Christianity, the religion of replacement
April 21, 2015
Christianity had sought to replace just about everything that Israel held dear:
- It replaced the One G-d of Israel with a three-headed god heretofore unknown to the Jewish people (but not so unknown to ancient pagans), violating the Oneness of G-d that permeates the Hebrew Bible from cover to cover.
- Christianity sought to replace the Torah of G-d with Paul’s “law of Christ” (1 Corinthians 9:21), a law of a dead human being (a fuzzy “law” which NT fails to even define). At the same time, the Torah of G-d was spurned as an outmoded “schoolmaster” (Galatians 3:24) who, while once necessary, had outlived his usefulness. Even the so called “Torah-observant messianic Jews” do not observe Torah but rather put on a thin veneer of Jewishness, with ample lip service to how wonderful Torah is and how it’s still applicable. They believe, again via Paul, that the promised negative consequences for non-observance (a.k.a. the “curses”) were supposedly nullified by Jesus on the cross (but still very much applicable to Jews who don’t believe in Jesus). But hey, the Law is a nice “guide”, if one is into it (and especially if used as a “witness to lost Jewish people”). Do messianics observe Torah? In my experience, even the most observant of them, their “rabbis” and “scholars”, do not truly observe such basics as either laws of kashrut or Shabbat, but do whatever feels right to them (I know, since I was once myself an MJ and have seen the levels of observance of my former coreligionists first hand). Most Jewish-born messianics, even rabbis, are married to non-Jews and do not hesitate to officiate marriage ceremonies for those who are born Jewish with Gentile Christians.
- Christianity replaced the Jewish people with the Church. Some messianics (ashamed of the wretched history of Christianity vis-à-vis the Jewish people) play word games and prefer to call it “ekklesia” or “the body of Messiah”. Whatever one calls it, according to the New Testament, the “Church of Christ” is composed of “believing” Jews and Gentiles, per Paul, the “Israel of G-d”. “True Jews”, as Paul would say, are only those Jews who are Jews on the “inside”, by which he no doubt meant that they are those who worship Jesus and didn’t reject his (that is Paul’s) message. They are the “believers”. The rest of the Jews are Jews in name only (they are potential Jews) and according to Paul they are effectively cut off as dead branches to make room for Gentile Christians (Romans 11:17). Two thousand years of “dead branches” of Jews. Unless, of course, the “unbelieving” Jews too join in the idolatry of man-worship – then and only then, as Paul “comforts”, they too will be re-grafted back into the “olive tree”. (Some, but not all, messianics are uncomfortable with the true implications of Paul’s words and choose to seek comfort in various alternate explanations found in latest books, which seem to try to outdo each other with ever more far-fetched theories about what Paul “actually meant”.)
- Christianity replaced Israel’s collective sonship and firstborn status (Exodus 4:22) with that of one man Jesus, claiming that all promises are now fulfilled in Jesus, making Jesus the “true Israel”, or “one man Israel”. One frequently hears Christians and Messianics say that Israel wasn’t replaced by the Church, since “Jesus is Israel personified” and the “Church is grafted into Israel” (must be in some alternate universe).
- Christianity sought to replace the Jewish Messiah, a normal “non-god” human being expected by the Jewish people to be a future fulfillment of the promise G-d made to King David, with a demigod savior of the world, a “100% god, 100% man” (yet at the same time “G-d’s servant”) who is sacrificed by G-d for sinners. This new god-man messiah fails to deliver on all counts, dies like all other false messiahs before and after him, doesn’t fulfill any of the messianic expectations (including not even being born of David), and to top if all off ends up being worshiped as god. As Maimonides wrote “is there a greater stumbling-block than this one? So that all of the prophets spoke that the Messiah redeems Israel, and saves them, and gathers their banished ones, and strengthens their commandments. And this one caused (nations) to destroy Israel by sword, and to scatter their remnant, and to humiliate them, and to exchange the Torah, and to make the majority of the world err to serve a divinity besides G-d.“
- Christianity replaced the TaNaKh with the “Old Testament”, or as Paul called it in 2 Corinthians 3:14, “the old covenant”. Few Christians ever studied the Hebrew Bible in its original language (that is the way Jews do daily), historically sticking to Church-authored and authorized Greek and Latin translations. No doubt, most Christians would protest that the Hebrew Bible and the Old Testament are the same books. Not so – the Old Testament of the Christians is actually their numerous translations, which are, in essence, theological treatises defending specific Christian agendas (depending on denomination). The “New Testament”, of course, is the true key scripture for Christianity, that is the key to seeing Jesus in the Old Testament. No wonder that virtually all Christians and Messianics read the Hebrew Bible as an afterthought, through the lens of the NT. They read the Jewish scriptures backwards and mostly for the purpose of trying to find Jesus hidden there, somewhere. Nobody tells the potential Christian converts to start with the Genesis!
119 Comments
leave one →
Daily Minyan 
I always read my bible from genesis to revelation and the book I studied more was the book of psalm, which I tried to memorize. There are things that don’t add up. When we look thought the new testament eyes, it is always a complicate or vague passage. I am reading the book of Hebrews, it starts with Psalm 2 “prophecy”, and of course it has not happened yet. It’s hard to prove Jesus with something that has not happened yet. Then it goes to the Priest according to the word of a righteous king… I am not sure what it means, then you dump the whole Levitical system because of one unclear passage. Then it goes to the “New covenant”, which has not happened yet. That covenant is with Israel, not with gentiles, and as long as it has not happened yet, how can we say for sure that it talks about Jesus. Jesus is supposed to be a king, because he said it. So we used all passages that talks of a king and we render it to Jesus. But Jesus never was a king. How do we know that old testament passage talks about Jesus, because he say he will be a king. How do we know he says the truth, because it’s written that he will be a king. Isn’t it circular reasoning.
I know why I don’t believe, not because it does not adds up, but because I have a veil in front of my eyes, To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted. So I cannot see it because I don’t believe it without seeing it! Because if I would believe it, then I would see it, but because I don’t want to blindly believe, then I don’t see all the wonderful prophecies that Jesus fulfilled when all Jews will believe and when he had mercy on Israel, just before sending them to exile ?
By the way, it is totally wrong to read from genesis to revelation, because you will pass 6 months reading nothing about Jesus, then you may have doubts! So you have to read their nice “read the bible in one year”.
“By the way, it is totally wrong to read from genesis to revelation, because you will pass 6 months reading nothing about Jesus”
That’s why it’s best to start with “John”. That way one can get to the all-important divinity of Jesus right off the bat, realize that “the Jews” who disbelieve in Jesus (even today) are obstinate enemies of G-d and children of the devil doing Satan’s bidding, that Jesus is the ultimate sinless sacrifice, see that Jesus was clearly and publicly announced as the “lamb slain before the foundation of the world” (in the very beginning of John, instead of being kept from the clueless public as a “messianic secret” as in the synoptic gospels), and that, of course, believing in him brings eternal life and disbelieving the condemnation.
*Sigh*…. It’s all so much baloney, isn’t it? I can understand why Rabbi Shochet had such an angry attitude. But there is a fundamental problem with Christian belief, and that is a point you mentioned, Gene. You said that the problem is that the Hebrew Bible is viewed through the NT lens. As you know, this is the primary explanation. It is the combination of the fact that we are genetically designed to believe — our brains are wired for it — and once we see things in a certain way, it’s so hard to disengage our views and have a fresh perspective.
Michael Shermer, a professional skeptic who doesn’t believe in any of the bible, nevertheless has a YouTube video that nicely demonstrates the power of belief and that lens you’re talking about. It’s quite revealing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T_jwq9ph8k
Dear Friends,
That we can find Yeshua is HaMashiach is a marvelous testament to HaShem’s power and promise– after all, the Good News has remarkably survived despite being denigrated for two millennia.
Gamaliel himself conceded to his fellow members of the Sanhedrin,
(from the book of Acts, Chapter 5)
“Men of Israel, take care what you are about to do with these men (i.e., the Apostles). For before these days Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a number of men, about four hundred, joined him. He was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and came to nothing. After him Judas the Galilean rose up in the days of the census and drew away some of the people after him. He too perished, and all who followed him were scattered.
So in the present case I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or this undertaking is of man, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God.”
Although perhaps a minority (of which I include myself), we still find those who see the B’rit Chadashah through the viewpoint of the Tanakh.
Shalom
“Gamaliel himself conceded”
Says a Christian religious text written many decades after the supposed events. Think about it Kavi – how could the Christian author of Acts know what Gamaliel supposedly said (and in such detail) to Sanhandrin in a private meeting after Peter and gang (i.e. the Christian witnesses) were taken outside? I’ll tell you how – in the Roman world it was common for story tellers to make up out of whole cloth a speech by some historic person based on what the story teller THOUGHT they could have said.
“Good News has remarkably survived despite being denigrated for two millennia”
But it has failed, miserably, you see – it created a non-Jewish religion that has been worshiping a man as god for the last two thousand years and resulted in murder and oppression of millions of Jews and countless others. Besides, do you think that the Jewish Sanhedrin would have thought that Christian deification and worship of a man was somehow an undertaking from the G-d of Israel and that they would have called for a wait-and-see approach? Of course not! It would have been detestable idolatry to them to be rooted out! That’s a clue that the earliest Jewish Christians in no way viewed Jesus as divine or god but simply a messianic candidate (one among many in the first century).
KAVI,
Rabbi Gamaliel’s statement in fact was prophetic in a strange way because what happened was that Peter’s understanding of Christianity (You have to understand that this happened before Acts 10 or Acts 15) was that you could be Jewish, you can keep the Torah, you can keep the mitzvahs, and that you can believe in Jesus did disappear. And that’s what Rabbi Gamaliel says about Peter’s early Christianity. Rabbi Gamaliel says that can’t happen; that can never be because the Tanach tells us that not all Jews would remain a part of the Jewish people. Only those Jews who are faithful to G-d’s teaching and truth. The point is, only the truly faithful servant of G-d is preserved. Many Jews, thousands, converted to Christianity. Where are the children of these Jews today? They’re lost. They’ve assimilated. If Jesus was the Messiah, then why did G-d preserve only those Jews who said that Jesus is not the Messiah and that rejected the claims of the Church? If there is no Oral Torah, then why didn’t G-d preserve the Sadducees? They’re gone. They disappeared. So, what Gamaliel is saying is that you don’t have to work against these guys. This is G-d’s department. He’ll take care of this. And, in fact, that understanding of Christianity has lost. They’re gone. Look at the 1st century Christian groups who held to Peter’s original understanding of Christianity. They died out. They disappeared.
“And, in fact, that understanding of Christianity has lost. They’re gone. Look at the 1st century Christian groups who held to Peter’s original understanding of Christianity. They died out. They disappeared.”
Keith…. and that’s why KAVI was so careful to say that it is the ethereal “Good News” (ethereal, because whatever it exactly means depends on a denomination, since the NT itself does not define it) that supposedly survived.
Shalom!
Perhaps the understanding goes a bit too far when finding those who believe in Yeshua as HaMashiach as murdereing millions of the Yehudim?
After all, we find no difference in “thou shalt not murder” between the B’rit Chadashah and the Tanakh.
When faced with opposition, there was an incident where two of the Apostles wanted to “call down fire” to burn up the Samaritans– yet Yeshua rebuked them. (Luke 9:52-56)
Those who are found guilty of murder will be judged as such by HaShem since He says, “Vengeance belongs to Me”.
Kavi,
There is no denying the fact that millions of Jews have been murdered, tortured, forced to convert and oppressed by believers in Jesus. I don’t understand your comment. Do you disagree with these facts? Of course, it is understood that not all Christians are murderers, torturers and oppressors, however those atrocities were committed by believers in Jesus precisely because they believed the NT and responded as we would expect people to respond to it. Jew-hatred is progressive in the NT and incorporated into it.
But I’m curious about you, Kavi. Are you a Jew by birth? I have found that those who tend to overuse Hebrew in messianic discussions often are not themselves Jews. The issues being discussed are one thing, but the orientation and motivations of the writer are another, and important to understand for the sake of discussion. Tell me, do you attest before G-d that your parents and grandparents were themselves born Jewish?
Shalom!
Jim,
I am sorry, but my computer has been out of service for the past several days, so I have not been able to respond.
When conversing with ideas, it does not seem best practice to discuss gender, race, or any other aspect which would contribute to a bias one way or another. For example, what if I were to say I was an Ethiopian Jew? What if I were to say that only my father was a Jew (and a non-religious one at that)? The list is endless– and yet, any one of them does nothing to contribute to the discussion. It may satisfy the curious, but it only sparks controversies which take away from the freedom of expression without bias. No matter how free-thinking and liberal one is, everyone has a bias in the closet :(
However, to be polite and still not reveal anything affecting the free exchange of ideas, I will say that my ancestors can be traced to the Prussians and the Polish (western)– my relatives were virtually, if not completely (who knows), wiped out during WWII– well, enough said. . .
It is certainly known that justifying the murder of anyone cannot be found in the B’rit Chadashah. Yes, it is true that there have been claims that the Nazi’s were ‘xtian’– but such assumptions, of course, are false.
After all– Why should any faith be judged by those who abuse it?
_________________________________________________
If there are liars and deceivers, is this not what Yeshua already said would occur?
Paul echoed the same saying,
****Philippians 3:17-19
“For there are many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, walk as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things.”
Last, when comparing the Tanakh and B’rit Chadashah, we find both in agreement:
****Daniel 12:10
“Many will be purified, made spotless, and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand.”
_________________________________________________
That many commit evil while “pretending” or “hoping” to follow Yeshua as HaMashiach is a common matter plaguing true followers of “The Way” for two millennia.
I am sorry if this small discourse did not address your question– and anyone is certainly free to “write me off” as one of the “idolatrous” Yehudim or as a Goy. But to do so does not seem truly wise– for if I (hypothetically) were to do the same, would not my own bias be revealed :(?
