Originally posted by SwissGambitHow is this for a subjective text that can be read a myriad of ways?
[b]I'm not really interested in a deep historical study of prophecy. The old texts are written somewhat subjectively and it seems there can be several plausible ways to read passages like Daniel 9.
Isaiah 53
"Who has believed our report? And to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? For he will grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of the dry ground; he has no form nor comeliness; and when we will see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief, and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he has borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows, yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray, we have turned every one to his own way, and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. 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 opened not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgement; and who will declare his generation? For he was cut off out of the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him, he has put him to grief; when you will make his soul an offering for sin, he will see his seed, he will prolong his days and the pleasure of the Lord will prosper in his hand. He will wee the travail of his soul, and will be satisfied; by his knowledge will my righteous servant justify many, for he will bear their iniquities. Therefore, will I divide him a portion with the great, and he will divide the spoil with the strong because he has poured out his soul unto death; and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors."
Consider this prophesy. First of all, historically it was written well before the time of Christ. There is no disputing this fact. I guess what jumps out at me is that here we have a prophesy about an innocent man, yet it says that it pleased the Lord to bruise him and he was put to grief and he was made an offering for sin for us all. Why would God single out the righteous in order to inflict harm to them? It seems to me that this is unprecedented in the Bible. You may bring up Job, however, Satan was the one who instigated that fiasco, not God, and even at that, Satan was not given power to take his life and Job was restored seven fold after enduring his trials. Then the prophesy continues by saying that he was made a sacrifice for sin for us all. Why would someone write this?
Secondly, we have a historical figure like Christ who was crucified on the cross. Either Jesus read the prophesy and then decided to fulfill the prophesy by enticing the religious leaders to kill him, or you could argue that his disciples read the prophesy after his death on the cross and decided to make the prophesy fit the death of Jesus by connecting the dots, so to speak. I think the later is more plausible. However, what of their lives after the proclaimed resurrection? Historically, they were said to have gone around and preached the gospel. Not only that, they gave their very lives for such a gospel as each were martyred save one. So there we have it. We are either confronted with the notion that Jesus gave his life for a lie by making us believe he was the Messiah or his disciples gave their lives for a lie by making us believe he was the Messiah just so they could say that they fulfilled a prophesy in order to be famous. However, there is the trouble about the actual texts of the gospels themselves which rails against lying and encouraging us to seek the truth and condemning hypocirsy. Either that or they were all mad. Then again, is a text that proports loving others including ones enemies madness? What did they do in their lives to be judged mad?
Oh yea, and there is the little bit about the calendar in Daniel that I brought up that specifically mentions in detail the coming of the Messiah that you choose to ignore. You may say the calendar is wrong or to subjective or prone to wrongful interpretations, however, just tell that to the rabbies who rejected him as Messiah and who later wrote in their own Talmud that the calendar points to the time when Christ actually walked the earth!!!! If any one could interpret the calendar of Daniel it would be the rabbis hundreds of year ago and just think, they were all on your side, they all said that the Messiah did not come as well. However, they just glibly brushed the prophesy aside and said that the Messiah tarries because of the sinfulness of Israel. Make no mistake about it, God does not tarry just as he does not give a prophesy that is a lie.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI understand that there is much historical evidence for Jesus in Roman history alone. Most historians agree that there was a guy called Jesus who was crucified for blasphemy.
How do you know anything about the historical Jesus? I thought the whole point of the post you were responding to was that the Biblical Jesus is not necessarily historical. Do you have any other source of information on Jesus that is not Biblical?
Originally posted by knightmeisterNow, now, we know the Bible to be historically innacurate. Those Biblcial archeologists are all a bunch of religious zealots if you ask me. 😛
I understand that there is much historical evidence for Jesus in Roman history alone. Most historians agree that there was a guy called Jesus who was crucified for blasphemy.
Originally posted by whodeyRight; they killed a controversial and outspoken figure to quell turmoil. Just as I said.
The main reason for the execution of Christ was not the government of Rome, rather, it was due to the insistance of the religious leaders of the Jews. The Roman authorities simply went along with them in order to help end turmoil in the region.
