Isaiah 52-53 ~ Israel or The Messiah? - part 2

LittleLambofJesus said:

Don't forget the captivity and dispersion of the Jews in AD70 when God allowed the Roman army to level Jerusalem and the Temple. It was practically the equivalent of a the WW2 "holocaust" by the Nazis.

Btw, does Judaism view that the ad 70 divine destruction of Jerusalem was allowed by God for crucifying their Messiah, Jesus? Thanks


John 11:48
"If-ever we may be be letting Him thus, all shall be believing in Him.
And shall be coming the Romans and they shall be taking away of Us and the Place and the Nation
[Reve 6:6/14:8]

Luke 21:24
And they shall be falling to mouth of sword and they shall be being led captive into all the nations.
And Jerusalem shall be being trodden by nations until which may be being filled times of nations.
[Reve 11:2/13:10]

Reve 13:10
If any to-captivity into captivity is going away. If any in sword to be killed, is binding him in sword to be killed.
Here is the endurance and the faith of the saints.
[Luke 21:24]

http://www.bible.ca/pre-destruction70AD-george-holford-1805AD.htm

"I consider the Prophecy relative to the destruction of the Jewish nation, if there were nothing else to support Christianity, as absolutely irresistible."
(Mr. Erskine's Speech, at the Trial of Williams, for publishing Paine's Age of Reason)

......Thus they cut the very sinews of their own strength. At this critical and alarming c onjuncture, intelligence arrived that the Roman army was approaching the city.
The Jews were petrified with astonishment and fear;..............

The day on which Titus encompassed Jerusalem, was the feast of the Passover; and it is deserving of the very particular attention of the reader, that this was the anniversary of that memorable period in which the Jews crucified their Messiah.................

Before their final demolition, however, Titus took, a. survey of the city and its fortifications ; and, while contemplating their impregnable strength, could not help ascribing his success to the peculiar interposition of the ALMIGHTY HIMSELF......

Of the Jews destroyed during the siege, Josephus reckons not less than ONE MILLION AND ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND, to which must be added, above TWO-HUNDRED AND THIRTY-SEVEN THOUSAND who perished in other places, and innumerable multitudes who were swept away by famine, and pestilence, and of which no calculation could be made.
Of the captives the whole was about NINETY-SEVEN THOUSAND.

Click to expand...

One version, the first Temple was destroyed because of idolatry,
The second Temple because of a baseless hate among the Jews,
there was no unity.

And welcome to CF's very own "Coronation St"

The Sages mean that the destruction of the second Temple was because of the baseless hatred that prevailed among Jews.

If the Jews had been United they would have merited God's protection.

It was the factionalists among Jews that ultimately brought destruction of second Temple.

Sadducés rejected Oral Torah and the leadership of the Rabbis.

Many of them were rich priests and they took Control of the priesthood.
Sometimes buying their way into the office of High Priest.

Those who wanted to befriend the Romans were mostly Saducees.

There were Pharisees,
Saducees,
Zealots,
Sicarii (dagger men)

LoAmmi said:

Hillel never would have supported abandoning the Torah in favor of simply not doing what was hateful to others.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know, I was being mostly sarcastic.
In the end I realized I should have followed my instincts. I was hesitant on moving forward and I should have ended the discussion. I provided my reasons in post #192.
Oh well.

LoAmmi said:

However, you do have to concede that Maimonides and other sages, when they talked about it, never expected the Messiah to die.

Click to expand...

Yup; The Mishnah Torah, ‘If he did not succeed to this extent of he was killed, then we know that he is certainly not the one promised by the Torah..’
Have you researched the Mishnah Torah and the letter to Yemen?

peepnklown said:

Yup; The Mishnah Torah, ‘If he did not succeed to this extent of he was killed, then we know that he is certainly not the one promised by the Torah..’
Have you researched the Mishnah Torah and the letter to Yemen?

Click to expand...

I've read at least most of them. Nothing too deep.

peepnklown said:

Yes, I know, I was being mostly sarcastic.
In the end I realized I should have followed my instincts. I was hesitant on moving forward and I should have ended the discussion. I provided my reasons in post #192.
Oh well.

Click to expand...

I was mostly making sure others wouldn't get the wrong impression.

ewq1938 said:

That doesn't address my question. Which book was written first?

Click to expand...

The five books of Psalms were written by different authors over a long period of time,
90-101 the Midrash attributes to Moses.

The prophet Ezekiel lived in exile in Babylon during the period Before and after the fall of Jerusalem in 586bce.

Robban said:

One version, the first Temple was destroyed because of idolatry,
The second Temple because of a baseless hate among the Jews,
there was no unity.