Well Kavi — if that is indeed your (Hebrew sounding) name — allow me to get to the point. I have nothing against your own belief in Jesus or your love for him or your personal joy in believing that you are saved and are going to a better place when you leave this earth. However, in your exuberance and your attempts to fulfill your mission of saving the Jew first, you are being manipulative and deceitful — and this is what I take great exception to. So my apologies in advance… because I am about to be much less than polite than you.
You have no right to sling around Hebrew words as though you yourself are a Jew. It is disingenuous and intentionally fraudulent. You’re a Christian, so speak English like a Christian and stop the nonsense! Do not try to persuade Jews to your beliefs by having them think you are a brother. For there is no other reason to use Hebrew other than make the unsuspecting Jewish reader believe that you are a knowledgeable Jew. No, you cannot be duplicitous and then claim to be simply the innocent messenger.
Perhaps you are dutifully following Paul’s example he gave in 1 Corinthians 9:20, and thereby feel justified in doing so? “To the Jews I became like a Jew to gain the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law) to gain those under the law.” Paul was a deceiver to pretend to follow Torah when he didn’t believe in it. But at least he WAS a Jew. You are not. So you are even more deceitful than Paul.
You protest against introducing bias into the discussion. But the discussion is really about personal belief and personal experience. So the person on the other end of the discussion is in fact relevant to the discussion. Your orientation is purely Christian. In fact, your modern Christian belief set is not even the same as Paul’s. Your aim here is to convert Jews, and you’ll do it by any means necessary.
The real Yeshua is not the Yeshua of the NT,with so many words that have been put into his mouth. The real Yeshua never preached that he was God — that was the author of the book of John and other authors of the NT who wrote those lies. The real Yeshua was an Orthodox charismatic Jewish healer who preached repentance (read: “Torah observance”) and the imminent coming of earthly perfection. So what? He was neither the first nor the last to believe that. But I tell you: If he, even for a moment, thought that his followers would worship him as God, he would have given them a tongue lashing the likes of which they had never before experienced. And Paul would have been the first to bear it.
So let’s not be liars and deceivers. Because neither the real Yeshua nor the make-believe Yeshua would approve.
Shalom!
Thank you Jim for giving all of us your honest opinion– even though some, perhaps many, would not find it the best way of forming friendships :)
As mentioned, all that is necessary to say has been said, and (thanks to Gene) we all have been privileged on this site to freely express anger, concern, opinions, doubts, and beliefs.
However, if it is truly offensive to use Hebrew, I can certainly try to oblige to some extent :)
___________________________________
Getting back to topic–
What “should” followers of The Way see in the Tanakh regarding the Messiah?
Is there a “true” replacement theology or a “misunderstood” one?
When I first engaged the discussion on Gene’s site, the topic regarded the reliability of the Tanakh and the B’rit Chadashah (First Covenant vs the Second Covenant).
Essentially, followers of The Way can find a “reasoned” unity between both whereby HaShem reveals His purpose to mankind over the course of history– naturally, some do not find our “reasons” to be “reasonable.”
One reason is that the Book of Daniel (Chapter 9) gives us a very specific time period when HaMashiach would come– before the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D.
Other than Yeshua, who has become a “light to the Gentiles”, is there anyone else who fulfills Daniel’s prophecy? Daniel is not a false prophet, so it seems those who follow The Way have a reasonable basis for their faith.
Kavi,
My response was primarily for you, and my first goal is not to create friendships here (although I’m happy to do so). Okay, now that we are being honest, let’s get back to topic.
But first, I want you to have a better appreciation of why I reacted the way I did. And I am not the only one who reacts with anger to your ways, as you know.
Jews are Jews today for one and only one reason: That for 3,000 years, our forbears remained steadfastly Jewish, and most of the time in the face of challenging circumstances. It has never been easy to live a Jewish life. The Jews who are alive today (not including the very small number of converts) are the present day expression of family lines that were lucky enough to survive murder, destruction and assimilation over the centuries. The fact that there are even Jews existing today is, in itself, an amazing fact. Some could say, miraculous. Our heritage is so unlikely, so ancient and so rich, that we are indeed blessed to have been born into this special lineage.
In contrast to being a living legacy, when a Jew converts to Christianity by believing that Jesus is God, almost assuredly, that person’s children or grandchildren will no longer be Jewish. In fact, that person ceases to be a Jew — which is a separate discussion. But when that decision is made, it is the end of the line. It brings to an end his or her long heritage and what previous generations struggled, strived and sacrificed for. And that is the ultimate, sad shame in this. The legacy of the Jewish people is amazing. It is to be revered. It is holy. And Jews must recognize their special heritage, seek to understand Judaism, and fight to preserve it.
By the way, this is why some Jews associate messianic efforts to convert Jews with murderous Nazis — there may be no physical killing involved, but the long term effect is undeniably the same: the loss of the Jewish people.
But you, a believing Christian, may think that there’s nothing really wrong in this — that belief in Jesus is a good thing. My guess is that you would argue that a Jew who believes in Jesus is a “completed Jew”. But my point is — right or wrong — some Jews respond to your happy sharing of the Good News with anger because they realize it spells the end of the family line. This is what I want you to try to really understand. This subject is far more than about one person’s individual beliefs, as it is in Christianity. This is about the Jewish people, our Jewish families. You’re making waves in waters that are deeper than you realize.
Okay, I like your lines so I’m going to use one here.
——————————————————————
But what if — just what if — you happen to be wrong? What if the things you believe and teach others is mistaken? I know you are fully confident in your beliefs, but let’s just say in a purely theoretical sense, for argument’s sake?
You said,
“What “should” followers of The Way see in the Tanakh regarding the Messiah?”
You asked,
“Other than Yeshua, who has become a “light to the Gentiles”, is there anyone else who fulfills Daniel’s prophecy? Daniel is not a false prophet, so it seems those who follow The Way have a reasonable basis for their faith.”
It’s possible I might have something to say about these issues (Well — I’m a Jew, so I have something to say about almost everything… and then some.) But before I offer my opinions, let me ask you a question first (another Jewish trait):
How important, really, is Daniel to your beliefs? In fact, how important — really — are any of the “prophecies about Yeshua” to your beliefs? What if none of them existed in Tanakh? Would you still believe in him?
And if not, which are the pillars in Tanakh that are *absolutely and critically essential* to support your beliefs, without which you would have to admit that you could no longer view Jesus as the messiah or worship him as God? Think carefully about this. Don’t leave the back door open to play the “yeah, but” game if you find that things turn out to be different than you have thought. If it’s really the truth you seek, then when you provide the list of these pillars of your faith, commit to them. What do you hang your hat on? And if the actual answer is that you would believe in the NT regardless of what is or is not in Tanakh, then be honest about that. Since we’re being honest.
Jim,
Not an unreasonable line of thought :|
Directly reading from the Tanakh, are we sure that one can positively ascertain that Jewish identity or heritage is lost from believing in The Way?
From the beginning, HaShem deeply loved all mankind and promised us a Redeemer when Adam and Chava sinned.
The Tanakh was written through the Yehudim which HaShem raised up as a people to witness His purpose of redemption from sin.
HaShem does not lie– so, understanding how He fulfills His promise can first be discerned by reading the Tanakh. The New Covenant writings only find legitimacy when read with the Tanakh as their basis.
The B’rit Chadashah is rooted in the Tanakh– both exhibit HaShem’s justice, righteousness, and grace to mankind through His Anointed One, Yeshua.
Kavi,
You asked:
“Directly reading from the Tanakh, are we sure that one can positively ascertain that Jewish identity or heritage is lost from believing in The Way?”
The most basic fact one recognizes by reading the Five Books of Moses is that God’s plan for His People was that they would take on His commandments and live according to His statutes and ways, which He revealed at Sinai. There, He made it abundantly clear that there is no God aside or beside Him, and that we are not to worship anything in Creation. Just as man is not to worship idols made by his own hand, we are also not to worship anything made by God’s hand. This includes animals and men.
Punishment for sins against God result in “karet” — the cutting of of one’s family line from the Jewish People. God said that He punishes the wicked to the third and fourth generation. Idol worship is wickedness before God, and in fact this formula is visible in practice in children and grandchildren of believers in Jesus being lost from the Jewish People. They are suffering the consequences.
So if The Way is idolatry, then the answer to your question is a resounding “Yes!”. And that is the crux of the argument, isn’t it.
But you haven’t answered my questions. You are being evasive and changing the subject. Quite typical of messianics, by the way.
So please return and provide your considered answers to my questions in my last post, if you will.
Thanks.
Kavi, Concerning Daniel 9, it is ironic that you put such an emphasis on the יִכָּרֵת מָשִׁיחַ part of Daniel 9:26, claiming that it was because of the “cutting off” of this “moshiach” that was the initiator of the “sixfold changes” mentioned in Daniel 9:24, including the “end of transgression/sin.”
You obviously identify this “cutting off” of this “moshiach” with the death of jesus…But what I find ironic about this is that jesus’s death did not accomplish any of the “sixfold promises” mentioned in Daniel 9:24!
Daniel 9:24. Seventy weeks [of years] have been decreed upon your people and upon the city of your Sanctuary to terminate the transgression and to end sin, and to expiate iniquity, and to bring eternal righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies.
Did any of these things happen after your jesus died, Charles? Has iniquity been erased from Israel as this verse states concerning “your people”? (Which refer’s to Israel, Daniel’s people.) Do you still sin?
We both know that jesus’s death accomplished none of this…
So the question becomes, why in the world would you associate the promises of Daniel 9:24 with jesus’s death?! It is clear that jesus’s death did not accomplish any of these promises of the end of transgression among Israel or any other people.
So why do you insist that jesus must be this “moshiach” mentioned in Daniel 9:26?
It is interesting to note that Jews and Christians can agree on other passages referring exclusively to the Messiah! Here are a few:
Isaiah 11:1. And a shoot shall spring forth from the **STEM OF JESSE,** and a twig shall sprout from his roots.
Ezekiel 37:24. And **MY SERVANT DAVID** shall be king over them, and one shepherd shall be for them all, and they shall walk in My ordinances and observe My statutes and perform them.
Hosea 3:5. Afterwards shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God and **DAVID THEIR KING,** and they shall come trembling to the Lord and to His goodness at the end of days.
Jeremiah 30:9. And they shall serve the Lord their God and **DAVID THEIR KING,** whom I will set up for them.
There is one thing all of these verses have in common: They all use a “Davidic qualifier,” meaning that they all exclusively refer to the Davidic dynasty in some fashion. This is a good reason why Jews and Christians can all understand that these future prophesies refer to one person: Moshiach ben David.
But Daniel 9:24-27, nor the rest of the chapter, give us any indication that this “moshiach” mentioned has any connection to the Davidic dynasty, at least at face value…This lend credibility to the Jewish position that this “moshiach who was cut off” in Daniel 9:26 is not the promised Messiah son of David who is spoken of in the four aforementioned passages above that both Jews and Christians agree refer to the specific individual called “Moshiach ben David.”
In fact, the word “moshiach” is NEVER used to exclusively refer to the individual of “Moshiach ben David” in the Tanach…Ever! Usually, the individual of Moshiach ben David is referred to as “David” or “melech/king.”
So your interpretation of Daniel 9:26 actually runs contradictory to the rest of scripture…
Shalom
Kavi, concerning the New Covenant, going straight to the source, lets go to Jeremiah 31:30
“30. Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, and I will form a covenant with the **house of Israel and with the house of Judah,** a new covenant.
31. Not like the covenant that I formed with **their forefathers on the day I took them by the hand to take them out of the land of Egypt,** that they broke My covenant, although I was a lord over them, says the Lord.
32. For this is the covenant that I will form **with the house of Israel** after those days, says the Lord: I will place **My law** in their midst and **I will inscribe it upon their hearts,** and I will be their God and they shall be My people.
33. And no longer shall one teach his neighbor or [shall] one [teach] his brother, saying, “Know the Lord,” for they shall all know Me from their smallest to their greatest, says the Lord, for I will forgive their iniquity and their sin I will no longer remember.”
The passage says that the New Covenant will be made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah. This says nothing about the gentiles. I am aware that the NT attempts to reconcile this by saying that the gentiles were “grafted in” via Jesus. However, Jeremiah 31:31 explicitly states “Not like the covenant that I formed with **THEIR FOREFATHERS** on the day I took them by the hand to take them out of the **LAND OF EGYPT,** that they broke my covenant.” This New Covenant will not be with the gentiles because G-d did not make a covenant with the forefathers of the gentiles. Thus, this New Covenant will be made only with people who are under the Mosaic covenant. (The Jewish people.)
Verse 32 says ” I will place **My law** in their midst and **I will inscribe it upon their hearts,** What does it mean for G-d to inscribe His law upon the hearts of the house of Israel? This is explained in verse 33.
33. And no longer shall one teach his neighbor or [shall] one [teach] his brother, saying, “Know the Lord,” for they shall all know Me from their smallest to their greatest, says the Lord, for I will forgive their iniquity and their sin I will no longer remember.
The primary difference between the Mosiac Covenant and the New Covenant is that *G-d Himself* will put the law on all of the hearts of the House of Israel so that we will not have to TEACH the law to each other. You see, under the Mosaic covenant, we are required to teach the law to each other. I believe Deuteronomy 6:6-7 demonstrates this most clearly.
Deut 6:6. And these words, which I command you this day, **shall be upon your heart.**
Deut 6:7. **And you shall TEACH** them to your sons and speak of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk on the way, and when you lie down and when you rise up.”
It is important to note that even the Mosaic covenant was a covenant of the heart. The New Covenant is not different from the Mosaic covenant in this respect. Rather, as Jeremiah 31:33 explains, what makes the New Covenant “new” is the mode of transmission: G-d Himself will put the law directly on our hearts so that we will not have to TEACH the law to each other. This is a future prophesy that has not come to fruition yet. Deut 30:1-6 echoes this idea:
Deut 30:1. And it will be, when all these things come upon you the blessing and the curse which I have set before you that you will consider in your heart, among all the nations where the Lord your God has banished you,
Deut 30:2. and you will return to the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul, and you will listen to His voice according to all that I am commanding you this day you and your children,
Deut 30:3. then, the Lord, your God, will bring back your exiles, and He will have mercy upon you. He will once again gather you from all the nations, where the Lord, your God, had dispersed you.
