tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post2005816954661765434..comments2023-11-03T05:51:16.392-07:00Comments on For Zion's Sake: Emet Ve'Yatziv - Truthful and CertainAvihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06156322358503174356noreply@blogger.comBlogger38125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-45293940161183699362007-10-29T13:19:00.000-07:002007-10-29T13:19:00.000-07:00Abraham when he was called had neither the Torah n...Abraham when he was called had neither the Torah nor its precepts and commandments. Abraham believed God and it was creditted to him as righteousness. Abraham had great faith and great belief that had only to do with God and nothing t do with critical thinking. God spoke and he believed without any proof except his own relationship with God. Which is greater: belief in God Almighty and his Word or precepts and commandments that are not taken straight from the Torah but rather decided by a rabbis opinion of what the Torah meant?Papa Frankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03544402123543832168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-751965946225974022007-10-29T07:39:00.000-07:002007-10-29T07:39:00.000-07:00Belief is important. 'And now Israel, what does Ha...Belief is important. 'And now Israel, what does Hashem your G-d ask from you but that you revere Hashem your G-d.' But belief must be based on the Torah's commandments and precepts, something that Christianity is not based upon.Avihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06156322358503174356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-62565439882730736192007-10-28T18:28:00.000-07:002007-10-28T18:28:00.000-07:00"Just know that belief is not a substitute for cri..."Just know that belief is not a substitute for critical thought."<BR/><BR/>It's a good thing that Abraham did not share this same opinion. This my friend is the heart of the problem. The truth of the matter is that critical thought is no substitute for belief. Without belief we can never hope to please God.Papa Frankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03544402123543832168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-23301422482818146802007-10-28T16:50:00.000-07:002007-10-28T16:50:00.000-07:00Jews were here first. As a Christian, the onus is ...Jews were here first. As a Christian, the onus is on you to prove to me that JC was divine. I've already said that he fulfilled none of the requirements of the messiah and is even disqualified, in this thread, at Karin's and at Deborah's. Your belief is based on emotions and not Torah-knowledge. I cannot argue with emotions. Just know that belief is not a substitute for critical thought.Avihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06156322358503174356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-65082375427801430922007-10-28T15:52:00.000-07:002007-10-28T15:52:00.000-07:00I don't "use" scriptures for anything. I read the...I don't "use" scriptures for anything. I read them and take what they say as the Word of God. You, on the other hand, ignore the phrases that you don't like and call them metaphor. No scripture teaches idolatry to be acceptable. I worship the one true living God.Papa Frankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03544402123543832168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-78520317950403406122007-10-28T14:20:00.000-07:002007-10-28T14:20:00.000-07:00G-d is not a man. We're going in circles here. Bel...G-d is not a man. We're going in circles here. Believe whatever you want but don't use my holy scriptures to support idolatry,Avihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06156322358503174356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-55191873844576785152007-10-28T07:38:00.000-07:002007-10-28T07:38:00.000-07:00"Even if Jesus arose from the dead, that doesn't p..."Even if Jesus arose from the dead, that doesn't prove him to be divine. Elijah and Elisha both resurrected children and Ezekiel resurrected the valley of dry bones. None of the people who came back to life are divine."<BR/><BR/>Elijah, Elisha, and Ezekiel did these things through the power of God Almighty. They did not raise themselves back from the dead. Jesus took up his own life because he is God.Papa Frankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03544402123543832168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-70271967385202214882007-10-27T20:32:00.000-07:002007-10-27T20:32:00.000-07:00Joe Gringo: Nobody said that the Apostles didn't b...Joe Gringo: Nobody said that the Apostles didn't believe in JC. The fact that they died for Christianity doesn't prove anything except that they <EM>believed</EM> that it is true. People have died for paganism, Islam, Communism... true believers. They can't all be right.