Originally posted by whodeyNo, we are confronted with another False Dichotomy. 😞
We are either confronted with the notion that Jesus gave his life for a lie by making us believe he was the Messiah or his disciples gave their lives for a lie by making us believe he was the Messiah just so they could say that they fulfilled a prophesy in order to be famous.
If you believe your own reasoning, you must also explain why the 9/11 hijackers gave their own lives to destroy the trade towers.
You cannot judge the validity of the faith by the fervency of its followers. If you can do so to confirm Christianity, then so can radical Islamists, and cults like Heaven's Gate that committed mass suicide to ride on a comet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Gate_(cult)
Originally posted by whodeyWould you please provide a citation for that section of the Talmud for me?
How is this for a subjective text that can be read a myriad of ways?
Isaiah 53
"Who has believed our report? And to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? For he will grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of the dry ground; he has no form nor comeliness; and when we will see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is d ...[text shortened]... ake no mistake about it, God does not tarry just as he does not give a prophesy that is a lie.
===========================
I mean we've got service men laying down their lives
every day. If each of them were treated proportionally
to Christ, we'd be up to our necks in hymns and mantras.
====================================
The war is different. The way of victory is different.
The job Jesus did no other person could do. No one was ever qualified to do what Jesus did.
The war is about bringing two estranged parties together - that of God and that of man.
The war is about killing off a parasitic evil which has taken up residence in man's being. No one could do that except Jesus.
His death was not a martyr's death. It was a termination of everything negative in the universe and resurrecting to be a life giving Spirit to impart this new realm of existence into our beings.
"the last Adam became a life giving Spirit"
Christ died and rose and can convey, impart, transmit, and dispense this victorious divine life into His believers. He is the only one who truly does an "inside job" on the problems of man's being.
No one else could do what Jesus did in His death and resurrection. So He occupies a unique position all His own.
Originally posted by vistesdHere are the citings in the Talmud.
Would you please provide a citation for that section of the Talmud for me?
"1a. Maimonides (Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon): "Daniel has elucidated to us thet knowledge of the end times. However, since they are secret, the wise rabbis have barred the calculation of the days of Messiah's coming so that the untutored populace will not be led astray when they see that the End Times have already come but there is no sign of the Messiah" (Igeret Teiman, chapter 3 p.24)"
"1b. Rabbi Moses Abraham Levi: "I have examined and searched all the Holy Scriptures and have not found the time for the coming of the Messiah clearly fixed, except in the words of Gabriel to the prophet Daniel, which are written in the 9th chapter of the prophecy of Daniel (The Messiah of the Targums, Talmuds and Rabbinical Writers, 1971) p.141-142 (These two quotes were taken from the Creator Beyond Time and Space by Mark Eastman, M.D. and Chuck Missler (The Word for Today, 1996)"
Here is the web site I got these quotes from:
http://100 prophecies.org/weeks.htm
Hope this helps. 😀
Originally posted by jaywillSo, God needed a Son to enable Man's redemption?
[b]===========================
I mean we've got service men laying down their lives
every day. If each of them were treated proportionally
to Christ, we'd be up to our necks in hymns and mantras.
====================================
The war is different. The way of victory is different.
The job Jesus did no other person could do. No one ...[text shortened]... Jesus did in His death and resurrection. So He occupies a unique position all His own.[/b]
Originally posted by whodeyThanks.
Here are the citings in the Talmud.
"1a. Maimonides (Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon): "Daniel has elucidated to us thet knowledge of the end times. However, since they are secret, the wise rabbis have barred the calculation of the days of Messiah's coming so that the untutored populace will not be led astray when they see that the End Times have already come but ...[text shortened]... I got these quotes from:
http://100 prophecies.org/weeks.htm
Hope this helps. 😀
Originally posted by whodeyYou've been told many times that the archeology supports the Bible's claims 100%, but if you're going to repeat it, then you should check it out for yourself. I don't mean going to an apologetics webpage and getting handpicked archeology that's fifty years behind the field. Find a text that challenges your views. I'd recommend The Bible Unearthed. It was written by two reputable Biblical archeologists. They concern themselves only with the Old Testament (the narrative history of Israel). Neither one is out to sell you on a religion nor to grind an axe against one.