Deut 30:4. Even if your exiles are at the end of the heavens, the Lord, your God, will gather you from there, and He will take you from there.
Deut 30:5. And the Lord, your God, will bring you to the land which your forefathers possessed, and you [too] will take possession of it, and He will do good to you, and He will make you more numerous than your forefathers.
Deut 30:6. And the Lord, your God, will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, [so that you may] love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, for the sake of your life.
As you can see by verse 4, this passage refers to the redemption after the final exile. Also, note that G-d says in verse 6 that He will “circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring.” This is precisely what Jeremiah was saying in Jeremiah 31:33!
Jeremiah 31:33 And no longer shall one teach his neighbor or [shall] one [teach] his brother, saying, “Know the Lord,” for they shall all know Me from their smallest to their greatest, says the Lord,
This is in contrast to the Mosiac Covenant, which is discussed in Deut 6:6-7, where G-d instructs Israel to TEACH the Law to our offspring.
Deut 6:6. And these words, which I command you this day, **shall be upon your heart.**
Deut 6:7. **And you shall TEACH** them to your sons and speak of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk on the way, and when you lie down and when you rise up.
The very fact that we are having this debate right now is a testament to the fact that the New Covenant has not been made with anyone. You wouldn’t have to teach me and I wouldn’t have to teach you. (Jeremiah 31:33, Deut 30:6) It is a future covenant which has nothing to do with the death of jesus.
Shalom and G-d bless!
Nicely explained, Yehuda.
Yasher koach.
Shalom,
It appears I inadvertently caused a bit of a stir by not revealing more about myself than what is necessary. And, unfortunately, it also appears the “bias” I was concerned about will occur whether or not someone proudly reveals their identity or, alternatively, prefers absolute anonymity.
Coming to this site was an accident—I find it interesting and challenging to the mind and faith (Emunah).
I am not a professional blogger, have no facebook page, or twitter account. I am pretty much a nobody even where I work and the place I live. The name KAVI was originally derived from the word “coffee”— I am multilingual and love words that have a pleasant sound – so, I researched whether this word would be offensive in other languages and found that, in ancient Sanskrit, KAVI essentially means “someone who ponders” or “thinker” – the name, therefore, seemed apropos.
Although I do not agree with much of the discussion on this site, I have no plans to battle everything—to me, it is wonderful that we can speak openly as if standing in the ancient Agoras of Greece!
Well, I am out of time for the moment—but I will absolutely get back to the thoughts and challenges regarding Daniel as well as Jeremiah/Ezekiel’s writings about the New Covenant.
However, for the sake of completeness in this current discussion, the sages describe both a “Mashiach ben Yosef” as well as a “Mashiach ben David.”
Dear Kavi (or Charles, or whoever you really are):
Looks like you walked right into a hornet’s nest.
This has happened to me before, and I wonder if you’ve ever had a similar experience. Being from the L.A. area, I spent more time on the roads than I like. There have been a few times over the years when I was very tired and driving in “automatic mode”. Suddenly, I look around and I don’t recognize where I am, I don’t recognize the familiar landscape or other markers. The sign in front of me says “405 South”, but I don’t accept it. I’m sure I’m headed West. I look at the sign again, I look around, and it just doesn’t compute. Finally, I realize after a few disorienting minutes that road sign was right, not my perception. Have you ever had that experience?
Kavi isn’t Charles. I copied and pasted a response I had given to Charles concerning the same issue and I forgot to edit that out.
Sorry for the confusion.
Hey coming back to the original issue of Gene, I was reading the bible (book of matthew more precisely) and I bunked into something that made no sense. Did John knew who was Jesus before he baptised him. I also read MacArthur’s comment on the Virgin prophecy. He actually say that the word alma means virgin because the new testament writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit. After I came to another problem, did John the baptist knew who was Jesus before or after he baptised him? So again I read MacArthur and I do not remember what he said, but I remember he had another explanation. So basically all contradictions have an explanation, and if we (xtians) don’t know the answer they usually reason like this “I might not be wise enough to know, but all scriptures are inspired”. My point is this, why are they so quick to protect their own bible, but also so quick to destroy any other book as inspired. I am quite sure that the Mormons have an explanation for the so call contradictions. Are people so quick to protect their opinion and they do not even want to listen to others! Do I do the same, I mean, now I am so quick to close myself to anything else than what I believe? Are we all deceived? Why most people buy a tones of books and say that what they believe is right. When I got saved, I went to a calvinist congregation, all my books were calvinist and everything I believed was calvinism (not the Bible). Then I went to a messianic congregation and could imagine Yeshua with a kippah (why would he were a kippah if he rejected the oral law, or did he?). Then I start reading and doubting and started to listen to JewsforJudaism, Outreach Judasim, etc. and well guess what I believe! People that read Dr Brown are Carismatic, and it looks like nobody is really concern to see what’s in the Book!
Now I am all confused (not that I want to go back to xtianity, I saw it and was dissapointed with their 365 prophecies!) but I do not want (and can’t) convert to judaism either! What a big mess. And G-d said, You will find me when you seek me with your whole heart. Well anyway, that’s confusing!
“Did John knew who was Jesus before he baptised him.”
Well, if we are to believe Luke 1:36, John and Jesus were relatives (through their mothers).
But did John know who Jesus reallysupposedly was? (John said that he didn’t, in John 1:33) But Luke 7:20, while in prison (from which he’s not going to come out alive), John still doesn’t know who Jesus is, if he’s the Messiah or not, and sends his disciples to find out. However, in the gospel of John (and BEFORE John was thrown into prison), John not only knows for sure and recognized Jesus but goes so far as to foretell of Jesus’ death by announcing Jesus to be the “lamb sacrificed before the foundations of the world!”
That’s why many Christian theologians call John “the spiritual gospel”, because it doesn’t jibe with the three synoptics in so so many things.
“Now I am all confused”
I am sure that you are not “all” confused, but a little bit:) That’s OK.
Remi,
Do not despair. I would say to you that although things seem confusing right now, it’s not actually a mess. You are on the road to truth, and you (as well as I) have more road in front of you. It will take more questions, more study, more understanding. And that will take some more time.
You have very important characteristics that many do not: You seek the truth, your value it above all else, and you have the courage to follow where it leads. Congratulations for having those qualities!
You said;
“And G-d said, You will find me when you seek me with your whole heart.”
Well, I think that is exactly what you are doing!
You’re on an exciting path! Keep up your good progress. Be patient. Get a bible with a proper translation (I like the Keter Crown Bible, but you might only find it online. Also, http://www.mechon-mamre.org has a good online translation and other resources.) Study Torah from a new point of view, with your new understanding, and continue listening to those, like Rabbi Skobac, Rabbi Singer, and others here, who can help. Stay connected. The holiness of God occurs in the social context at least as much as individually (if not more so). And a final thought: You don’t have to convert to Judaism to seek God and find Him.
REMI, it is all very confusing, I know how you must be feeling, at least partially. Something important to realize about scriptures, (any nation’s or world religion’s scriptures,) is that inspiration can mean different things to different people at different times. Some people say inspiration means ALL is literally true, others think that inspiration means deep truths of ethical and spiritual value found therein, regardless of time. I think the Bible falls into the latter category.
It’s curious to me that while both the Tanakh and the Christian Bible tell their believing proponents NOT to put their trust in miracles, that’s exactly what everyone does and rests their faith on.
People are willing to ditch the whole worldview, and it’s lessons if it didn’t happen literally AS WRITTEN. I think that’s a mistake. These books were written down so long ago, so, if not all details match, should we be surprised? Human authors or transcribers make mistakes. It’s Normal. Ancient authors also used myth as a literary device back then, that was normal,
Everyone expects biblical people to be somehow more genuinely awesome (read less human,) more spirit filled than the rest of us today. All you have to do is look at the lives of Moses, Samson, and David to see that this obsession with miraculous inspiration is too much emphasized.
The people of the Tanakh touch people’s lives today because of their humanness, not because of miracles or all knowing proclamations from on high.
People are so Quick to defend their own Sacred texts and traditions because it’s their worldview that they were raised with from the cradle, either directly, or through the culture of society. If you are Jewish, you only know Judaism as true, and will defend it as such. If you are born in a Christian culture, you “know” Christianity as the truth. If you are born Hindu or Muslim, you will defend those world views. It’s part of the human condition to have a thirst for knowledge, and more so to find a sense of security in knowing. That being the case, whatever religion you come across, you will find people who will defend it, regardless of rationality of a given position. In many ways, belief serves as a glue for many people.
Ramban once said to the King of Aragon during the disputation with Christiani to paraphrase: “you would not believe in the propositions of this thing (Christianity) if its teachings were not already in the marrow of your bones.”
Ramban noted here that the king’s birth into that worldview makes him (and the rest of us) partial to it, because it’s all we learn initially, whichever belief system it is..
Hi Gene,
I thought I would just bring up Paul’s statement in Romans 11:
“28 As regards the gospel they [Israel] are enemies of God, for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. 29 For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.”
It seems clear that Paul did not think that Israel, despite its disbelief in Yeshua, had lost its gifts or calling from God, or that it had been replaced by the Church.
“It seems clear that Paul did not think that Israel, despite its disbelief in Yeshua, had lost its gifts or calling from God, or that it had been replaced by the Church.”
Julian…. Paul said a lot of things. He was known for doing and saying whatever was expedient for spreading his new religion based on worship of Jesus and being “all things to all men” to “win as many as possible” (1 Corinthians 9:19-23). It’s nice that he acknowledged that Jews were chosen by G-d (after all, Paul knew that Jesus was one), but elsewhere Paul also said that Jews were “broken off for unbelief” (in demigod Jesus, of course, since Jews very much continued to believe in and worship their only One G-d) while Gentiles were grafted in their place. What does “cut off” and “lost” mean to you?
Hi Gene, you got a good point about John, but I actually was talking about another contradiction. John, in the book of Matthew did not want to baptise Jesus, because he knew who he was. But in the book of John, he did not know who was Jesus before the Spirit felt on him like a dove.
Remi, just believe and don’t ask too many questions:)
REMI, I recommend a reading of Tatian’s diatessaron to see the creative examples of early reconciliations. It’s an early example of a gospel harmony of the Synoptics with John. Scripture’s are really bad about preserving important details, which is why we (and scholars) have had to guess into so much of its details. They simply weren’t thoroughly recorded. Scripture is interested in teaching, not details.
As an example, Which Persian ruler is for sure the true Ahashverus? Is it Xerxes the 1st (who invaded Greece?) Or was he Artaxerxes II? Many believe it’s the latter, as he accords better contextually.
Who was the exact Pharaoh during the Exodus? He’s often portrayed as Rameses II in popular movies like CB Demill’s Ten Commandments, and in The prince of Egypt, cartoon (because of biblical references to the treasure cities of pithom and Rameses)
The date of the Biblical Exodus-Conquest as extrapolated from texts is given By examining 1 Kgs 6:1 and 1 Chr 6:33–37 and other texts, they converge on a date of 1446 BC for the Exodus. This puts the Exodus somewhere during the reigns of Thutmose III or Amenhotep II, and Not Rameses. So? Which is it?
Thank you CR, but in the end, you cannot have two truth. So many are trying to find explanation saying that all scriptures are inspired, but if they see an obvious contradiction, it’s not a contradiction, and if you point it to them they will say I am a scoffer. That’s the whole point, I am not seeking to prove the New Testament, there is always an explanation that an “expert” came up with, but if you add all those explanations, it makes only sense if you cannot doubt the authority of the new testament. How many people went out of Egypt, Jesus’ nativity and death naratives, how many crows crowed, etc. I mean, if you add up all of those explanations, the chance that all those seemingly errors only look contradictory, but in the end would be true is extremely slim. And if they (all xtians) do that with their beliefs, what makes us think that we are better and we maybe are all fooling ourselves.
I know the Bible’s literal truthfulness is of slim likelihood, that’s the point REMI. These texts are not about conveying literal historical accuracy (even though very religious people believe they are.) There can be truths gleaned from things which may not have actually happened as written, that’s just the art of the fable as a literary device. Look at Aesop’s fables, The Grim Tales, Star Wars, etc. these literary and film works are interested in teaching people ethical and social truths, althewhile fully knowing that they are conveyed through mythical colorful telling and story.
I think you are taking the word truth too much in one overarching BIG sense, when truth has many layers. Even the scientific theories that we rely on today are known by scientists to be our BEST models that work best given our present level of understanding, they are not dogmatic, or meant to be.
I’m not sure if you have heard of Richard Carrier? He’s a Jesus and Bible myther. He says, “everything we have in the gospels and scripture is conveyed through myth, ergo Jesus didn’t exist.” I’m hearing this guy say this, “the Bible has myth in it, so therefore it’s totally not true,” and I’m thinking to myself, “the bible uses myth? DUH! ALL ANCIENT TEXTS DO! Lol
Carrier is so busy saying that the source uses myth, that he dismisses even the existence of a historical Jesus, but in so doing, he completely misreads the nature of his sources. Even some of the rabbis hold certain aspects of Genesis, or Job, as wholly mythical, or even parable, but modern culture says “oh well, it’s not literal, so, it’s not relevant.” Heaven forbid we treat literature like that.
If we held Jesus to Carrier’s myther standard, we wouldn’t have enough information to prove the existence of any of the rabbis of the Talmud either. I’m saying to myself, “hey buddy? Hold on there! Consider the nature of the book you are reading. Is it there to teach you literal history, or a religious teaching? Tge latter you say? Then why do you treat it like an anthropology survey? Lol that’s NOT WHAT ITS WRITTEN FOR!”
Know what I mean?
Gene, if you are going to quote Paul about the branches being broken off, you should at least provide the context:
“But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive shoot, were grafted in their place to share the richness[a] of the olive tree, 18 do not boast over the branches. If you do boast, remember it is not you that support the root, but the root that supports you. 19 You will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast only through faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. 22 Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off. 23 And even the others, if they do not persist in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. 24 For if you have been cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these natural branches be grafted back into their own olive tree.