<BR/>Even if Jesus arose from the dead, that doesn't prove him to be divine. Elijah and Elisha both resurrected children and Ezekiel resurrected the valley of dry bones. None of the people who came back to life are divine. <BR/><BR/>"How else can we explain that a group of pious Jews became, so suddenly, so unanimously, and so unshakably convinced of a doctrine that to Jewish ears sounds like blasphemy?"<BR/>Many Russian Jews, early pioneer founders of Israel, left their Judaism in the shtetl and became devotedly socialists and communists. Does this prove that communism is divine or right? If we're going to talk about martyrdom, Jews rank first, often at the hands of the followers of the 'Prince of Peace'. As an Ashkenazi (European) Jews, my ancestors chose death over baptism during the Crusades. Being part Sephardic (Spanish) my family left Spain and moved to Israel rather than to forsake the religion of the Patriarchs.<BR/>You can believe whatever you want but Christianity has no basis in the Torah. JC is disqualified form being messiah and didn't fulfill any of its requirements.Avihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06156322358503174356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-66516262260079587032007-10-26T12:10:00.000-07:002007-10-26T12:10:00.000-07:00BK, you got under my skin a bit ;-)Perhaps rather ...BK, you got under my skin a bit ;-)<BR/><BR/>Perhaps rather than saying that miracles “prove” the divinity of Christ, we could say that miracles invite belief in Christ. They are signs that point to the divinity of Christ.<BR/><BR/>Peter Kreeft, a Catholic philosopher, writes in the Handbook of Christian Apologetics: “Scattered generously throughout the myths of the ancient world is the strange story of a god who came down from heaven. Some tell of a god who died and rose for the life of a man. Just as the Garden of Eden story and the Noah’s flood story appear in many different cultures, something like the Jesus story does too. For some strange reason, many people think that this fact-that there are many mythic parallels and foreshadowings of the Christian story-points to the falsehood of the Christian story. Actually, the more witnesses tell a similar story, the more likely it is to be true. The more foreshadowings we find for an event, the more likely it is that the event will happen (p. 153).”<BR/><BR/>“If the divine Jesus of the Gospels is a myth, who invented it? Whether it was his first disciples or some later generations, no possible motive can account for this invention. For until the Edict of Milan in A.D. 313, Christians were subject to persecutions, often tortured and martyred, and hated and oppressed for their beliefs. No one invents a practical joke in order to be crucified, stoned or beheaded (p.164).”<BR/><BR/>Perhaps the greatest evidence, the greatest miracle if you will, is the spread of Christianity to every corner of the planet against all odds.<BR/><BR/>Why should we believe that Jesus is Risen and that He is God? The testimony of the apostles is credible. The strong conviction of the early Church, so bravely preached, stands out as a true miracle. From where would the apostles have drawn their faith if not from the revelation of God? How else can we explain that a group of pious Jews became, so suddenly, so unanimously, and so unshakably convinced of a doctrine that to Jewish ears sounds like blasphemy? It would be quite impossible to conceive that they would have exalted a mere man, one whom they had known in the flesh, to divine status.<BR/><BR/>One scholar has written: “In many religions of the empire it was possible to deify a private citizen. But in at least one nation it was impossible, and that was among the Jews. They adored Yahweh, the one God, the transcendent…, whose image they did not portray, whose name they did not pronounce, who was separated from every human creation… To associate with Yahweh any kind of man at all would have been a sacrilege and a supreme abomination.” (Apologetics and the Biblical Christ, Avery Dulles)<BR/><BR/>In preaching the divinity of Christ, then, the apostles are teaching with full conviction a belief that they could not conceivably have invented. This striking fact suggests that their views had been revolutionized by an actual revelation. When we look more closely at the doctrine itself, this hypothesis is magnificently confirmed. The Incarnation and Divinity of Christ appears completely worthy of God. It expresses to us, as nothing else could, the power and infinity of divine love. It is the supreme manifestation of God’s interest in the world that he has created.