Now, now, we know the Bible to be historically innacurate. Those Biblcial archeologists are all a bunch of religious zealots if you ask me. 😛
I realize that one text isn't the whole picture, but it is a great place to start, and it will give you a myriad of archeological facts to consider.
Originally posted by telerionPoint taken, however, I would not expect all Biblical archeologists to agree in one accord that the OT is 100% factual. In fact, I know of no scientific pursuit in which all agree 100% about everything.
You've been told many times that the archeology supports the Bible's claims 100%, but if you're going to repeat it, then you should check it out for yourself. I don't mean going to an apologetics webpage and getting handpicked archeology that's fifty years behind the field. Find a text that challenges your views. I'd recommend The Bible Unearthed. ...[text shortened]... a great place to start, and it will give you a myriad of archeological facts to consider.
Originally posted by whodeyAs I go about my research, here are some Jewish sites on the question. I’m sure you can offer counter-interpretations; the point, though, is that Jews are not simply ignorant, stupid or perverse in not seeing Jesus as the messiah.
Here are the citings in the Talmud.
"1a. Maimonides (Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon): "Daniel has elucidated to us thet knowledge of the end times. However, since they are secret, the wise rabbis have barred the calculation of the days of Messiah's coming so that the untutored populace will not be led astray when they see that the End Times have already come but ...[text shortened]... I got these quotes from:
http://100 prophecies.org/weeks.htm
Hope this helps. 😀
http://judaism.about.com/library/3_askrabbi_o/bl_simmons_messiah3.htm
http://www.messiahtruth.com/wanted.html
http://www.torah.org/features/secondlook/messiahs.html
These sites offer differing views—not a problem for Judaism (see points below). A good overview is here:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=510&letter=M&search=Messiah
And here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Messiah
(The discussion page is interesting, too.)
A couple of other points:
(1) Messianism is not the doctrinal issue in Judaism that it is in Christianity. There are, and have been, different understandings of messiah—what it means.
—In fact, Isaiah calls King Cyrus YHVH’s moshiach (messiah; anointed); Is. 45:1.
(2) Judaism is a fundamentally hermeneutical religion (in the words of a professor from the Jewish Theological Seminary, whose name I forget). Multiple interpretations are not only welcome, but are the basis for Jewish understanding.
__________________________________________
“Why are the words of Torah like fire? A fire is built of many logs and the words of Torah survive only through many minds.” (tractate Ta’anit)
“Whenever a man studies words of Torah, he is certain to find a meaning in them.” (tractate Eruvin)
Rav Hisda said: “To learn Torah…it is better to go to several teachers. The many different explanations will help to give you understanding.” (tractate Avodah Zarah)
“The words of Torah are fruitful and multiply!” (tractate Hagigah)
“He who toils in Torah and discovers in it new meanings that are true contributes new Torah which is treasured by the congregation of Israel.” (the Zohar)
“A place has been left for me to labor in it [the Torah].” (tractate Hullin)
—Talmudic quotes from The Talmudic Anthology, Louis I. Newman, ed.
___________________________________________
(3) The Talmuds are a record of the opinions and counter-opinions (arguments) of various rabbis. But this “oral Torah” is not fixed; it continues as a dynamic oral traditions.
For example, I found this (on a Christian site):
“R. Hillel says there will be no Messiah for Israel, because they have enjoyed him already (fol. 99, col. 1) in the days of Hezekiah. Said Rav. Joseph, may God pardon R. Hillel. When was Hezekiah? In the first house, but Zechariah (9:9) prophesied in THE SECOND HOUSE Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout O daughter of Jerusalem; Behold thy King cometh unto thee; He is just and having salvation; lowly, and riding on an ass, and upon a colt, the foal of an ass.’” (Sanhedrin fol. 99, c. 1)
Now, there is no requirement here that one accepts Rav Joseph’s as the final word, over that of Hillel. Or either one, for that matter. Similarly, both the views of Hillel and those of Shammai are recorded; Hillel’s views are usually given precedence.