All Israel Will Be Saved
25 Lest you be wise in your own conceits, I want you to understand this mystery, brethren: a hardening has come upon part of Israel, until the full number of the Gentiles come in, 26 and so all Israel will be saved; as it is written,
“The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
27 “and this will be my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”
28 As regards the gospel they are enemies of God, for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. 29 For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable. 30 Just as you were once disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, 31 so they have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may[b] receive mercy. 32 For God has consigned all men to disobedience, that he may have mercy upon all.” (Romans 11)
Julian,
I presume you are quoting these verses from Paul to… what? Demonstrate that in his magnanimity he recognized that unbelieving Jews and all Israel will eventually be grafted back in once they get their heads on straight? That they too will be saved? And if this is the case, also presumably, then Paul didn’t really teach replacement theology if correctly understood in the “fullness” of context?
I appreciate that you value that teaching, because if more Christians had the same respect for Jews over the last seventeen hundred years as you do, maybe millions fewer would have suffered.
However, these verses preach replacement, and the temporary nature of it is beside the point. The cut off branches are Jews who are unbelievers. The olive tree is God’s new covenant. Paul has created a new theology to replace Israel’s and preaches that it’s God’s plan of salvation for all.
You believe in it. But, let’s just say for the sake of argument, Paul’s ideas are wrong. Then indeed you would have to agree that, if it’s not true, then it certainly is replacement theology.
From the believer’s perspective, it’s not of course. I don’t have time in this post to get into it, but one can easily follow Paul’s logic back to his fundamentals upon which he develops his entire structure and show you how faulty they are. Paul’s theology is, essentially, a house of cards. Not only are his fundamentals ill conceived, but at every point where he adds a new piece of the structure, he supports it with cracked and broken beams.
For example, in these verses he attempts to quote from Isaiah 59:20:
““The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
27 “and this will be my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”
But guess what? His quotation is entirely wrong! That’s neither the correct translation of Isaiah or the correct meaning of the text. A more correct translation is,
A redeemer comes to Zion,
to those in Jacob who repent of their rebellious deeds,” says the Lord. “As for me, this is my promise to them,” says the Lord. “My spirit, who is upon you, and my words, which I have placed in your mouth, will not depart from your mouth or from the mouths of your children and descendants from this time forward,” says the Lord.
The passage means that God will COME TO Zion to redeem and protect those who stop doing wicked DEEDS. And the new covenant that God here makes is that Zion – read “ISRAEL” will not forget God’s words – read “TORAH” forevermore.
But Paul’s quote is wrong, and his entire meaning is wrong. It is absolutely different from what Isaiah wrote and meant. Not only is it wrong, but he changed the text. He changed God’s word! But don’t take my word for it. Check it out yourself with a correct translation of the Hebrew. Try the NET bible online.
And you believe in everything that this man tells you to believe? And worse, you would have Jews believe it too?
Hi Jim, it looks like Paul may have depended upon the Septuagint for that verse:
Click to access 33-esaias-nets.pdf
“And the one who delivers will come for Sion’s sake,
and he will turn impiety away from Iakob.”
As for the rest, it is not clear who the “you” is that HaShem is referring to. Again, from the Septuagint:
” 21And this is the covenant to them from me, said the Lord, my spirit that is upon you and my words that I have put in your mouth shall not fail out of your mouth or out of the mouth of your offspring, for the Lord has said it, from now on and forever.”
But back to my original point: Paul makes it clear that even though most of Israel has rejected Jesus, this does not mean that they are no longer God’s people:
“28 As regards the gospel they are enemies of God, for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. 29 For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.”
I agree with you that it is tragic that for most of Church has not seen the clear implications of those verses. But then, that means that Israel’s suffering has paralleled that of her Messiah – unrecognized by those who claim to know HaShem. And Israel will be vindicated among the nations, just as her Messiah will be vindicated among his people.
Ah, Julian… You’ve hit the nail on the head. Yes, Paul relied on the Septuagint. How accurate a translation do you think the Septuagint was? Would you say it’s the Word of God?
Consider also, the Septuagint originally used by Jews was only the 1st five books of the Torah, not the prophets, or the writings. The so called Septuagint today is a Church preserved, translated, Church partial document. Jews rely on Hebrew and Aramaic, not Greek texts.
Oy, watching people straining out gnats and swallowing camels is hard to do. Obviously HaShem has many more Gentiles that need to be saved first, before the veil can be lifted from the hearts of His own people. Shalom.
Julian, seriously? You just think everyone who doesn’t share your view is just blind? That’s convenient for your belief isn’t it? That’s called a confirmation bias my friend. Also, historians and religious studies scholars know these basic facts about the Septuagint that I mentioned to you, as does any historian. Including all reputable Christian Bible’s.
Tell me, why aren’t the gospels written in the native language of a 1st century Galilean audience? Why use Greek at all? Why would these Jewish writings, written for members of the covenant nation be written in Greek if they are supposed to be of supreme relevance to the Jewish people?
That’s like writing a document in Portuguese for a nation full of native English speakers. It makes no sense.
Why doesn’t Paul (the PHARISAIC student of rabban Gamliel) write in a language known to his people? It’s an important question don’t you think?
I think everyone here should read this.
http://sacred-texts.com/jud/rio/index.htm
Julian, come strain a gnat with me, will you? And lets take this one step at a time. Tell me, why do you use “HaShem” when you’re referring to God?
Shalom!
We know the Tanakh is not always clear and portrays divergent themes :o
[] The Faith of Abraham vs the Works of the Law
[] The Mosaic Covenant vs the New Covenant
[] Mashiach ben Yosef vs Mashiach ben David
[] etc, etc, etc.
HaShem is Sovereign– a Mighty King — unless He gives us a discernment of His overall purpose, our interpretation becomes only a matter of mankind’s whim.
****Isaiah 28:9-11
“Whom shall he teach knowledge and to whom shall he explain the message? To those weaned from milk, removed from breasts?
For a precept for a precept, a precept for a precept, a line for a line, a line for a line, a little there, a little there.
For with distorted speech and in another language, does he speak to this people.”
______________________________
Another language? What an odd place to find a reference to Noah’s prophecy concerning Japheth (i.e., Greece)?
****Genesis 9:27
“May God extend Japheth’s territory; may Japheth live in the tents of Shem”
______________________________
To summarize,
[] Those who believe in Yeshua as HaMashiach have been given grace to understand HaShem’s purpose in Redeeming mankind from their sin. These believers have been given a hope of seeing Him fully revealed because they have been cleansed from unrighteousness of the soul, the “inner being” while the flesh, the “outer being” perishes. To these, through the same Emunah as Abram, have been given the “sure mercies of David.”
[] To those who do not believe in L-rd Yeshua for Redemption, it would seem that there would always be unresolved questions without any consistent answer (Isaiah 28).
KAVI, for someone who chose a pen name based on the idea of being a thinker who wishes to offend no one, you are doing exactly the opposite on both counts. You come here to a forum of people who are in fact thinkers, but you listen and consider nothing of what is offered. The truth is you have no interest in thinking, because that’s not your agenda. When faced with information that is contrary to your script, instead of thinking, you come up with sheepish excuses for yourself. Then you return to spout off such nonsense as what you just posted. You take the tactics of a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a Gentile posing as a Jew with your Hebrew sounding gibberish, parroting what you have heard in a messianic “synagogue” or read in the “Complete Jewish Bible” or the “Orthodox Jewish Bible”, both of which are insidious and pathetically misguided. But the truth is that belief in Jesus is NOT Jewish, and that you don’t know what you’re talking about. You accept what you read from your sacred pages of myth, lies and idolatry — and you have the audacity to try to preach who God is. This latest post of yours shows incredible ignorance, and I for one have no patience for it, nor for such cowardly deceit in attempts to seduce Jews into idolatry. Other contributors here may display a more measured response to posts like yours, and perhaps they are right in that, but I do not. I don’t mind being particularly direct in response to this kind of nonsense. The Tanakh is quite clear and consistent, but not to Yeshua-worshipping idolaters, who are the ones suffering from so much spiritual blindness that they cannot see or understand.
Friends–
It is difficult, but please remember not to shoot the messenger.
“Argumentum ad hominem” logic attacks help no one.
Even if someone can prove I am satan’s brother, it does not mean they can answer my logical, well-reasoned thoughts.
Where is the answer to the Tanakh’s big questions– its big “discrepencies” that continue to confound the Rabbis to this day?
[] Is not Abram justified by Emunah, not works of the Law?
[] If the Mosaic Covenant was sufficient, why is it imperfect to the point where a New Covenant is necessary?
[] How can there be a “Mashiach ben Yosef” and a “Mashiach ben David”?
Yeshua HaMashiach is the answer to these big questions.
________________________________________________
****As David says,
“For You will not abandon me to Sheol; You will not allow Your Faithful One to see decay in the pit.” [Psalm 16]
[] David died and decayed– yet he will be resurrected someday, not abaondoned to Sheol.
[] L-rd Yeshua was dead for three short days and then resurrected without undergoing decay in the tomb.
Just another riddle? For those who do not believe in The Way, the answer is “yes”– for those who believe in L-rd Yeshua as the Messiah, there is no riddle.
________________________________________________
Is not much of the confusion caused by rabbinic oral tradition? Even a little word like “kerat” has no standard definition without controversy. Israel as a nation would have been cut off at the time of the Judges if idolatry were “the line in the sand”– but no, HaShem continued to pour out is grace upon the wicked and kept moving the line more and more and more trying to reach His people that forgiveness comes through faith.
****Habakkuk 2:4
Behold, his soul is puffed up; it is not upright within him, but the righteous shall live by his faith.
________________________________________________
So, is there a “true” replacement theology or a “misunderstood” one?
****Genesis 9:27
“May God extend Japheth’s territory; may Japheth live in the tents of Shem”
[] Through Shem did G-d prepare the tents– and Japeth has come not only to dwell within as brothers/sisters with Shem through Emunah in L-rd Yeshua– but Jepheth has greatly extended the territory of the basar, “good news” of faith!
[] The Covenants HAD to come through Shem (the Yehudim).
[] Indeed, HaMashiach HAD to come through Shem– and MANY Yehudim came to believe in Yeshua as HaMashiach.
Likewise, Japeth (the Goyim) could only come to a living relationship with HaShem
__________________________________
I fully understand this “basar” is totally unacceptable to some, but not all the Yehudim.
****Psalm 11821-24
“I thank you that you have answered me and have become my salvation.
The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.
This is the Lord’s doing;it is marvelous in our eyes.
This is the day that the Lord has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it.”
****Isaiah 52:7
“How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings good news, who publishes peace, who brings good news of happiness, who publishes salvation, who says to Zion, “Your God reigns.”
Kavi, quoting the rabbinic Moshiach ben Yosef concept and applying it exclusively to Jesus as you do, doesn’t really work. Let me explain.
What you are teaching is not what the Midrash CONCEPT intends. Jesus was not a warrior priest, while Moshiach Ben Yosef is. MOSHIACH BEN YOSEF DOESNT HAVE TO COME IN JUDAISM, but he does to the Christians. The Christian son of Joseph is the only one who takes part in the role of suffering and atoning, while the Moshiach Ben Yosef role can apply to any righteous Jew, and to righteous Israel collectively as a people. These are huge differences.
Christian theological ideas about Jesus as the unique preexistant Son, and only way/mediator do not have a precedent in the Tanakh. Your faith is resting mainly on vague unclear mystical allusions, while Jews rely only on the commandments as solid. When you quote Paul as being against “works of law” are you aware that he also kept them? Paul’s audience is (mostly) Gentiles. He is telling Gentiles not to become Jews. He never tells Jews, “hey, let’s have a BLT,” or to cease TORAH observance.
The big elephant issue is that you are advocating that someone who walked on earth should be prayed to, and served alongside the father. You can point to the Angel of the lord and say, AHA! That angel must have been G-d. BUT! Even if that were so, (it isn’t,) THAT ANGELIC BEING IS NEVER EVER PRAYED TO OR GIVEN SERVICE. THAT SERVICE BELONGS TO THE FATHER ONLY.
CHRISTIANITY ADVOCATES THAT JEWS SERVE PRAY AND SING TO JESUS, BUT THE FATHER ALONE SHALT THOU SERVE.
Shalom
The question is one of those big issues where the Tanakh also shows divergence.
How? Why does the Shema use the word, “echad”? Of all the words to use, why one which is intrinsically plural?
Why does the Tanakh have written, “Let Us make man in our image”? Who is “Us”?
****Why does Isaiah 48:16 have
“Come near me and listen to this:
From the first announcement I have not spoken in secret;
at the time it happens, I am there.
And now the Sovereign Lord has sent me,
endowed with his Spirit.”
Who are these three?
________________________
Which is more difficult, to believe in “plurality of majesty” or, alternatively, “Unity in Plurality”?
There is so much more evidence throughout the Tanakh that could be added, but let me add one more Scripture that needs to be addressed as to “why” as well as “who”:
****Isaiah 28:16
“So this is what the Sovereign L-RD says:
“See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation; the one who relies on it will never be stricken with panic.”
Kavi, why should anyone beleve the obscure mysteries in favor of what is otherwise a crystal clear BIBLICAL teaching, ie that Adonai is Echad (this word means 1 regardless of a plural or unitary form) with asking who the “us” Is in that verse? Why is it even relevant? WHETHER IM TALKING ABOUT A BUSHEL OF ONE THING, OR A SINGULAR THING, ONENESS STILL TRUMPS PLURALITY IN CONTEXT.
Whether you could somehow prove that G-d was triune, quatraune, or any other combination of numbers in one is utterly irrelevant, because G-d says CRYSTAL CLEARLY, I AM HASHEM and THERE IS NO OTHER BESIDE ME. WORSHIP ONLY ME, ETC.
SO, even if you could somehow speak of G-d, the Angel of his presence, and the Shekinah, as somehow being mysteriously one with him in essence, we never find ANYONE IN THE BIBLE PRAYING IN A 3 fold way, or being commanded to do so. EVER! ONLY G-D THE FATHER RECIEVES WORSHIP AND SERVICE, HONOR AND GLORY.
