuteronomy 22? We read it here a few weeks ago. I have it marked somewhere with my marking system. It has just mechanically failed me. Let me read it to you. Deuteronomy 22.5, if you remember, a woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor a man put on a woman's garment, for all who do so is an abomination to the Lord your God. And we have discussed, I hope you remember, that that cannot be ordinary clothing. This has to be specific clothing, and I am making the case for you today, a woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman's garment, for to do so, abomination to the YHVH. The Orthodox Jews, because of Deuteronomy 22.5 today and then, do not allow women to wear a talisman. Some segments of the Jewish population would the women do, but not in the religious or the orthodox sex. It's an abomination for a woman to wear a tallit. That's what 22.5 is about primarily. I can prove that because how does 22 end? Oh, let me say, you shall make tassels on the four corners of your clothing. That's the context of Deuteronomy 22 is the blue tassel. Go through that again as the time passes. But we would want to know why a woman wearing a pallet is a bad thing. It's an abomination to the YHVH. Yes, sir. What's that? Ah, Supper Dave is suggesting that this is the Romans five context and it is the continuity of germ cell plasm. Now, that is an interesting idea. I think correct, by the way, for those of you who wonder what I thought of that. Absolutely, it's the case, because this is a Roman study. Now, they're going to accuse me and Dave of collaborating. Did we collaborate? No, we didn't. Did anyone believe us? No, no one believed you. But that is the case. It must be hot in here. This is what we've had a lot of. We've had heat waves, haven't we? It must be, what, 75 degrees? And bright sunny outside. That's why we're not showing pictures of the audience, especially the non-felons. So, where was I? We want to know. We should want to know why. Why is it not acceptable for a woman to wear a talent? And Dave is proposing that it is a Romans 5 situation. I think he's absolutely correct, which makes it a Genesis three situation in it. We should want to know that this is the this is that the man say it again. We should not just want to know why the woman can't wear a talent. We will solve it by figuring out why the man can't wear something that is precisely the woman. So I have a man has something and a woman has something and we can't exchange them. They have to be what they are. Where in the Bible does the first garment of a man and a woman occur? Obviously, Genesis 3.21. Could I exchange those garments? Could Adam take Eve's? Could Eve take Adam's? Or would that be an abomination? Where was I? The bleeding woman has been bleeding for twelve years, bleeding to death, is pursuing the blue tassel of Christ as her last and only hope. Nothing else will save her. She's tried everything else. She's going to bleed to death. Her condition is incurable. Death is coming. No one can save us. Notice what I did there. Only the blue thread on the fringe of the pallet of God can save us. Nothing else can save us. We have an incurable bleeding condition. OK, back to the woman. I have a bleeding woman. He's bleeding to death. The only thing that can save her is the fringe of the talent of God that has the blue dye in it. Obviously, this blue dye is a symbol of the resurrection and the healing power of Jesus Christ. The 12-year-old girl makes that especially clear. He says in John 11, 25, he makes it as definitively obvious as he can. He says, I am the only resurrection and the only life. Do you believe this? I put in only because only belongs there, singular. I am the life, the resurrection. There is no other resurrection, there is no other life except his life and his resurrection. And the bleeding woman and the ruler of the synagogue, they believed it. They knew, he's it. There's only one resurrection, this is the guy. There's only one person that can stop the bleeding, the incurable condition, this is the guy. has got something to do with his blue tassels on his talot. And both of them saw what he did with the talot, what his talot did, if you want to have a human perspective. Most people would watch the woman touch the talot fringe and they would think what? Because they're idiots. They're going to think the fringe did something. The fringe didn't do something. The fringe symbolizes who is doing it. It's a clue as to who he is. And the ruler and the woman both figured that out, and they saw how he used his talent to explain that. He used the symbol that is of himself. The life of the bleeding woman draining from her, the life is in the blood, Leviticus 17.11. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, for the life of all flesh is in the blood, it's blood that sustains its life, Leviticus 17.14. God made it as clear as clear can be if anyone in Israel ate blood, he's going to get rid of them. It's an act of evil to eat blood. So that's why all steaks have to be cooked to well done. Did you know that? That's going to be, it'll be a $50 fine payable to Cliffside Community Chapel. No. If you eat blood, it is an act of evil. Who would eat blood? You're going over and somebody's going to say, hey, come on over, I've got a bowl of blood for you. Why does he say, eat blood? Who eats blood? Why would they do it? Under what circumstances, what conditions? If you do it, it's evil. The woman's lifeblood is coming out of her. The life is in the blood. Life, blood, blood, life. That's explained in Leviticus 17. I see the context of the sanctity of blood with respect to the priesthood and the sacrificial system in Leviticus 17. He's talking to the priests. Don't you eat blood. If you eat blood, when you're doing these sacrificial offerings that are pictures of Christ, that are pictures of substitutionary atonement, if you eat the blood, that's evil. I'm cutting you out. You're done. So therefore, the eating of blood is a religious action in context of Leviticus 17. So again, who would do that? Why did God have to say, don't eat the blood? Because somebody was going to eat the blood. Who's going to eat the blood? I mean, I would put it this way, and I have done it this way. What moron's going to eat the blood? Apparently, there's lots of them. God has to say, it almost looks like, please do not, insert, do not eat the plastic container in which the Vaseline is. Those little disclaimers to protect people from being sued. Don't stick the bowling ball, never mind. It almost looks like that. Don't eat the blood. Well, somebody wanted to eat the blood. What's the purpose of that? It's clearly a religious event. It's a religious person. It is somebody that is in the priesthood that's going to do this. And we will find it necessary to evaluate the bleeding woman with the principles established by God at Leviticus 17. Everyone cheer. Okay, no one cheer. Nothing like a Leviticus lecture to draw a crowd. That's what we're going to have to do. We will have to set out an extra chair for the visitor. Make a note to the staff. Yes, sir. I'm writing with a blue marker. I am. Is it the right blue? No, it's not. If it was, it would be worth a fortune and we would all have motorhomes tomorrow. Okay. I almost said... There was a rabbi not too long ago. I'm doing this from memory that claimed to have produced the correct blue. But as they analyzed it over time, they discovered that he had iron dust, if you will, in the blue. And that, of course, made it incorrect. How much money did that guy make, though, for a while? When did they catch him? Anyway, that's an aside. Something that has to come up eventually. Leviticus 17 will explain this woman's situation. The life is leaving the woman. The solution is to touch the blue tassel. Life is leaving me. Is life leaving you? Yes, it is. The rate at which life is leaving us is different individually, but we have a rate. The outcome, as Dana and I were discussing earlier, is not going to change. The rate may be adjusted, but the outcome is inevitable. The life is leaving the woman. The solution is to grab a hold of the blue-dyed thread in the tassel and the fringe of the talent. I hope that makes sense. Life. John 11.25, Christ says, I am the light. He could have said, I am the blood. Or he could have said, I am the lifeblood. Or he could have said, I am the source of the lifeblood. He said, I am the life. If you read Leviticus 17, you understand that I cannot separate life from blood. The blood is in the life. The life is in the blood. But he just said, I am the life. There is no other lifeblood but His. And the woman, the bleeding woman, understood that, knows this and has associated it correctly with His blue tassel. Now note that immediately subsequent to healing the woman, stopping the bleeding, arresting the loss of lifeblood, Jesus Christ resurrects the 12-year-old girl, again with the blue tassel being displayed as a symbol. I have the resurrection and I have the life. There they are, side by side, resurrection and life. So I have wondered if I could apply the transitive property, basic mathematics. If the blue tassel is portraying the blood of life, and if the blue tassel is also portraying the resurrection to eternal life, then Christ could have said, I am the blue tassel and the blue tassel, do you believe this? That's what he said. The bleeding woman, you see, and the ruler of the synagogue both had figured out that Christ could and would stop the bleeding, cure the incurable. Only Christ, only the one of whom the blue tassel symbolizes, can cure the incurable. What is the incurable for us? Who is she representing? Consider the nature of the intirable. It drains the blood out of us, drains the life. Christ will and is able to end the intirable. This is Romans 5, isn't it? Yes, it is. There will be no dealing with supper day for at least two weeks now. There is two parts to the intirable. There is the blood part and the resurrection part. Christ is going to take care of the blood part, and he's going to take care of the resurrection part, and only he can do it. And the blue fringe tells us how it all works. So you can look at the woman and look at the girl. They are the resurrection and the life part of the incurable. And next week we will define those distinctions.