And welcome to CF's very own "Coronation St"

Click to expand...

Robban said:

The Sages mean that the destruction of the second Temple was because of the baseless hatred that prevailed among Jews.

If the Jews had been United they would have merited God's protection.

It was the factionalists among Jews that ultimately brought destruction of second Temple.

Sadducés rejected Oral Torah and the leadership of the Rabbis.

Many of them were rich priests and they took Control of the priesthood.
Sometimes buying their way into the office of High Priest. Those who wanted to befriend the Romans were mostly Saducees.

There were Pharisees, Saducees, Zealots,Sicarii (dagger men)

Click to expand...

Great post and thank you for that info.
I like studying on the Sadducee sect of 1st century Judaism. I think the Pharisees are listed more in the NT than the Sadducees, tho both sect were hated by Jesus and His followers.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7454770/
Why did Sadducees not believe in Resurrection? Acts 23:8

Matthew 3:7
Seeing yet many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming upon the baptism he said to them, prodigy of vipers!
who intimates to ye to be fleeing from being about wrath?

Acts 5:
17 But the high priest rose up, along with all his associates (that is the sect of the Sadducees), and they were filled with jealousy.
18 They laid hands on the apostles and put them in a public jail.…

Paul had a knack for dividing those 2 sects:

Acts 23:7
And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and the assembly was divided.
8 For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection -- and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both.
9 Then there arose a loud outcry. And the scribes of the Pharisees' party arose and protested, saying, "We find no evil in this man; but if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him, let us not fight against God

http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=3974

The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead or the immortality of the soul, since these doctrines are not mentioned in the law of Moses. Neither did they believe in heaven or hell. They interpreted the law literally and tended to support strict justice as opposed to mercy toward the offender.
Since Jesus supported all these things opposed by the Sadducees, Jesus did not fit within the Sadducean movement.

Being closely associated with the Temple, the Sadducees disappeared from history when the Temple was destroyed in 70 ad..........

..



.

Robban said:

I am not getting you, He, the Holy One does not make it up as He goes along.
Nothing just happens, all is for a purpose.

Click to expand...

Neither does YAHWEH's Holy One, Jesus the Christ:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/search/search.cfm?Criteria=holy+one&t=ESV#s=s_primary_0_2

Eze 39:7
“And My holy name I will make known in the midst of My people Israel, and I will not let My holy name be profaned anymore.
And the nations shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.

Jhn 6:
68 Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life,
69 and we have believed, and have come to know, that You are the Holy One of God.”

Act 13:35
Therefore he says also in another psalm,
“‘You will not let Your Holy One see corruption.'

Reve 1:18
and the living One! And I became dead, and behold, I am living into the Ages of the Ages,
and I am having the Keys of the Hades and of the Death

Rev 3:7
“And to the Messenger of the church in Philadelphia write: ‘The words of the Holy One, the true one,
who has the key of David, who opens and no one will shut, who shuts and no one opens.
Rev 16:5
And I heard the Messenger in charge of the waters say:
“Just are you, O Holy One, who is and who was, for you brought these judgments.





.
.

rakovsky said:

So at this point it's case closed. There is not much more point in you and I discussing it except to waste time or burn steam.

Click to expand...

I agree but, stop playing the open-mind card, it's silly.

peepnklown said:

This is the problem when you don’t dig deeper.
It’s not about not having an open mind. Just because I do not agree with you doesn’t mean I don’t have an open mind.
The evidence supports my side. It’s plain and simple. You need more time.

Click to expand...

peepnklown said:

I agree but, stop playing the open-mind card, it's silly.

Click to expand...

How can you stay open-minded when you say "the evidence supports your side, plain and simple".
If the BIBLE is that plain and simple, why is the Bible still one of the most discussed and debated book on the planet?
Jeremiah 8:
8 "How can you say, 'We are wise, And the law of the LORD is with us'? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes Has made it into a lie.
9"The wise men are put to shame, They are dismayed and caught;

1Co 1:
20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?[Isaiah 33:18/Jeremiah 8:8]

22 For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom;

23 but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeksfn foolishness,

24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

.

juvenissun said:

Let's not use any translation.

Click to expand...

I will tackle your last paragraph first. If Christianity wants to claim that Jesus was the Messiah then they must support their claims from the Hebrew Bible. This is the actual conflict. If you follow Judaism you simply cannot sacrifice wherever you feel like it. Sacrifices are only allowable in the place that God has chosen for that purpose. Forgiveness is acquired through repentance, prayer and righteousness (good deeds, charity, etc).