MOSES NEVER SAID TO THE JEWS ON SINAI, FOR THEM TO PRAY IN THE NAME OF G-d, his Angel, and his HOLY presence.
HE NEVER SAID, PRAY TO THE FATHER, AND TO HIS ANGEL WHO WAS REVEALED IN THE BUSH, AND TO THE SPIRIT. NEVER.
ALSO, CONSIDER CAREFULLY THAT THE NT ITSELF WARNS CHRISTIANS THAT A FALSE ONE WILL COME WHO WILL CLAIM HIMSELF TO BE DIVINE (2 Thessalonians, AND IN REVELATION.) IT IS SAID THAT HE FORCES ALL PEOPLE TO ACCEPT HIM AS G-d. Tell me, if the deity of Jesus was so CENTEAL, WHY NOT JUST MENTION SUCH A TEACHING VERY CLEARLY IN TANAKH AS THE OTHER TEACHINGS ARE? WHY ALL THE OBSCURE SHADOWY VERSES?
WHY ALSO WOULD THERE BE AN ANTI CHRIST FIGURE WHO CLAIMS THE SAME EXACT THING VIS BEING G-D ONLY TO LEAD PEOPLE ASTRAY?
TORAH OBSERVANT JEWS COULD NEVER FALL FOR SUCH A TRICK IF A PERSON COMES AND SAYS, “HI IM G-D INCARNATE,” BECAUSE THEY DOUBT THE PREMISE FROM THE START IN LINE WITH THIS VERSE, PSALM 146:3 Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.
G-d alone is the one that you are commanded to place YOUR trust in and worship, not a messiah.
YOUR READING OF SCRIPTURE WOULD MAKE G-D JUST LIKE A GUY WHO SAYS, REPEATEDLY AND CLEARLY I HATE CHOCOLATE, HATE CHOCOLATE, HATE CHOCOLATE, (BUT HEY, SECRETLY, I REALLY LOVE CHOCOLATE. ;)
Now you see my frustration, Concerned Reader :-P
Kavi, Concerned Reader is right. Your position would make G-d into a liar.
G-d forbids the worship of ANY FORM, be it man made or not…
Deuteronomy 4 tells us not to worship Hashem in ANY FORM. Lets start at verse 9, shall we?
Deut 4:9. But beware and watch yourself very well, lest you forget the things that your eyes saw, and lest these things depart from your heart, all the days of your life, and you shall make them known to your children and to your children’s children,
Here we see that G-d is commanding Israel to teach these things throughout their generations. G-d is directly telling Israel to teach their children about the things they saw and the things on their hearts. What are these things you ask? Lets continue reading:
Deut 4:10. the day you stood before the Lord your God at Horeb, when the Lord said to me, “Assemble the people for Me, and I will let them hear My words, that they may learn to fear Me all the days that they live on the earth, and that they may teach their children.
Deut 4:11. And you approached and stood at the foot of the mountain, and the mountain burned with fire up to the midst of the heavens, with darkness, a cloud, and opaque darkness.
Deut 4:12. The Lord spoke to you out of the midst of the fire; you heard the sound of the words, but saw no image, just a voice.
Here we have G-d explaining to the children of Israel what they “saw.” Notice that what they “saw” was no image according to G-d Himself! Moving on…
Deut 4:13. And He told you His covenant, which He commanded you to do, the Ten Commandments, and He inscribed them on two stone tablets.
Deut 4:14. And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and ordinances, so that you should do them in the land to which you are crossing, to possess.
This verse is important to read in context with the next few verses because it reiterates the fact that these commands are not just a “one time deal.” Rather, G-d is commanding Israel not to acknowledge Him in any form throughout all our generations! With this in mind, lets continue reading:
Deut 4:15. And you shall watch yourselves very well, for you did not see any image on the day that the Lord spoke to you at Horeb from the midst of the fire.
Deut 4:16. Lest you become corrupt and make for yourselves a graven image, the representation of ANY FORM, the likeness of MALE or female,
Deut 4:17. the likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged bird that flies in the heaven,
Deut 4:18. the likeness of anything that crawls on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters, beneath the earth.
Deut 4:19. And lest you lift up your eyes to heaven, and see the sun, and the moon, and the stars, all the host of heaven, which the Lord your God assigned to all peoples under the entire heaven, and be drawn away to prostrate yourselves before them and worship them.
So, from this we see two explicit themes:
1. G-d is explicitly commanding Israel not to acknowledge Him in any form. (Deut 4:16)
2. G-d is explicitly commanding Israel to teach this to their children and their children’s children, even after they come to the land of Israel. (Deut 4:9-14)
It is important to note that this is not simply explicit to “man made forms.” Did G-d create Adam, the first man? Yes…But WOULD G-d appear in the form of Adam? Of course not! Same thing with the “first lizard,” or the “first fish.” How do we know this? Deut 4:16! We are not to worship G-d in ANY FORM.
At the end of the day, Deut 4:9-19 what we are to go by. If you wish to eisegetically abuse scripture and assume that Moses prayed to jesus, then that’s your idolatrous prerogative. If you want to assume every time an unnamed angel appears to someone in the Tanach, this angel must be a “pre incarnate jesus angel,” then that is your idolatrous prerogative. Just know that the Tanach, nor the NT supports your claims. For jesus didn’t even claim to be these angels!
G-d gave Israel explicit instructions not to worship Him in ANY FORM. Deut 4:9-19 isn’t going away Kavi…Sorry!
Shalom
Hi everybody, I have an honest question to ask to the xtians out there. I am reading the anonymous gospel of Matthew and was wondering, how can so many people worship Jesus. I mean, they did not know he was god, the Maggie and lamed could not have any knowledge that he was god in the flesh, so, how could they bow down to him. That would have been in contradiction to the Bible. Also, the Pharisees, when they rebuked Jesus about the fact that he was forgiving sin, they could, in no way know that Jesus was god, so why did they get rebuked so hardly to protect what the bible teach? Jesus could have explained “you know guys, I am actually god in the flesh, so I am not blaspheming, otherwise you are right and that would be blasphemous, but Just believe that I am god, and to show it to you, I will heal that guy also.” There are a lot of people out there who say they are gods and lots of people with miracles, so somebody accepting worship is not something, in my opinion, that could fit with the teaching of the Tanack…
Thank you
I should have said “hard” not “hardly”
Remi, since according to the New Testament the “unbelieving Jews” are demonic (children of the devil doing his bidding, per John 8:44), the “satanic” Pharisees probably really really did know, supernaturally, that Jesus was indeed god. (And you know how much unbelieving Jews hate G-d!) That’s why they opposed him. They knew who Jesus was, since satan himself not only told them but was controlling their every move. This would be the same when demons cried out in Matthew 8:2: “”What do you want with us, Son of God?” they shouted. “Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?””
Dear Gene, you see, I have my theory, probably John did not write the book of John, neither any of Jesus’ disciples. You see, the author was definitively an anti-Jew. When he said “the feast of the JEWS” he really refers to the jews as evil and excluded himself from being a jew, you can say that “the Jews” means something else like the Judean, but in the end, G-d would have know of all the persecution of the “evil” Jews. So, to say it is inspired, I would doubt it. I think the author of Matthew did not see Jesus as the third person of the trinity. Maybe “John” did, but I doubt Matthew did. In fact, maybe some people were realizing that Jesus did things that only G-d could do, so they had to come up with some other inspired book. John’s gospel is the only one that claimed Jesus’ divinity. But how could Jesus in the book of Matthew be worshipped… It makes no sense, especially when he said himself that only G-d is good. (I know some say he was saying “are you calling me G-d?”, but they really had to arrive with something hard fetched defence for themselves.)
“But how could Jesus in the book of Matthew be worshipped… It makes no sense, especially when he said himself that only G-d is good.”
Remi, some non-trinitarian Christians explain that Jesus wasn’t actually “worshiped”, but merely “honored” as a “king”, and that the better translation for proskuneo is not “worshiped” but “bow down to” (as indeed Christian bibles translate this same word, differently in this instance, in Rev 3:9).
Shalom,
Yeshua cannot be a “graven image” because mankind did not make Him out of clay, wood, or metal.
From the very first, HaShem promised a Redeemer to be born of the seed of a woman. Is it really too difficult for Him to allow the Son of Man [see Daniel 7] to be born of a woman so that He can redeem mankind from their sins?
A mystery? Absolutely!
And we have other mysteries not revealed:
[] Why did G-d create the world?
[] Why did G-d create satan– whom He knew would become His enemy?
[] Why did G-d create mankind– whom He knew would sin against Him?
[] Why does G-d hide himself from mankind?
[] Why is faith/Emunah so important to G-d?
I don’t have all the answers– I simply read the Tanach and find divergencies which cannot be explained by the Rabbis [the blind guides] or anyone else– excepting the first century Jewish believers in the L-rd Yeshua who have given reasonable testimony of Yeshua; it is in the L-rd Yeshua that I find the answer to my questions.
We cannot fathom what G-d does– it is impossible. The best we can do, is pray that He reveals Himself to us.
****Jeremiah 9:24
“let him who boasts boast in this, that he understands and knows me, that I am the LORD who practices steadfast love, justice, and righteousness in the earth. For in these things I delight, declares the LORD.”
Please understand that I have no intention to “convert” anyone– by all means if you have a solid, well-reasoned line of understanding of the Tanach– then stick to it!!
Again, if someone has a reasoned, unified logic that reveals HaShem’s purpose outside of faith/Emunah in L-rd Yeshua HaMashiach for redemption– then please let us know.
The difficulty is that, so far, it seems that no one has been able to do so?
But to me– that’s ok. Everyone has the prerogative to voice their ideas and thoughts. I can fully disagree with someone and still respect them– I have no absolutely no right to criticize anyone even if their ideas seem “unusual” or down right bogus– but I likewise have a right to politely disagree.
Last– I continue to learn from those who disagree! Please continue to comment as a forum like Gene has put together is valueless if there are no comments (whether for or against)– active forums show value as an Agora for processing and discussing important information!
“Yeshua cannot be a “graven image” because mankind did not make Him out of clay, wood, or metal.”
Kami… you are gravely mistaken about what constitutes idolatry. Worshiping ANYTHING other than G-d is idolatry. Worshiping G-d’s creation, whether people (like the pharaohs worshiped by Egyptians or emperors by Romans) or heavenly “hosts” is idolatry, per Deuteronomy 4:19:
” Rabbis [the blind guides]”
Kami… nice.
Kavi, I’m glad that you feel no obligation to force your views on others. That’s great. The main reason that I can’t and shouldn’t accept any person, indeed any thing, including Jesus as deity, divine, etc. is because literally anyone can (not to mention historically has) made that claim already.
There is no way to tell objectively which person is truly G-d, vs which is not G-d. Even the NT says that the false messiah claims he is divine and does miracles, so YOU CANT RELY ON THOSE CLAIMS AS A STANDARD OF TRUTH. THE ONLY THING THATS RELIABLE, IN SCRIPTURE IS THE COMMANDMENTS.
I USED TO Use the same kind of arguments in favor of Jesus’ divinity, until I realized that even the gospels prove that a claim to divinity and miracles are not suitable proof of a mission from G-d. The closer you get to Jesus’ lived out Judaism and the ethics he taught People to live by, the less relevant Christian theology becomes. It’s disconcerting, but it’s the truth.
Shalom,
Deuteronomy 4:19 refers to “things” made by HaShem– so Yeshua does not meet the definition of an idol– whether graven images or to things created [at least, that is the way I understand it].
Nonetheless, I will drop the matter– you have been gracious listeners in the Agora and, hopefully, I have been a reasonably good listener as well.
I have learned a great deal from your comments and sincerely appreciate gaining your insight to dealing with complex matters :)
Yeshua cannot be a “graven image” because mankind did not make Him out of clay, wood, or metal.
Respectfully, That’s an irrelevant distinction. Even if G-d could hypothetically manifest in a form, that would not make it permissible for anyone to worship the object, because G-d said, “you saw no form, but heard only a voice.” G-d manifested his will through the Angel in the bush, and in the pillar of cloud, but you would never pray in the name of the bush, the Angel, the cloud, or a hypothetical incarnate man. See what I mean? I don’t mean to harp, but this is THE major contention between Judaism and Christianity.
Dear CR, that is exactly why xtianity makes no sense… I had a talk with my wife yesterday, and again I am the blind that don’t want to see, the impure that finds excuses and even if everything is clear as crystal, I refuse to see. But your comment sums up what I think. Jesus cannot be G-d, it would break the first precepts that G-d gave us, the really basic of who He is. But again, I put G-d in a box… he can have multiple facet, and that is The mystery! My definition of the mystery “Plain contradictions”. Have you ever wonder why the xtian bible clear said that xtians should not listen to ex-xtians… I was preaching at my “messianic” congregation, but as soon as I had doubt, bang, I never was a xtian and never understood the mysteries of their faith. I am the outsider that could be used by the devil to put seeds of doubts in dear xtians brother. I am the one who should go in the middle of the seed with a big rock. But again, G-d is ONE and if I am right with Isaiah 53, all xtian (the nations who saw the hand of the L-rd) will said “who would have believe our report!”
” I had a talk with my wife yesterday, and again I am the blind that don’t want to see”
Remi… have you tried sitting down with her and going over scriptures…. calmly? On the other hand, with some people, especially those who believe purely emotionally regardless of evidence presented, that usually does nothing. An MJ friend of mine told me, using these exact words: “I don’t care what the Bible says”. He told me that his personal “experience with Jesus” is all the evidence he needs. With such people, no amount of evidence and reasoning will work. Their brain has long been resting on a shelf and only their heart has been making the spiritual decisions. (I think it’s the case even with those Christians who claim to base their faith in Jesus on the Bible).