It is really an error to say, “The Talmud says.” Or even, as you put it, “The rabbis of the Talmud say.” Jewish writers, too, often use such phrases as a kind of shorthand—but it is then understood that what is really meant is, “This or that rabbi says in the Talmud.” Because that is how the Talmud works (same for Midrash).
By the way, here is a very interesting exchange that I found:
Letter from an American Christian and the Rabbi's Response
From The Restoration Newsletter, Sept/Oct. 1995.
Letters to the Editor...
(The following is the relevant excerpt of a letter which was received in Jerusalem from a reader in Maryland. We are including it here because we understand that the questions which this reader asks, and the answer which he received, are of great interest to many readers, and we hope that this will provide an instructive opportunity to discuss the Jewish view of the messiah. )
To Rabbi Chaim Richman,
Greetings from a Christian living in Washington, DC. Do you think that Jesus may have been the messiah? Why or why not? Have you ever considered to look at the life of Jesus in that role? Thank you for being patient with my questions. May I state one last thing however, in the New Testament it is written that Jesus fulfilled all of the prophecies of the prophets and the law. Please let me share some with you concerning what is known as the second coming of Christ... I don't want to offend you in any way, however I feel that the L-rd wants me to tell you this in this manner...
I am including a list of biblical verses that I would like you to look at, please also see Matthew chapter 24. Also the Psalms speak of many prophecies fulfilled by Jesus. I have a book with a better list - I will send it with this letter. Please take a look and see if Jesus was the Messiah I would love to hear from you! Please feel free to write. Again I say that I hope that this letter did not offend you, however I must do what G-d requires of me. Thank you very much. (Signed).
Rabbi Richman replies:
My dear friend,
Thank you very much for your sincere letter.
I appreciate your expressed desire not to offend, so let me start off by stating that for me as well, to be offensive in any way is absolutely the furthest thing from my mind. Of course, we both understand that if we are truly to communicate in sincerity, with a goal of clarifying the truth of G-d and how we are to serve Him in this world, then the cornerstone of our dialog must be - and always remain mutual respect, concern for learning the truth, and care for each other. We must remember at all times that we are all created by the same Master and we are all connected.
Just as I hope that your intention is not to try to change me, but to inform me of your convictions, so too, my intention is not to try to change you, but to answer your questions with as much consideration as possible, and to provide you with information about the One G-d of Israel and His faith. Please be aware that I will not be offended by anything you say (as long as your intention is not to offend) and I would also never want to offend you either. I can only tell you the truth of the Bible as revealed to Moses and passed on to every subsequent generation until this very day.
Many Christians pose the question, "why don't you accept Jesus as the messiah?" But to us it is not a simple question of 'accepting' or not. Now first of all, before we even get off the ground with our discussion, we must realize that the concept 'messiah' seems to mean different things to us. Jews do not believe that the Messiah is a part of G-d, or Divine in any way, more than any other person. No indication of this can be found in the Old Testament, since this is not a Jewish concept. We look only to G-d for our salvation, and when the time comes for Him to bring the anointed king, then it shall happen. But we do not concern ourselves with the Messiah's identity - for he is a person (as we have written, and continue to expound, in the "Countdown to Redemption" column in this publication) and his coming does not change the essence of our relationship with G-d - the most important fact of life there is. We do not accept the notion that Scripture "foretells" that G-d would robe Himself in flesh. We believe that this idea is the very embodiment of idolatry, and we must give our very lives to make a stand against it...as indeed we Jews have always done throughout the ages.
The reason why Jews like myself do not accept Jesus as the messiah is a very basic one - we do not see that he fulfilled any of the requirements for the job. If he never qualified, it is not even a question of rejection. G-d outlined these requirements in the Bible. The identity of the messiah is not up to you or me; it is up to his performance to prove. You have said that I should "take a look at the book (you enclosed) and see if Jesus was the messiah" These are not lists of prophecies that have been fulfilled, but an attempt at working out New Testament passages to reflect Old Testament prophecies. Can a little booklet one receives in the mail prove that the messiah has come? Is that all it takes? The state of the world must prove that the messiah has come; not a tract. Don't you think that when the messiah arrives, it should not be necessary for his identity to be subject to debate - for the world should be so drastically changed for the better that it should be absolutely incontestable! Why should it be necessary to prove' him at all? If the messiah has come, why should anyone have any doubt?