<BR/><BR/>The testimony of the New Testament is such that men and women in search for religious truth can find it satisfying. The intrinsic beauty of the message, its coherence, and its fulfillment of humanity’s religious needs make it worthy of consideration as a revelation from God. The uniqueness of the message, the spiritual power it has given to so many generations, give us reason to accept this testimony as true.<BR/><BR/>The credibility of the message of the early Church is strengthened in the living reality of Church throughout history: its marvelous spread, its stability through the centuries, its constant good works, its ability to change lives and the great saints produced in every generation.<BR/><BR/>The conviction that Christ is Risen is not something we are forced to accept on blind faith. Our faith is a leap, but it is not a leap into the dark. Rather than being blind, our faith gives us true sight. They say that seeing is believing, but for the Christian, believing is seeing. When we believe, we see what is true. We see the Risen Christ. We see God.Joe Gringohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05198444834011239318noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-33288131032378944512007-10-22T07:42:00.000-07:002007-10-22T07:42:00.000-07:00Yes, here it is:Ex 24:9-11" 9 Moses and Aaron, Nad...Yes, here it is:<BR/><BR/>Ex 24:9-11<BR/><BR/>" 9 Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and the seventy elders of Israel went up 10 and saw the God of Israel. Under his feet was something like a pavement made of sapphire, clear as the sky itself. 11 But God did not raise his hand against these leaders of the Israelites; they saw God, and they ate and drank." <BR/><BR/>It would appear 74 individuals actually saw God at this point.Eyeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01720460918202738868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-19401473351784573602007-10-22T07:35:00.000-07:002007-10-22T07:35:00.000-07:00Which isn't to say it didn't happen, we Christians...Which isn't to say it didn't happen, we Christians believe Moses did in fact go up the mountain and come down with the 10 Commandments, etc.. but we don't believe there were 600,000 direct witnesses. They heard it from Moses. That being said, there's another interesting passage about witnesses that I ran across a while back.. let me see if I can find it..Eyeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01720460918202738868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-68407492098057354522007-10-22T07:30:00.000-07:002007-10-22T07:30:00.000-07:00I would say the only 'fly in the ointment' is this...I would say the only 'fly in the ointment' is this:<BR/><BR/>Exodus 32:1 "When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and said, "Come, make us gods who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who brought us up out of Egypt, we don't know what has happened to him."<BR/><BR/>If 600,000 people were witnesses, why would they do that?Eyeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01720460918202738868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-25635187498549048892007-10-20T20:43:00.000-07:002007-10-20T20:43:00.000-07:00Lech lecha is my son's birthday parsha, and my per...Lech lecha is my son's birthday parsha, and my personal favorite of all our readings. Last year at this time was the shalom zachor, (and many, many lchaims flowed!) so he is now officially one year old according to the Hebrew calandar. Want to know why I'm the Mad Zionist? Read lech lecha and you'll understand that our covenant to the land of Israel is as sacred as our covenant for circumcision.Mad Zionisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02368389951636950238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-32162598559313425702007-10-19T05:57:00.000-07:002007-10-19T05:57:00.000-07:00thank you for answering me in such a timely manner...thank you for answering me in such a timely manner, b.k. - i have printed it out and will study your concepts.<BR/><BR/>*:]nanchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08809768490674110768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-17854024433811268032007-10-18T06:26:00.000-07:002007-10-18T06:26:00.000-07:00Oops.Anyway, a couple thoughts since I don't have ...Oops.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, a couple thoughts since I don't have time to delve deeply into your exegesis of Isaiah:<BR/><BR/>First, the word `almah is used ONLY in the context a young girl who has never been married - hence understood to be a virgin. Also, why would Isaiah even mention that a non-virginal woman would conceive and give birth...it happened every day.