Well, that’s what it is… She was raised as xtian since she was 5, reads all the messianic stuff and saw people that changed their life after they accept Jesus. She is convinced that Judaism is wrong and she’s a Calvinist and believes only god will make me see the truth, if of course I am chosen before the foundation of the earth. By the way, I even heard a preacher saying that in judgement day, he will cheer G-d if he sends his own son in hell fire if he does not accept Jesus. Scary god that is! Anyway, sitting and reading the bible did not worked well so far. It becomes quickly a debate and no one wants to acknowledge the other point in case he will lose the debate. She usually comes with “you don’t think you are a sinner that deserve to go to hell, aren’t you?” But I tell her that Jesus could not be a proper atonement. Then she said he was not a sacrifice, but a self-sacrifice. Then I come with the fact that G-d is one, and she said it that Jesus is clear in the old testament. Then she said that I was never a xtian and that I am blind and the I will never see unless Jesus let me see…
I pretty much let her win everything, but I just can’t believe Jesus was a king messiah. I tell her that he was never king… Of course 80% of the prophecies of Jesus has not come to happen yet. When was he a king that ruled over all the earth! I mean, that was a prophecy that Jesus fulfilled? When?
“Their brain has long been resting on a shelf”
I am not sure about that, every week they go to listen they deserve hell and that Jesus fulfilled all the old testament. That he is the fulfilment of 300 more prophecies and they explain them over and over again that same thing. use a little of psychology, saying Jesus is your friend, that you are stupid if you refuse the god of the universe. It is actually hard to un-brainwash yourself. The whole new testament is saying that you are going to hell, that you should not doubt Jesus and that he fulfilled all the old testament prophecies. I almost feel that some Roman out there came up with those scripture to have good obedient people under a Mother State… Pay your tithe dear citizen!
“he will cheer G-d if he sends his own son in hell fire if he does not accept Jesus. Scary god that is! ”
G-d (the True One) Himself says (Ezekiel 18:23) that he doesn’t take pleasure in death of the wicked, but this man will “cheer” that someone – his own son! – will consciously burn alive for eternity in Christian hell. I think that this preacher will be in for one huge surprise.
Wow. Scary stuff. And so very sad for his son..
Remi, my wife is a born-again Christian, and that experience was one of the most profound of her life. There is nothing more important to her. It is a deep feeling that she cannot imagine giving up. I can understand that — not from personal experience, but from hearing her describe it, as well as others too.
But feelings and beliefs are funny things. There are people of every faith imaginable on earth who can report similar types of experience. And there are many, as we know, who are willing to die for their beliefs. Well, they can’t all be in possession of the truth, but they are all equally convinced that they are.
I’m sure others can also relate to the problems you’re having with your wife. Not that my relationship can be any example for you, because everyone’s is different, but I used to hear the same kind of things from my wife. Fortunately, it didn’t get to the point where she decided Satan had me. There would probably have spelled the end. But I have heard the spiritually bind remarks, the hostility toward “the rabbis”, how the Jews are lost, etc, etc. We finally came to the point of agreeing to disagree after a long and difficult period. And now we generally avoid talking about scripture at all, because in our case such discussions usually lead to heated arguments and damage our relationship. So we just don’t discuss it at all, and thereby keep the peace — even though we are each passionate about scripture. Yes, that means there is a significant area in each of our lives that we cannot share, but it’s either that or divorce. For us.
I wish I could offer you some advice, but unfortunately I cannot. Some counseling wouldn’t hurt I suppose, just to try to come to a mutual understanding of how to best interact with each other given this new development. Well, at least know that you are not alone.
Thanks for sharing Jim. It does not help that I have a four year old and that my wife wants to raise him as xtian. I guess I have to live with it for now. Counselling would not work either, only nouthetic counselor could work for her, because I am not saved so they could not work with me. Well, we are not the first couple with different opinion on G-d… but again Jesus said “I did not bring peace, but a sword”…
You’re right. Having a young child who your wife wants to raise with such different beliefs is very hard.
But as father and husband, aren’t you supposed to be the head? If your wife truly follows the NT, mustn’t she subject herself to you in all matters? Neither Ephesians, Colossians nor Galatians put any conditions on this commandment. They don’t say that wives are to submit to their husbands only if their husbands are believers. I’ll tell you what — this will be the ultimate test of her obedience to her covenant! (By the way, mine didn’t pass this test. lol!)
There are some Christian counselors who are devoted to helping marriages. None of them want to see divorce and will work with both of you as best they can. But I can tell you that they won’t be neutral; they aren’t able to be. So the purpose is not to get therapy for yourself but to get help on how your wife and you can best relate to and treat each other. In the end, how well it works depends on how willing you and your wife are, and the individual counselor — their training, personality, belief, etc. You just have to try it out to see.
Nope, you’re not the first couple to face this problem, and I’m sorry you’re in the thick of it. I cannot advise you as to your relationship with God (nor anyone else), but I can encourage you to keep your self esteem and keep moving forward. May God bless you and help you through.
Thanks Jim :)
KAVI said,
“One reason is that the Book of Daniel (Chapter 9) gives us a very specific time period when HaMashiach would come– before the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D.”
I would like KAVI to explain to me, if he would, just how Daniel chapter 9 proves that HaMoshiach had to come exactly when Jesus did? What makes you think its even talking about Jesus?
Hi Jim, just as Jesus is King and we cannot see it, Jesus made an end to sin and we cannot see it. I just guess it’s one of the prophecies that will actually happen (or see the result) when (if) he comes back. Again, we cannot say that he fulfilled something (yet) if we cannot see the result of it. Am I wrong?
Remi,
Well, suppose I say to you that my grandmother is going to return and fulfill all prophecy? Can you prove that she won’t?
Do you personally believe that Jesus made an end to sin? Or are you just using that as an example of something that is argued but cannot be proven.
” Jesus is King and we cannot see it, Jesus made an end to sin and we cannot see it. ”
Right, and as Jesus supposedly said (Luke 17:20-21):
There, no proof of anything is required. Just use your imagination.
Exactly Jim, that’s what I found lacking… proofs. Of course if you believe that all words in the new testament are inspired and truth, then it fulfils the prophecy, but for a somebody in the time of Jesus, his death on the cross could not have shown an end to sin. Most xtians fulfilled prophecies can be described as mistranslation, ambiguous passages, or things that will happen in the future. The best you can say is “It could refer to Jesus” but you cannot say “It is definitively Jesus”. Like Rabbi Scobac said “365 prophecies times 0 equals 0”. Of course there are types and shadows, but again, I can make a bird out of my hand’s shadow, it does not mean it is a bird…
How convenient Gene! But blessed are those who believe and do not see! I received insults when I said that to some xtians at my congregation! Blessed are those who believe and do not have any reason to believe so. I am about to follow anybody that claim to be a god, why not, I’m going to be blessed. I believe him without proof, I am blessed.
“Just use your imagination.”
I believe in the Force… I am about to move objects!
Shalom,
Well, I was not anticipating a call to join back in the discussion– but thanks!
Daniel 9:25-27 says that:
[] Jerusalem would be rebuilt
[] The “Anointed One”, HaMashiach, would come and be killed
[] Jerusalem and the Temple would be destroyed [ which occurred in 70 AD ]
[] Time will pass
[] A new Temple will be apparently be built
[] A new ruler will set up an abomination in the Temple, but he will be judged
L-rd Yeshua is the only one who fulfills Daniel’s prophecy. The prophecy is further substantiated by Yeshua becoming a Light to the Goyim. [Isaiah 49 and Genesis 9].
KAVI,
Can you give more detail such as dates for each?
Jesus is King and we cannot see it, Jesus made an end to sin and we cannot see it. ”
Right, and as Jesus supposedly said (Luke 17:20-21):
Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.”
There, no proof of anything is required. Just use your imagination.
It’s ironic, that this verse (in its way) when read with Jesus’ parables actually disproves the Protestant concept of having faith in Jesus alone, because in this verse, Jesus is effectively saying, “here we are, living in Israel, Aka the kingdom of G-d, it’s here, but not manifest because NOBODY IS DOING ANYTHING.”
it’s ironic that the Church has had to theologize and mystify so many of Jesus’ core ethical teachings, that he very likely meant to be taken literally, and which were lived out back then.
I mean, when you think about it, the notion of original sin itself is the Church saying, “we can’t actually live out Jesus’ ethics that he commanded us, so, maybe they are just metaphor and we can’t really be godly?” It turns Jesus’ whole ethic into a big Joke rather than actually letting it have an impact.
CR: And remove you all joy that you can do good (because you are an unworthy servant) and turns you into a “what a wretch that I am”!
Seventy weeks [of years] have been decreed upon your people and upon the city of your Sanctuary to terminate the transgression and to end sin, and to expiate iniquity, and to bring eternal righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies.
And you shall know and understand that from the emergence of the word *Not decree*
to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until a *Not THE* anointed king [shall be] seven weeks
*seven weeks and sixty-two weeks are not together*,
and [in] sixty-two weeks it will return and be built street and moat, but in troubled times.
And after the sixty-two weeks, *not the* a anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more
*that could be the high priest*,
and the people of the coming monarch
*ROME (like the Roman Catholics)*
will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, and his end will come about by inundation, and until the end of the war, it will be cut off into desolation.
*That could also be the seven years before the destruction of the second temple. There is no gap of thousands of years in the 70 weeks*
And he will strengthen a covenant for the princes for one week, and half the week he will abolish sacrifice and meal- offering, and on high, among abominations, will be the dumb one, and until destruction and extermination befall the dumb one.
KAVI, concerning Daniel chapter 9:
To even begin to explain this passage to you in a streamlined fashion, it’d take me an hour’s worth of typing. Books have been devoted to just a few verses in Daniel 9. It’s enough to make your head spin. So, I won’t go into much detail on it. Also, read the whole chapter of Daniel 9 to get the context for the verses that you are ripping out to prove your claims about Jesus, KAVI.
The major problem though is this. The major problem is trying to work out the dating for many reasons.
Number one would be, “What are the dates for these events?” For example, many Christians will insist that the counting of these seventy weeks begins with the decree by Artaxerxes to Nehemiah and they just sort of assert, “Well, that was 440 BCE.” Well is that true? I mean, maybe it’s 445 or 443. So, one problem is trying to determine what dates certain things actually happened.
For another one, when was Jesus crucified? Was it 29, 31, 32, 33, 28? No one knows. So, that’s one problem.
Another problem is, is that there is a 160 year differential between the secular dating system and the traditional Jewish dating system. So, when was the first Temple destroyed? Historical sources will say 586 BCE and Jewish sources will say about 420 BCE. So, you have so many problems with trying to work through these calculations that if we were to try and do it, we could spend weeks on this.
Kavi, Concerning Daniel 9, it is ironic that you put such an emphasis on the יִכָּרֵת מָשִׁיחַ part of
Daniel 9:26, claiming that it was because of the “cutting off” of this “moshiach” that was the initiator of the “sixfold changes” mentioned in Daniel 9:24, including the “end of transgression/sin.”
You obviously identify this “cutting off” of this “moshiach” with the death of jesus…But what I find ironic about this is that jesus’s death did not accomplish any of the “sixfold promises” mentioned in Daniel 9:24!
Daniel 9:24. Seventy weeks [of years] have been decreed upon your people and upon the city of your Sanctuary to terminate the transgression and to end sin, and to expiate iniquity, and to bring eternal righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies.
Did any of these things happen after your jesus died, Charles? Has iniquity been erased from Israel as this verse states concerning “your people”? (Which refer’s to Israel, Daniel’s people.) Do you still sin?
We both know that jesus’s death accomplished none of this…
So the question becomes, why in the world would you associate the promises of Daniel 9:24 with jesus’s death?! It is clear that jesus’s death did not accomplish any of these promises of the end of transgression among Israel or any other people.
So why do you insist that jesus must be this “moshiach” mentioned in Daniel 9:26?
It is interesting to note that Jews and Christians can agree on other passages referring exclusively to the Messiah! Here are a few:
Isaiah 11:1. And a shoot shall spring forth from the **STEM OF JESSE,** and a twig shall sprout from his roots.
Ezekiel 37:24. And **MY SERVANT DAVID** shall be king over them, and one shepherd shall be for them all, and they shall walk in My ordinances and observe My statutes and perform them.
Hosea 3:5. Afterwards shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God and **DAVID THEIR KING,** and they shall come trembling to the Lord and to His goodness at the end of days.
Jeremiah 30:9. And they shall serve the Lord their God and **DAVID THEIR KING,** whom I will set up for them.
There is one thing all of these verses have in common: They all use a “Davidic qualifier,” meaning that they all exclusively refer to the Davidic dynasty in some fashion. This is a good reason why Jews and Christians can all understand that these future prophesies refer to one person: Moshiach ben David.
But Daniel 9:24-27, nor the rest of the chapter, give us any indication that this “moshiach” mentioned has any connection to the Davidic dynasty, at least at face value…This lend credibility to the Jewish position that this “moshiach who was cut off” in Daniel 9:26 is not the promised Messiah son of David who is spoken of in the four aforementioned passages above that both Jews and Christians agree refer to the specific individual called “Moshiach ben David.”
In fact, the word “moshiach” is NEVER used to exclusively refer to the individual of “Moshiach ben David” in the Tanach…Ever! Usually, the individual of Moshiach ben David is referred to as “David” or “melech/king.”
So your interpretation of Daniel 9:26 actually runs contradictory to the rest of scripture…
Shalom
Also, Daniel 9 is not used anywhere in the new-testament or the early church fathers. If it would have been such a good proof that THE Messiah had to come before 70 CE, why nobody mention it?
REMI, lol bingo. The Church fathers by and large were mostly pure allegorists regarding scripture, and most of them, were only replacement theologians. Aphrahat the Persian ascetic is one of the few exceptions who isn’t as bad, because he actually had a lot of rabbis living where he did, and had fruitful dialogues/argued with them a lot. I think he benefited a lot from that interaction.
I’ve always found it sad that Christians have always had to ask Jews to teach them when they didn’t know something, (followed of course by their usual replacement theology drivel after help has been given. Just Terrible!)
When I was in college studying comparative religions (with a personal emphasis in Christian origins,) I loved that I was constantly seeing parallels with Judaism, but more so, parallels with Halacha. Many halachic principles are deeply imbedded in early Christian practices, and also in manuals of discipline, like the Didache (that Christians no longer keep or have forgotten are there btw.)