I will deal with the Hebrew now. I should have just broken it down piece by piece.
In the end, I am saying the Hebrew says of our or from and NOT for our (the matching Hebrew prepositions for the two cases are - מ-\ מ (mei-\mi-); both are abbreviations of the preposition מִן (min), meaning from, because, of).
This is the actual conflict when it comes to this verse.
If we look at the applications of חַבּוּרָה/חֲבוּרָה (havuRAH/habuRAH) in the Hebrew Bible (wound/s) we will see, Genesis 4:3 (for giving me a bruise), Exodus 21:25 (a wound), Isaiah 1:6 (and contusions), Psalms 38:6 (my wounds), Proverbs 20:30 (contusions)…
We see וּבַחֲבֻרָת ו u'va'havuraTOmeans ‘and with his wounds.’
The phrase נִרְפָּא־לָנוּ (nirPA-LAnu) is a figurative expression that only appears in Isaiah 53:5. נִרְפָּא (nirPA), was healed, לָנוּ (LAnu), for us.Now, this is compared to the root verb, רפא (RESH-FEI-Alef), [to] heal.
In the end, again, it’s all about of our or from and NOT for our.

So, when Israel merits the arrival of the messianic age, the nations (gentiles) will also benefit.
Israel’s suffering will eventually lead to the world’s redemption from which the nations (gentiles) will also benefit.

LittleLambofJesus said:

How can you stay open-minded when you say "the evidence supports your side, plain and simple".

Click to expand...

I can respect that question.
I have an open-mind because if the evidence did not support my view then I will reevaluate my view and change it accordingly.
Yet, if the evidence supports my view, then why do I need to change it?

peepnklown said:

I can respect that question.
I have an open-mind because if the evidence did not support my view then I will reevaluate my view and change it accordingly.
Yet, if the evidence supports my view, then why do I need to change it?

Click to expand...

Did you happen so see this post concerning translations and the word "astonished"?

I actually agreed with your rendering of the words "astonished, startled...." in Isaiah 52:15, as shown in numerous Christian bible versions [and a Jewish one]...

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...-messiah-part-2.7927727/page-14#post-69294729

rakovsky said: ↑
Yemenites is correct that Isaiah 53 is about Messiah.
Take for example the opening of Isaiah 52 where it says Servant sprinkles many nations

Click to expand...

="peepnklown, post: 69287417, member: 114813"


You need a better translation for Isaiah 52.
It does not say ‘sprinkles’ many nations. The correct translation would be more surprised or astonished or startled.
This is made clear by the context of the verses that surround it as well.

Click to expand...

="LittleLambofJesus, post: 69294729, member: 376868"]Yeah, that would be the more logical choices and is used in many Bible versions as shown below.

I actually prefer "astonished" [which is used in the Darby version below], as that word is also used often in the Christian NT when folks meet or hear Jesus [and Paul].

http://biblehub.com/isaiah/52-15.htm

New Living Translation
And he will startle many nations. Kings will stand speechless in his presence...........

International Standard Version
so will he startle many nations.....................

NET Bible
his form was so marred he no longer looked human--so now he will startle many nations................

JPS Tanakh 1917
So shall he startle many nations,.........................

King James 2000 Bible
So shall he startle many nations;

Darby Bible Translation
-- so shall he astonish many nations;......................

===================================================

Mat 13:54
and coming to His hometown He taught them in their synagogue,
so that they were astonished, and said, “Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works?"

Luk 9:43
And all were astonished at the majesty of God.
But while they were all marveling at everything he was doing, Jesus said to his disciples,

Luk 20:26
They were unable to trap Jesus in what He had said there in public.
And astonished by His answer, they became silent.

Cross References

Act 9:21
All those who heard Paul were astonished and asked, “Isn't he the Man who raised havoc in Jerusalem among those who call on this name?
And hasn't He come here to take them as prisoners to the chief priests?”
========================================================
Pulpit Commentary

Verse 15. - So shall he sprinkle many nations.
The Septuagint has, "So shall many nations marvel at him;" and this translation is followed by Gesenius and Ewald. Mr. Cheyne thinks that the present Hebrew text is corrupt, and suggests that a verb was used antithetical to the "astonied" of ver. 14, expressing "joyful surprise."
It is certainly hard to see how the idea of "sprinkling," even if it can mean "purifying," comes in here.

Kings shall shut their mouths at him; rather, because of him. In reverential awe of his surpassing greatness (comp. Micah 7:16). That which had not been told them shall they see.
They will learn the facts of Christ's humiliation, sufferings, death, resurrection, and ascension to heaven - events that it had never entered into the heart of man to conceive, and of which, therefore, no tongue had ever spoken..................