<BR/><BR/>Secondly, each of Maimonides confessions falls down on the fourth word. Neither he, nor you, nor I, was or is capable of perfection.<BR/><BR/>Third, God did not appear to Moses in front of millions. His face-to-face meeting was absolutely private. The Spirit of God did appear with Yehoshua in public at His baptism.<BR/><BR/>Fourth, Yehoshua did not preach a new religion, but rather he preached the Kingdom of God. His miracles were perfectly in line with the Torah.<BR/><BR/>Finally, the preponderance of scholars on this issue have determined that the Gospels were all written in the first century, by the said apostles/disciples (with the possible exception of Mark). They are not late fabrications. Justin Martyr may not have had the gospels in his hands, but he knew of Marcion, who did.<BR/><BR/>Now, <B>For Zion's Sake</B>:<BR/><I>And Jehovah from Zion doth roar, And from Jerusalem giveth forth His voice, And shaken have the heavens and earth, And Jehovah [is] a refuge to his people, And a stronghold to sons of Israel</I><BR/><BR/><I>I will establish my covenant as an <B>everlasting</B> covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. <B>The whole land of Canaan</B>, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.</I><BR/><BR/>Amen.Godefroihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00812729226487305826noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-20598932191164338642007-10-18T05:53:00.000-07:002007-10-18T05:53:00.000-07:00eyeyGodefroihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00812729226487305826noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-72631159585642558622007-10-17T20:05:00.000-07:002007-10-17T20:05:00.000-07:00I am made speechless by the lengths you would go t...I am made speechless by the lengths you would go through to discredit Jesus.. To believe the translation and explanation that you have put forth here one would need to be completely disconnected from all rational thought.Papa Frankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03544402123543832168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-33567336182597068542007-10-17T14:00:00.000-07:002007-10-17T14:00:00.000-07:00Isaiah 53 and the "Suffering Servant" is one of th...Isaiah 53 and the "Suffering Servant" is one of the most misunderstood chapters in the entire Scriptures. Christians mistake the "Suffering Servant" to refer to their messiah but it really refers to Israel. When you look at history, you see that the suffering of JC really pales in comparison to the rivers of Jewish blood, often shed in his name. (Just think Crusades, pogroms, Inquisitions...)<BR/>I'll post an article by Jews for Judaism that explains the true understanding of Isaiah 55.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>A. PRELIMINARY ISSUES<BR/>Before engaging in an examination of Isaiah 53 itself, some preliminary issues must be considered. First is the issue of circular reasoning. Even if we interpret the chapter as the Christians do (forgetting for a minute the mistranslations and distortions of context which will be noted below), the most that could be said is this: Isaiah 53 is about someone who dies for the sins of others. People may have seen Jesus die, but did anyone see him die as an atonement for the sins of others? Of course not; this is simply the meaning which the New Testament gives to his death. Only if you already accept the New Testament teaching that his death had a non-visible, spiritual significance can you than go back to Isaiah and say, "see - the Prophet predicted what I already believe." Isaiah 53, then, is in reality no "proof" at all, but rather a contrived confirmation for someone who has already chosen Christianity. <BR/><BR/>Second (and consistent with all Jewish teaching at the time), Jesus' own disciples didn't view Isaiah 53 as a messianic prophecy. For example, after Peter identifies Jesus as the Messiah (Matt. 16:16), he is informed that Jesus will be killed (Matt. 16:21). His response: "God forbid it, lord! This shall never happen to you" (Matt. 16:22). See, also, Mk. 9:31-32; Mk. 16:10-11; Jn. 20:9. Even Jesus didn't see Isaiah 53 as crucial to his messianic claims - why else did he call the Jews children of the devil for not believing in him before the alleged resurrection (Jn. 8:39-47)? And why did he later request that God "remove this cup from me" (Mk. 14:36) - didn't he know that a "removal of the cup" would violate the gentile understanding of Isaiah 53? <BR/><BR/>And third, even if we accept the gentile Christian interpretation of Isaiah 