For instance, tertullian wrote a whole treatise called “against idolatry,” and in this book of his there are huge parallels in it with the Mishna tractate Avodah Zerah, (it’s even stricter in some practices than the Mishna!) I just thought, wow! Here is a very Christian text with large Remnants of halachic content in it, but the Christians don’t even know the halachic content is in there! Lol
If a Christian were to read their NT only looking to see how the disciples expected them to behave in lived out daily practice, they would find a form of Judaism, not Church theology.
Here’s an experiment for everyone. Read only the dos and donts of behavior as listed in the NT. ignore the theological musings, focus only on ethics and expected standards of behavior, and tell me what you see. Hint, you will basically find a primer course in ethics for G-d fearing Gentiles, with bits of second temple era legal argument. It’s fascinating what you get when you read that book for its actual content concerning behavior and not theology. No honest Christian can bash Judaism once he knows the historical context of the material he is reading.
Shalom,
We would need to go back to Gan Eden when HaShem promised mankind a Redeemer– everything that Daniel speaks about is the culmination of G-d’s promise through Yeshua HaMashaich.
So, without changing the context, let’s look at Daniel’s prophecy:
****Daniel 9:24 Promises
[A] terminate the transgression and bring eternal righteousness,
[B] seal sin, the vision, and prophet,
[C] atone for iniquity and to anoint the Holy of Holies.
****Daniel 9:24 promises fulfilled by L-rd Yeshua
[A] For those who have Emunah in L-rd Yeshua as their Redeemer– they receive forgiveness of their sin and experience eternal righteousness as promised by the “sure mercies of David” [Psalm 32]
[B] G-d set His seal upon the Prophet and Anointed One, Yeshua. Only He could seal the New Covenant by His blood and seal the vision first spoken by G-d in the Garden of Eden. [Genesis 3, Exodus 24, Deuteronomy 18]
[C] L-rd Yeshua entered the Holy of Holies to atone for iniquity [Exodus 25, Exodus 26, Leviticus 16]
Note: The last item can be further reviewed by reading the Book of Hebrews 8:1 thru 9:15
Shalom
KAVI,
Since you came to the blog you have received a lot of good information and heard a number of qualified opinions here, yet you have not accepted one, single point. Either you don’t trust any of what has been presented (which means you think that all of us are completely ignorant), or you are simply opinionated and will remain so regardless of the facts. I rather think it’s the latter, but to afford you an opportunity to prove otherwise, I’m making this (very) long post.
Admittedly, it will be an exercise on your part to slog through it all *and think*, but you should. I can tell you that I spent quite a bit of my time putting this together for your benefit, but mostly for the benefit of any Jews reading these posts who are considering Christian claims about Daniel 9 as a proof text for belief in Jesus.
I want to say that I have not discussed all of the prophecy in Daniel 9. Keith is right: There is far too much to discuss. Daniel 9 is complex. (And made far more confusing by Christian explanations.) What I discuss here is just enough to dismantle the argument. And once these points are made, the rest becomes moot. So there is no need to address every single issue. If the engine don’t run, you cant drive the car even if the tires are still good.
With that in mind, I am going to break down only certain, key parts of Daniel 9:25-26 — enough to prove that the messianic interpretation is false, and thereby dismantling all the rest.
This is going to be pretty long, but please bear with me and follow along.
————–
A.
Let’s look at the King James Bible translations:
First, the 1611 KJV:
“Know therefore and vnderstand, that from the going foorth of the commandement to restore and to build Ierusalem, vnto the Messiah the Prince, shall be seuen weekes; and threescore and two weekes, the street shall be built againe, and the wall, euen in troublous times.”
Notice the semi-colon after “seven weeks”, dividing that period of time from the 62 weeks. This is, in fact correct and according to the Hebrew. But also note that the translation refers to street and wall. However, that’s not what the Hebrew says. The Hebrew says, “broad place (like a plaza) and moat”. So that part is a mistranslation. Also, and importantly, the Hebrew does not capitalize “messiah”, nor refer to him as “the” prince with a capital “P”. These are all mistranslations, purposefully written to convey a false meaning.
Then, the NKJV:
“Know therefore and understand, That from the going forth of the command to restore and build Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince, There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; The street shall be built again, and the wall, Even in troublesome times.”
Notice the revision from the 1611 version: The 7 weeks and 62 weeks have been combined, and in addition, punctuation has been added after “sixty-two weeks”, separating it from the rest of the sentence that follows. It keeps “Messiah the Prince”, of course.
—————–
B.
The problem is, the Hebrew does not say “HaMachiach” or make this messiah out as anything special. There is no capitalization. It doesn’t say “the” messiah, making a distinction that this one is particularly different than any other. He is just an anointed prince, the first one to be installed after the return of the Exiles. In Hebrew, “messiah” simply means “anointed one” — anyone who is anointed into office, whether into government as a king or in the priesthood. They are ALL anointed. Which means that in the history of the Jewish people, there have been hundreds of messiahs. In Hebrew they are all referred to as a mashiach, and that’s what we have in Daniel 9:25. (Are you following, KAVI?…)
Now, I know that KAVI and other believers aren’t going to take my word for it, or anyone else’s here. As far a you all are concerned, we are just voicing opinions. So I’m going to prove it.
I am going to show you the actual Hebrew from the authentic scroll. You will see a few things. First, there is no capitalization. Second, there is no “Ha” in the Hebrew, meaning “THE”. Third, there is a punctuation mark at the end of the first instance of “weeks”, which has the same effect in English as a semi-colon. It is a separator. Thus, the Hebrew separates the time into two periods — 7 weeks and 62 weeks. Fourth, there is no separator between the second instance of “weeks” and the rest of the sentence.
I am going to provide you with a link to the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia online. It is the actual Hebrew taken from the Masoretic Text of the Leningrad Codex — the oldest complete Tanakh discovered. It dates to 1008 CE, and includes the Hebrew punctuation. It agrees with the Aleppo Codex, which dates to 980 CE. I’m unable to cut and paste Hebrew font here because it comes out weird, so bring up the link in a new window on your screen so you can see both windows at once, and then follow along.
Click to access BHS_35_Daniel.pdf
Now I assume you don’t read Hebrew, but I’ll guide you. I suggest you zoom in on the page to magnify the text, so you can see the little cantillation and punctuation marks below the letters.
1. Scroll down to verse 25. There are three lines. Remember, Hebrew reads from right to left, so the beginning of each line is on the right.
2. Look at the last two words on the first line (at the left). The first one is hyphenated. They are, “ad-moshiach nagid”.
First point: “ad” is not “ha” and does NOT mean “THE”. It means, “unto” or “up to”.
Look it up yourself in Strong’s: http://www.eliyah.com/cgi-bin/strongs.cgi?file=hebrewlexicon&isindex=5704
Second point: “moshiach” means an anointed person.
Look it up yourself in Strong’s: http://www.eliyah.com/cgi-bin/strongs.cgi?file=hebrewlexicon&isindex=4899
And “nagid” means a military ruler, often a king or prince leading battle.
Lookup: http://www.eliyah.com/cgi-bin/strongs.cgi?file=hebrewlexicon&isindex=5057
So what this part translates as is, “unto the time of an anointed commander/prince.” It does NOT mean “The Messiah”, the one we are all waiting for.
Do you still stubbornly disbelieve? Well, this is the truth of the verse.
————
C.
Next subject: Weeks.
1. Go to the second line of Verse 25. Reading from right to left, notice the first four words.
2. The first two words are, שבעים שבעה “shavuim shiva”. The Hebrew I pasted here doesn’t include the vowels or punctuation marks, but are to help guide you to the two words I’m discussing. They mean “Seven weeks”. No big deal, so I won’t send you to look them up.
3. But now, look closely under the second word, third letter “ע”. See there are two small marks. The one on the left looks like an arrow-head insertion mark. This isn’t an editing mark, this is the Hebrew punctuation mark called an “entach”. An entach is a break in a sentence, like a semi-colon.
4. Don’t believe it? See this sheet on Hebrew grammar from the University of Texas, where you will find the entach explained: http://www.laits.utexas.edu/hebrew/drupal/themes/hebrewgrid/bh/bhonline/grammar/accents.pdf
What does this mean? That the verse does NOT describe one period of 69 weeks, or 490 years. It does NOT combine the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks. The verses discuss two separate periods of time. The first is 7 weeks from when a word goes out until Jerusalem is rebuilt and there is a military ruler installed. The second is a 62 week period when the city will be fully complete but will exist in troubled times.
—————–
D.
Now we turn to 9:26. Look at the first seven words: ואחרי השבעים ששים ושנים יכרת משיח ואין
They mean,
“And after the threescore and two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off, and be no more;”
Notice the 6th word, משיח “karet”. This means “cut off”.
http://www.eliyah.com/cgi-bin/strongs.cgi?file=hebrewlexicon&isindex=3772
“Karet”, or “cut off” is a particular punishment that occurs in the Torah with a specific application. It applies when a person does something God commanded not to be done, that defiles spiritually and permanently. The punishment is meted out by God against the offender.
Therefore, what 9:26 describes is an anointed who God cut off due to breaking a commandment that defiled the person and was an abomination before God.
Don’t believe me? (Of course you don’t). See Deut. 18:29, and also read the chapters leading up to it. You can do your own research of every instance of when someone gets cut off in the Torah, and you will see the principal that underlies ALL of them.
QUESTION: If you insist that Jesus suffered karet, then you’re saying that God cut him off for a defiling abomination against God. Are you sure that’s what you’re saying?
—————-
WRAP UP
In A., I showed the current translation that Christians use when insisting that Daniel 9:25-26 is talking about Jesus “The Messiah”. I also showed how the translation has been changed to further mislead the reader over time.
In B., I took you step by step to outside sources to show you proof that what you have been reading in your bibles is false. I showed you the real translations and meaning of the predicted leaders (anointed), proving that it is not referring to Moshiach Ben-David (who, as Keith correctly pointed out, is always identified as such ben David — but isn’t here).
In C., I showed you proof that the Christian interpretation of the weeks is false. It is not referring to one period of 49 weeks with one anointed at the end, but rather there are two distinct time periods and two anointeds. There is no mention of how the first one ends up, but there is of the second, later one, and that he did something so abominable before God that God punished him with karet.
Daniel 9 does NOT predict HaMashiach ben David, and it has NOTHING to do with Jesus.
—————-
There is much more, but this is enough. If the reader values truth, he/she will think for himself and recognize the truth of what I’ve presented.
If by chance, you — whoever you are out there — see the light, then your next questions should be: Who are you listening to? What bible are you reading? And why? Should you continue to believe in people who proclaim to speak the truth and the word of God, even though they don’t?…
Shalom.
Kavi, why do people have to trust the New Testament narrative before it proves itself with fruit as being true? Daniel 9 speaks of an end of sin. SIN AND INIQUITY HAS NOT ENDED EVEN WITH JESUS’ coming.
Not to worry, CR. My deceased grandmother (may she rest in peace) is going to come again and finish the job. Believe it!
Hi Kavi, I think your point of view is circular reasoning. How do we know Jesus is the messiah? It was predicted in Daniel 9. How do we know Daniel 9 talks about Jesus? The New Testament says that Jesus died for the sin of the world. How do we know Jesus Died for my sin? It was predicted in the old testament in so many places, like Daniel and Isaiah 53. How do we know that Isaiah 53 and Dan 9 talks about Jesus? The claims of the new testament say that Jesus fulfilled everything that must concern him in the old testament. But where are the evidences? Are all the proofs only at his second coming? I used to hear that Jesus fulfilled 80% of the prophecies, but the truth, it is less than the 10%, the one that could be fulfilled by anybody, like Genesis 3. Yes Genesis 3, The messiah must be born from a woman! I guess nobody could have guess that one!
” I guess nobody could have guess that one!”
Jesus fulfilled many prophecies, such as riding on a [hijacked] donkey. Well, true, a few million of his fellow Judean residents did as well, but they were not trying to fulfill prophecies, just to get around.
Well, Gene, let me disagree with you… Nobody else ever rode a stolen colt and a stolen donkey in the same time!
Yes, you are right – that was quite a feat on his part. It’s hard enough to control one donkey, but riding on two at the same time is probably little easier than walking on water. May be it was a donkey and colt chariot (stolen too, “for the lord”) .
Shalom!
Daniel is a prophet– We know that HaShem speaks through His prophets to show us His purpose. Redemption of mankind has been His purpose since the beginning.
[] Years/Weeks– Daniel says the Messiah would be killed before 70 A.D.
[] HaMashiach vs Mashiach– Yes, the Hebrew text has the latter, yet since Yeshua fulfilled all the promises in Daniel 9:24, it is reasonably clear that Yeshua is “HaMashiach”.
[] Karet – “Karet” well describes L-rd Yeshua’s conviction as a criminal and hung on a wooden stake– the Law say that anyone hung on a tree is cursed [Deuteronomy 23].
The actual Hebrew of Zechariah 9:9 reads;
“Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion, shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold, thy king cometh unto thee, he is triumphant, and victorious, lowly, and riding upon an ass, even upon a colt the foal of an ass.” (http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt23.htm)
In verses 9:9 and 9:10, Zechariah indeed describes the future king who will come at the end of days. He is described as as once the most victorious, ruling the world in fact, yet also the most humble. Not only does he return from victorious battle riding on the lowliest of steeds, a donkey, as opposed to a powerful and regal horse as one would expect of a great king, but his steed is even more lowly than a donkey: he’s on a foal of a donkey. Such is the hyperbole employed poetically to describe the extremes of victory and humility embodied simultaneously in the same person. It is exceeding clear that this describes one animal, not two.
So how could the NT writer of the book of Matthew make such an error, saying that Jesus rode in on two donkeys? And not only that, he even took care to flesh out the story as if describing the details of a true event! How indeed? In a word; the Septuagint.