======================================

Paul actually quotes the last part of that verse:

Romans 15:21
Rather, as it is written: "Those who were not told about Him will see, and those who have not heard will understand."





.

peepnklown said:

"So at this point it's case closed. There is not much more point in you and I discussing it except to waste time or burn steam."

I agree but, stop playing the open-mind card, it's silly.

Click to expand...

The part in bold is all you needed to say.
If you see this as case closed and so do we, what is the real worth of you being here and talking about it?

Are you agnostic and you think Is. 53 is one of the best arguments against Christianity? Sorry, I think there are far better ones, and if Is. 53 is the "best", then the case against Christianity is very very weak because it's been debated for a long time and involves open endedness of poetry.

Or do you think people should follow R.Hillel as you mentioned, and so it's religiously important to argue for doctrinal correctness about Tanakh?
I am very confused about your premises. Are Jews and Christians right that Torah is an inspired "truth"?

Correction:

peepnklown said:

I can respect that question.
I THINK THAT I have an open-mind because I THINK THAT if the evidence did not support my view then I will reevaluate my view and change it accordingly.
Yet, if the evidence supports my view, then why do I need to change it?

Click to expand...

Closed minded people say the exact same thing, BTW.

peepnklown said:

Yup; The Mishnah Torah,
‘If he did not succeed to this extent of he was killed, then we know that he is certainly not the one promised by the Torah..’
?

Click to expand...

Rpk

Unless Christians have been hiding in a cave, most are aware of why today's Judaism does not accept Jesus as their Messiah. Perhaps it is the Christians fault for being so divided on not only who Jesus was, but also did He fulfill everything in the OT that He was suppose to.

Christianity believes in another coming of Jesus ,[as does Islam if I am not mistaken], in the future according to the NT, whereas Judaism says their future Messiah will accomplish ALL THINGS at one time [not sure what they believe about him dying].
As for me, I just love discussing and debating the Bible and the more I do, the more my faith in Jesus the Christ grows. Shalom

http://www.aish.com/jw/s/48892792.html

For 2,000 years Jews have rejected the Christian idea of Jesus as messiah. Why?

One of the most common questions we receive at Aish.com is: "Why don't Jews believe in Jesus?"
Let's understand why – not to disparage other religions, but rather to clarify the Jewish position.
==================================================================================
http://www.shamash.org/lists/scj-faq/HTML/faq/17-03.html

The reason why Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah is straightforward: he did not meet the requirements in the job requisition! G-d outlined these requirements in the Bible. The key aspect of proof is in the state of the world.According to the Bible, amongst the most mission of the messiah includes returning the world to return to G-d and G-d's teachings; restoring the royal dynasty to the descendants of David; overseeing the rebuilding of Jerusalem, including the Temple; gathering the Jewish people from all over the world and bringing them home to the Land of Israel; reestablishing the Sanhedrin; restoring the sacrificial system, the Sabbatical year and Jubilee. This simply has not happened.

Judaism has no notion of the messiah not doing these things on the first visit, let along needing a second visit to do these things. Whenever these things are described in the Tanach, the description says that the messiah will come and do these things—once.

=========================================================================

http://biblehub.com/hebrews/9-27.htm

Heb 9:
27 And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment,
28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many.
To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.

Pulpit Commentary

The Divine ordinance concerning mankind in general has its analogy in the truth concerning Christ, who was made like unto us in all things, and who represents humanity. As human life, with all its works, comes to an end in death, and only judgment fellows, so Christ's death once for all completed his ministerial work, and nothing remains for him to do but to return as Judge in glory - he judicaturus, men judicandi.
"To bear the sins of many" is taken from Isaiah 53:12. For similar use of the word ἀναφέρειν, el. Numbers 14:33, LXX.; and especially 1 Peter 2:24, Τὰς ἁμαρτίᾶς ἡμῶν αὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκεν ἐν τῷ σώματι αὑτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ ξύλον, which expresses the idea of Christ's taking our sins upon himself and bearing them up to the cross, and so removing them. The ideas of bearing and of taking away may thus be both implied.

In contrast with this is the χωρίς ἁμαρτίας ("without, or apart from, sin") when he shall appear again.
For then he will have been, as he is now, removed from it altogether - from its burden and its surroundings; it is in glory only that he will then appear. And so also "to them that look for him" his appearing will be "unto salvation" only. They, too, will have done with sin.
The insertion of the words, "to them that look for him," precludes the conclusion that it will be so to all. The many passages that express the doom of those who shall be set on the left hand, whatever they imply, retain their awful meaning (cf. especially infra, Hebrews 10:27).


.