53, where is it indicated (either in Isaiah 53 or anywhere else in our Jewish Scriptures) that you must believe in this "Messiah" to get the benefits? <BR/><BR/>B. CONTEXT<BR/>Since any portion of Scripture is only understood properly when viewed in the context of God's revelation as a whole, some additional study will be helpful before you "tackle" Isaiah 53. <BR/><BR/>Look at the setting in which Isaiah 53 occurs. Earlier on in Isaiah, God had predicted exile and calamity for the Jewish people. Chapter 53, however, occurs in the midst of Isaiah's "Messages of Consolation", which tell of the restoration of Israel to a position of prominence and a vindication of their status as God's chosen people. In chapter 52, for example, Israel is described as "oppressed without cause" (v.4) and "taken away" (v.5), yet God promises a brighter future ahead, one in which Israel will again prosper and be redeemed in the sight of all the nations (v.1-3, 8-12). <BR/><BR/>Chapter 54 further elaborates upon the redemption which awaits the nation of Israel. Following immediately after chapter 53's promise of a reward for God's servant in return for all of its suffering (53:10-12), chapter 54 describes an unequivocally joyous fate for the Jewish people. Speaking clearly of the Jewish people and their exalted status (even according to all Christian commentaries), chapter 54 ends as follows: "`This is the heritage of the servants of the L-rd and their vindication is from Me,' declares the L-rd." <BR/><BR/>C. ISAIAH 53<BR/>In the original Hebrew texts, there are no chapter divisions, and Jew and Christian alike agree that chapter 53 is actually a continuation of the prophecy which begins at 52:13. Accordingly, our analysis must begin at that verse. <BR/><BR/>52:13 "Behold, My servant will prosper." Israel in the singular is called God's servant throughout Isaiah, both explicitly (Isa. 41:8-9; 44:1-2; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3) and implicitly (Isa. 42:19-20; 43:10) - the Messiah is not. Other references to Israel as God's servant include Jer. 30:10 (note that in Jer. 30:17, the servant Israel is regarded by the nations as an outcast, forsaken by God, as in Isa. 53:4); Jer. 46:27-28; Ps. 136:22; Lk. 1:54. ALSO: Given the Christian view that Jesus is God, is God His own servant? <BR/><BR/>52:15 - 53:1 "So shall he (the servant) startle many nations, the kings will stand speechless; For that which had not been told them they shall see and that which they had not heard shall they ponder. Who would believe what we have heard?" Quite clearly, the nations and their kings will be amazed at what happens to the "servant of the L-rd," and they will say "who would believe what we have heard?". 52:15 tells us explicitly that it is the nations of the world, the gentiles, who are doing the talking in Isaiah 53. See, also, Micah 7:12-17, which speaks of the nations' astonishment when the Jewish people again blossom in the Messianic age. <BR/><BR/>53:1 "And to whom has the arm of the L-rd been revealed?" In Isaiah, and throughout our Scriptures, God's "arm" refers to the physical redemption of the Jewish people from the oppression of other nations (see, e.g., Isa. 52:8-12; Isa. 63:12; Deut. 4:34; Deut. 7:19; Ps. 44:3). <BR/><BR/>53:3 "Despised and rejected of men." While this is clearly applicable to Israel (see Isa. 60:15; Ps. 44:13-14), it cannot be reconciled with the New Testament account of Jesus, a man who was supposedly "praised by all" (Lk. 4:14-15) and followed by multitudes (Matt. 4:25), who would later acclaim him as a prophet upon his triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Matt. 21:9-11). Even as he was taken to be crucified, a multitude bemoaned his fate (Lk. 23:27). Jesus had to be taken by stealth, as the rulers feared "a riot of the people" (Mk. 14:1-2). <BR/><BR/>53:3 "A man of pains and acquainted with disease." Israel's adversities are frequently likened to sickness - see, e.g., Isa. 1:5-6; Jer. 10:19; Jer 30:12. <BR/><BR/>53:4 "Surely our diseases he carried and our pains he bore." In Matt. 8:17, this is correctly translated, and said to be literally (not spiritually) fulfilled in Jesus' healing of the sick, a reading inconsistent with the Christian mistranslation of 53:4 itself. <BR/><BR/>53:4 "Yet we ourselves esteemed him stricken, smitten of G- D and afflicted." See Jer. 30:17 - of God's servant Israel (30:10), it is said by the nations, "It is Zion; no one cares for her." <BR/><BR/>53:5 "But he was wounded from (NOTE: not for) our transgressions, he was crushed from (AGAIN: not for) our iniquities." Whereas the nations had thought the Servant (Israel) was undergoing Divine retribution for its sins (53:4), they now realize that the Servant's sufferings stemmed from their actions and sinfulness. This theme is further developed throughout our Jewish Scriptures - see, e.g., Jer. 50:7; Jer. 10:25. ALSO: Note that the Messiah "shall not fail nor be crushed till he has set the right in the earth" (Isa. 42:4). <BR/><BR/>53:7 "He was oppressed and he was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth. Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, so he did not open his mouth." Note that in the prior chapter (Isa. 52), Israel is said to have been oppressed and taken away without cause (52:4-5). A similar theme is developed in Psalm 44, wherein King David speaks of Israel's faithfulness even in the face of gentile oppression (44:17- 18) and describes Israel as "sheep to be slaughtered" in the midst of the unfaithful gentile nations (44:22,11). <BR/><BR/>Regarding the claim that Jesus "did not open his mouth" when faced with oppression and affliction, see Matt. 27:46, Jn. 18:23, 36-37. <BR/><BR/>53:8 "From dominion and judgment he was taken away." Note the correct translation of the Hebrew. The Christians are forced to mistranslate, since - by Jesus' own testimony - he never had any rights to rulership or judgment, at least not on the "first coming." See, e.g., Jn. 3:17; Jn. 8:15; Jn. 12:47; Jn. 18:36. <BR/><BR/>53:8 "He was cut off out of the land of the living." Israel is described as "cut off" in Ez 37:11.<BR/><BR/>53:8 "From my peoples' sins, there was injury to them."Here the Prophet makes absolutely clear, to anyone familiar with Biblical Hebrew, that the oppressed Servant is a collective Servant, not a single individual. The Hebrew word "lamoh - (lamed-mem-vav) ", when used in our Scriptures, always means "to them" never "to him" and may be found, for example, in Psalm 99:7 - "They kept his testimonies, and the statute that He gave to them." <BR/><BR/>53:9 "His grave was assigned with wicked men." See Ez. 37:11-14, wherein Israel is described as "cut off" and God promises to open its "graves" and bring Israel back into its own land. Other examples of figurative deaths include Ex. 10:17; 2 Sam. 9:8; 2 Sam. 16:9. <BR/><BR/>53:9 "And with the rich in his deaths." Perhaps King James should have changed the original Hebrew, which the plural "deaths" makes clear that we are dealing with a collective Servant, i.e., Israel, which will "come to life" when the exile ends (Ez. 37:14). <BR/><BR/>53:9 "He had done no violence." See Matt. 21:12; Mk. 11:15-16; Lk. 19:45; Lk. 19:27; Matt. 10:34 and Lk. 12:51; then judge for yourself whether this passage is truly consistent with the New Testament account of Jesus. <BR/><BR/>53:10 "He shall see his seed." The Hebrew word for "seed", used in this verse, always refers to physical descendants in our Jewish Scriptures. See, e.g., Gen. 12:7; Gen. 15:13; Gen. 46:6; Ex. 28:43. A different word, generally translated as "sons", is used to refer to spiritual descendants (see Deut. 14:1, e.g.). <BR/><BR/>53:10 "He will prolong his days." Not only did Jesus die young, but how could the days be prolonged of someone who is alleged to be God? <BR/><BR/>53:11 "With his knowledge the righteous one, my Servant, will cause many to be just." Note again the correct translation: the Servant will cause many to be just, he will not "justify the many." The Jewish mission is to serve as a "light to the nations" which will ultimately lead the world to a knowledge of the one true God, this both by example (Deut. 4:5-8; Zech. 8:23) and by instructing the nations in God's Law (Isa. 2:3-4; Micah 4:2-3). <BR/><BR/>53:12 "Therefore, I will divide a portion to him with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the mighty." If Jesus is God, does the idea of reward have any meaning? Is it not rather the Jewish people - who righteously bore the sins of the world and yet remained faithful to God (Ps. 44) - who will be rewarded, and this in the manner described more fully in Isaiah chapters 52 and 54?Avihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06156322358503174356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-91998505389901644082007-10-17T07:06:00.000-07:002007-10-17T07:06:00.000-07:00when you get to isaiah 53 - who do you feel "was p...when you get to isaiah 53 - who do you feel "was pierced for our transgressions"? is that future in judaism?