What requirements did he fulfill?
According to the prophets of the Bible, amongst the most basic missions of the messiah are:
to cause all the world to return to G-d and His teachings,
to restore the royal dynasty to the descendants of David,
to oversee the rebuilding of Jerusalem, including the Temple, in the event that it has not yet been rebuilt;
to gather the Jewish people from all over the world and bring them home to the Land of Israel,
and to reestablish the Sanhedrin,
restore the sacrificial system,
as well as the Sabbatical year and Jubilee.
You have stated that in the New Testament it is written that Jesus fulfilled all of the prophecies of the prophets and the law. But which of these above requirements did Jesus fulfill? And if he is going to fulfill them the second time, why did he not attend to them the first time? This in itself is one concept which no amount of Biblical sleuthing can find a prophetic basis for - FOR THE NOTION THAT THE MESSIAH DOES NOT ACCOMPLISH THESE THINGS UPON HIS APPEARANCE, AND THEREFORE MUST RETURN A SECOND TIME, DOES NOT EXIST IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. WHEREVER THESE THINGS ARE FORETOLD IN THE OLD TESTAMENT, WE ARE TOLD THAT THE MESSIAH COMES AND DOES THESE THINGS ONCE. Where in the Old Testament is there even the faintest allusion to such a concept, that the messiah does not complete the job, and therefore returns a second time? Every prophecy about the messiah makes it clear that he comes once and does the job. He will influence all men to serve G-d with a pure heart. And since the booklets which you have sent me are completely occupied with "corroborating" Old Testament prophecies with New Testament verses - as if to acknowledge that the contents of those Old Testament prophecies is indeed of paramount importance - THEN WHY IS THIS FACT IGNORED? But because this did not happen - it was necessary for Christianity to redefine the role of the messiah, complete with Biblical interpolation, in order to fit this man's career. First of all, Jesus was said to have been resurrected. Secondly, the Bible was examined with the purpose of finding what no one had ever seen there before - evidence that the messiah would be killed without bringing peace to the world or redemption to Israel (hence the importance to Christians of Isaiah 53, which they say refers to Jesus). Thirdly, there was the expectation of a second coming, at which time Jesus would carry out the task expected of the messiah. And finally, there had to be an explanation for the first coming and its catastrophic end. The basic structure of this explanation was to shift the function of the messiah from a visible level (the only level emphasized by the Bible) - where it could be tested - to an invisible level - where it could not. The Messiah's goal, at least the first time around, was now not said to be the redemption of Israel (which had clearly not taken place) but the atonement for original sin. A reworking of Biblical themes. But for Jews, if the Bible's description of the messiah has not been fulfilled, then for authentic Jews there can only be one explanation: he has not yet come. To Jews, who were often subjected to mockery and contempt when asked where their messiah was, this conclusion was painful. But an honest facing of the facts makes it inescapable. In adversity and joy, through holocaust and statehood, Jews who are truly faithful to the Torah and prophets can only repeat the words of their forefathers: "I believe with complete faith in the coming of the messiah; and though he may tarry I shall wait for him every day."
We have already written in these pages that we believe that the messiah, sent by G-d Al-mighty, is not G-d, but a human being - but the greatest leader and wisest teacher who ever lived. He will put his extraordinary talents to use to precipitate a worldwide revolution which will bring perfect justice and harmony to humanity. Please understand that several rabbis state that the historical Jesus - not the man-god Christianity made him into - did accomplish a great deal in turning people away from idolatry and towards a more authentic knowledge of G-d. But he did not claim the role which was given him by the early church fathers, nor do these rabbis ascribe any role to him. He has no connection with authentic Jewish thought. For reasons of space, this is not the proper format to enter into a lengthy debate or disputation on every possible Biblical verse - BUT I AM PREPARED TO DO SO - although at Light to the Nations, we prefer to stress that which we share, and unite around what should be our common goal: Greater knowledge of G-d and hastening the Redemption. Nor is this the pro...