<BR/><BR/>does this mean the Messiah is yet to come and be pierced?nanchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08809768490674110768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-49958458884003829552007-10-17T04:11:00.000-07:002007-10-17T04:11:00.000-07:00Thanks for your response BK. I wasn't trying to ar...Thanks for your response BK. I wasn't trying to argue for the superiority of the New Testament (why the "speech marks", by the way?) or of Jesus' work. I was just saying that the Jewish scriptures are just as authoritative for Christians as they are for Jews. As a result, every time you praise these scriptures (whether understood as 'Tanakh' or 'Old Testament', the content is the same) you are doing, not only Jews, but also Christians a service. We too rejoice when the Moses and the Prophets are shown to be what they are: the word of God. <BR/><BR/>By the way, the scholars you draw on to historically deconstruct the New Testament use the same tools and assumptions to deconstruct the Old. That, then, would undermine your argument that the Torah is more authentic because of Moses and the Sinai event: very few historical-critics actually believe such a thing happened. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Be aware of methodological consistency!Phil Sumpterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16491514886782881340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-70584176306719109562007-10-16T19:19:00.000-07:002007-10-16T19:19:00.000-07:00renegade eye -- The only difference between secula...renegade eye -- The only difference between secular and sacred is that the secular doesn't know yet that it is sacred.Papa Frankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03544402123543832168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-5417893462663510672007-10-16T16:26:00.000-07:002007-10-16T16:26:00.000-07:00Joe Gringo: I'm sorry if I may have offended you b...Joe Gringo: I'm sorry if I may have offended you but most of those points have nothing to do with the identity of the messiah and have no value for this argument. In think that the onus is on Christians to prove that JC was the Son of G-d rather than for Jews to disprove it since, going through the Torah, there is no hint that he would come or that he is even necessary since the Torah provides all of the tools for salvation and godliess.<BR/><BR/>Renegade Eye: I'm not sure of your point. This is one of my few non-political posts.Avihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06156322358503174356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-82019448715497181232007-10-16T15:22:00.000-07:002007-10-16T15:22:00.000-07:00Fascinating, although I do beievle it was inapprop...Fascinating, although I do beievle it was inappropriate when you say ......"I took a look at some of the "prophecies" that JC fulfilled and these are garbage and taken out of context".<BR/><BR/>I was baptized Methodist and am currently in the RCIA program at our Catholic church on my qwest for conversion to Catholicism, I hope to join in on future debates here as my faith deepens.<BR/><BR/>PS- If you are truly in High School, God bless you, you are one sharp young man.Joe Gringohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05198444834011239318noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-51932973788545842722007-10-16T14:16:00.000-07:002007-10-16T14:16:00.000-07:00Quite a spirited discourse you have here! Thanks ...Quite a spirited discourse you have here! Thanks for stopping by my blog and commenting. You are welcome any time.Karen Townsendhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12692791436106987353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7092397679011227919.post-83792004267077095992007-10-16T09:04:00.000-07:002007-10-16T09:04:00.000-07:00Nanc: The books of the prophets, along with the 5 ...Nanc: The books of the prophets, along with the 5 books of Moses and the "Writings", books by Solomon, Esther, Song of Songs... make up the Ta"NaKh, the Jewish Bible.<BR/>You are correct that Malachi was the last prophet.<BR/>Just as a side note, every week, a portion from the prophets is read after the Torah which corresponds to the weekly portion. The Torah is divided into 52 portions which are read every Saturday. This week's portion is <EM>Lech Lecha</EM> which is from Genesis 12 until the end of Chapter 17. (Verses and Chapters are a Christian division which the Jews adopted). The reading from the Prophets, the <EM> Haftorah</EM> is Isaiah 40-41. This custom of reading from the prophets goes back to the time of the second Temple under the reign of the Graeco-Syrian king Antiochus Ephiphanes who forbade public readings of the Torah. The Jews, to quench their spiritual thrist, called up 7 people to read from the prophets. When this ban was lifted, the custom was retained and now 1 person reads the Haftorah after the Torah portion.Avihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06156322358503174356noreply@blogger.com