The Septuagint was written in Alexandria Egypt in the 2nd and 3rd centuries B.C.E., and was, by the turn of the millenium, the go-to translation of the Tanakh for the widespread population of Hellenized Jews who didn’t read Hebrew. It was no different at that time than now when Jews who don’t read biblical Hebrew rely on English translations. (And Christians who don’t read Greek who rely on the KJV).
The problem was that the Septuagint contains numerous errors, some egregious. While the original work, the Pentateuch, was a more reasonable translation (though far from without error), the books of the Prophets and Writings, which were translated in the subsequent century, were of varying quality, some of them considered downright sloppy by scholars. The Book of Isaiah, for example, is considered to have the poorest translation and quite unreliable. (From the forward to the classical translation by Sir Lancelot Breton)
So it should be of no surprise now to read the Septuagint’s translation of Zech 9:9 and see how the author of Matthew was poorly informed:
“Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Sion; proclaim it aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold, the King is coming to thee, just, and a Saviour; he is meek and riding on an ass, and a young foal.” (http://www.ecmarsh.com/lxx/Zacharias/index.htm)
Here, you can see exactly how the author of Matthew thought there were two animals: the “and”, which exists in the Septuagint — but not in the Hebrew.
——–
There are many other similar examples of the NT authors relying on the Septuagint in error. Paul in particular (“pharisee of pharisees” as he was) was notorious for this. So many of his quotations, the majority actually, come right from the pages of the Septuagint, with all their errors.
It is not possible to understand the correct meaning of the Tanakh without reading an authentic translation. Even today, almost all of the traditional Christian bibles are still based on the Septuagint, yet they proclaim loudly that their bibles are the word of God and are infallible.
They are neither.
No KAVI,
The “Law” does NOT say that everyone who is hung on a tree is cursed. That’s your “Rabbi Paul”, the pharisee of pharisees, who in Galatians 3:14 quoted the false translation in the Septuagint. In fact, he was trying to quote Deuteronomy 21:22-23, which actually says,
“And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree; his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt surely bury him the same day; for he that is hanged is a reproach unto God; that thou defile not thy land which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.” (http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt05.htm)
It does NOT mean that the hanged man is cursed, but that a dead body left overnight is an affront to God and defiles the land.
Once again, let’s look at the Septuagint and it’s false translation:
“his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but ye shall by all means bury it in that day; for every one that is hanged on a tree is cursed of God;” (http://ecmarsh.com/lxx/Deuteronomy/index.htm)
Paul used this as the basis for claiming,
“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us..”
But it just ain’t so.
—————
Secondly, you have completely ignored what has been presented to you as to weeks of years, as to the fact that Jesus has NOT fulfilled the messianic prophesies, and as to an understanding of karet — although all was explained to you. It seems as though you don’t really listen — or learn — despite what you say about yourself.
————
Shabbat Shalom, all.
A clearer translation of Deut 21:23 is found in The Five Books of Moses, by Everett Fox:
“for an insult to God is a hanging-person.”
-or-
from the Interlinear Chumash, Schottenstein ed:
“for it is a curse to God for a person to be hanging.”
—–
These are examples of better translations than found in Christian bibles.
Shalom,
Oops, you are right!– I wrote Deuteronomy 23 instead of 21 :o
Let’s start again. . .
From what we can see, only translators imbue bias into Deuteronomy 21– the Hebrew word קִלְלַת is the same regardless of translation and means “curse”.
Deuteronomy 21:22-23
“If a man has committed a crime punishable by death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain all night on the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man is cursed by G-d. You shall not defile your land that HaShem Elohim is giving you for an inheritance.”
_______________
With the source corrected and, at the same time addressing some questions, a better rendition of my previous post would be:
[] Years/Weeks– HaShem speaks through Daniel that:
— the Messiah would be killed “after” the 62-“weeks”
— the second temple would then be destroyed sometime after His death
So, no matter what we think about the 483/490-year period – or the decree of Cyrus/Artaxerxes – or the building of Ezra/Nehemiah— we find HaMashiach is killed prior to destruction of the temple in 70 A.D.
[] Although the Hebrew text speaks of mashiach, since Yeshua fulfilled all the promises in Daniel 9:24, it is reasonably clear that Yeshua is “HaMashiach”.
–Here, I do agree some translators took the original text a bit too far [ remember, I am multilingual and value good translation]. On the other hand, I am not sure they misinterpreted the obvious. Even Rabbi David Blumhofe found enough evidence to say that Yeshua was the Mashiach of the Goyim.
[] Karet – “Karet” well describes L-rd Yeshua’s conviction as a criminal and hung on a wooden stake– the Law say that anyone hung on a tree is cursed [Deuteronomy 21].
Kavi, Concerning Daniel 9, it is ironic that you put such an emphasis on the יִכָּרֵת מָשִׁיחַ part of
Daniel 9:26, claiming that it was because of the “cutting off” of this “moshiach” that was the initiator of the “sixfold changes” mentioned in Daniel 9:24, including the “end of transgression/sin.”
You obviously identify this “cutting off” of this “moshiach” with the death of jesus…But what I find ironic about this is that jesus’s death did not accomplish any of the “sixfold promises” mentioned in Daniel 9:24!
Daniel 9:24. Seventy weeks [of years] have been decreed upon your people and upon the city of your Sanctuary to terminate the transgression and to end sin, and to expiate iniquity, and to bring eternal righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the Holy of Holies.
Did any of these things happen after your jesus died, Kavi? Has iniquity been erased from Israel as this verse states concerning “your people”? (Which refer’s to Israel, Daniel’s people.) Do you still sin?
We both know that jesus’s death accomplished none of this…
So the question becomes, why in the world would you associate the promises of Daniel 9:24 with jesus’s death?! It is clear that jesus’s death did not accomplish any of these promises of the end of transgression among Israel or any other people.
So why do you insist that jesus must be this “moshiach” mentioned in Daniel 9:26?
It is interesting to note that Jews and Christians can agree on other passages referring exclusively to the Messiah! Here are a few:
Isaiah 11:1. And a shoot shall spring forth from the **STEM OF JESSE,** and a twig shall sprout from his roots.
Ezekiel 37:24. And **MY SERVANT DAVID** shall be king over them, and one shepherd shall be for them all, and they shall walk in My ordinances and observe My statutes and perform them.
Hosea 3:5. Afterwards shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God and **DAVID THEIR KING,** and they shall come trembling to the Lord and to His goodness at the end of days.
Jeremiah 30:9. And they shall serve the Lord their God and **DAVID THEIR KING,** whom I will set up for them.
There is one thing all of these verses have in common: They all use a “Davidic qualifier,” meaning that they all exclusively refer to the Davidic dynasty in some fashion. This is a good reason why Jews and Christians can all understand that these future prophesies refer to one person: Moshiach ben David.
But Daniel 9:24-27, nor the rest of the chapter, give us any indication that this “moshiach” mentioned has any connection to the Davidic dynasty, at least at face value…This lend credibility to the Jewish position that this “moshiach who was cut off” in Daniel 9:26 is not the promised Messiah son of David who is spoken of in the four aforementioned passages above that both Jews and Christians agree refer to the specific individual called “Moshiach ben David.”
In fact, the word “moshiach” is NEVER used to exclusively refer to the individual of “Moshiach ben David” in the Tanach…Ever! Usually, the individual of Moshiach ben David is referred to as “David” or “melech/king.”
So your interpretation of Daniel 9:26 actually runs contradictory to the rest of scripture…
Shalom
KAVI,
I have not yet read Blumofe’s opinion nor do I know who he is. Are you suggesting that Blumofe speaks with the authority of Moses and all Jews should follow his opinion?
And since you are so multilingual and are qualified to render an opinion as to whether certain translators have gone too far or not, why don’t you prove to us that Deut 21:23 uses the word “by” — as in “a hanged man is cursed BY God” — and that, grammatically, the man is the object and God is doing the cursing. Your argument depends on answering these questions, so please explain well.
Kavi, head over to rabbi B’s blog, we’ve been discussing Daniel 9 Google 1000 verses
Even Rabbi David Blumhofe found enough evidence to say that Yeshua was the Mashiach of the Goyim. The same rabbi that debated dr. Brown?
Kavi,
If you are serious about understanding the way we view Daniel 9, then I urge you to please take the time and watch this video by Rabbi Michael Skobac:
I don’t think he is. He has an agenda.
Shalom, Friends!
Shalom,
Friends,
Thank you for the link. I am more familiar with Rabbi Tovia Singer’s discussion of the seventy weeks of Daniel however, Rabbi Skobac’s is better.
Their interpretation of the timelines in Daniel 9 seem fairly reasonable– the only disagreement really is who the second Mashiach is. The rabbis say it is King Agrippa or the High Priest, whereas the more clear understanding in history is that it is Yeshua HaMashiach.
Why Yeshua? We have the testimony of multiple witnesses in multiple Books:
[] Isaiah 53:8
[] Daniel 9:26
[] Psalm 16:10
[] Psalm 110:1
[] Daniel 9:24
[] et al.
****Daniel 9:24 Promises
[A] terminate the transgression and bring eternal righteousness,
[B] seal sin, the vision, and prophet,
[C] atone for iniquity and to anoint the Holy of Holies.
****Daniel 9:24 promises fulfilled by L-rd Yeshua
[A] For those who have Emunah in L-rd Yeshua as their Redeemer– they receive forgiveness of their sin and experience eternal righteousness as promised by the “sure mercies of David” [Psalm 32]
[B] G-d set His seal upon the Prophet and Anointed One, Yeshua. Only He could seal the New Covenant by His blood and seal the vision first spoken by G-d in the Garden of Eden. [Genesis 3, Exodus 24, Deuteronomy 18]
[C] L-rd Yeshua entered the Holy of Holies to atone for iniquity [Exodus 25, Exodus 26, Leviticus 16]
__________________________
As I said before, if someone finds that trying to keep Torah is good enough for them– then so be it.
Personally, there is no way I could keep a clear conscience as to my destiny if I relied on keeping the Law– for example, when asked if he was a “righteous Jew”, Rabbi Singer said, “Today I am.” Well, ok, but what about the next hour, or the evening, or the next day?
And since we also find Rabbi Yochanon Ben Zakkai uncertain whether heaven or hell awaited him, why should any one else?
HaShem is the One with an agenda, a purpose– Ever since Gan Eden, He is a G-d who loves mankind enough to bring about His promise to redeem them from sin. So, I will take the “sure mercies of David” through Emunah in L-rd Yeshua because in doing so, I find HaShem’s true purpose for mankind.
Kavi, he said “today I am” because to claim oneself as “sinless forever” even when tomorrow one may walk away completely from G-d into a deprave lifestyle is the height of presumption and arrogance. Of course, a sin for Jews and Christians may not mean the same thing. For many Christians, there is no greater sin than rejecting Jesus as god, lord and savior. And when one walks away from their former god Jesus, their fellow Christians stumble over each other in a rush to declare that person as never having known Jesus at all. That’s how they deal with the idea of being “made righteous by Jesus forever” not working out as planned – by denying reality.
“Christians stumble over each other in a rush to declare that person as never having known Jesus at all”
I never heard that one :)
Kavi, how do you know the Jesus was a messiah at all? He never was anointed, so how can he be a messiah (anointed one).
Despite the somewhat hard time I’ve given KAVI here, I really have no objection to his personal beliefs. I think that good Christians are good people. After all, one can’t be considered a good Christian and at the same time lie, cheat, steal, mistreat others and worse. In fact, one who calls himself a true Christian does his or her best to avoid sin. That is the gift of Torah. After all, it is true that you only understand what is sinful and what is not from the Torah.
So in my opinion he is welcome to believe whatever he wants, and I, for one, have no interest in trying to change his, or any Christian’s, beliefs. On the other hand, it is pretty clear that Kavi would like to change Jews’ beliefs. Think about it: No Christian needs to study Hebrew, Jewish ways, Jewish customs and Jewish expressions in order to believe they are saved. They simply have to believe that Jesus died for their sins and is God. Presto. Then they read the NT.
So how is it that any Christian would know so much about Jews, Jewish scripture, Jewish terminology? It is obvious that he has taken a lot of time and effort to learn what Jews say, how Jews might think, and how to approach Jews in a certain way. Why? Why bother with all that? The answer is no mystery. He, like all missionaries to the Jews and Jews themselves who have fallen, have studied techniques that have been carefully crafted by the Church to bring Jews to the cross. So this is where I have a beef. (Kosher, of course.)
************
What I have said here has never been specifically for Kavi. It is for the benefit of any Jew who may happen to read these posts and does not understand why everything you promote as true is a lie. Perhaps a beautiful lie and a nice, warm, fuzzy lie, but a lie nevertheless.
************
A Jew ceases to remain among the Jewish congregation, i.e., ceases to be a Jew, when he or she believes in Jesus. That’s right! Born a Jew or not, if you believe in Jesus you are no longer a Jew. It is false and it is idolatry — for the Jew.
If anyone who is Jewish inclines toward belief in Jesus (I’m sorry, I should say “Yeshua”, right?) it is because they have a spiritual thirst. They want to know God and to feel they are right with God. I think that’s awesome.
And so, the Jew’s spiritual destiny and fulfillment is in Judaism and the God of Israel, not in worship of a man. Some of the reasons have been explained in this blog, and the information is true. Yet, believers like KAVI will continue to proclaim their faith regardless of the facts. But you see, Christians have nothing to lose. It’s nothing for a non-believing Christian to turn their heart and believe in a god-man.
But as a Jew, you are not in the same position. For one, you are a Jew today because your own flesh and blood — your fathers, mothers, grandparents, great grandparents, and on — for centuries past — struggled and fought against oppression and persecution, remained loyal to God, and survived to this day. Not all were so lucky. You may not realize or fully appreciate it, but you are not a Jew by accident. You were born a Jew by purpose.
In addition to your rich and amazing heritage, you are held to a different spiritual standard by God. God revealed Himself in the great Revelation to His people — and through His people to the rest of the world — at Sinai and through the Tanakh. And all of it — all of it — is telling you that Jesus is not our messiah nor was he the son of God or God Himself. It is sheer fantasy, based on the misunderstanding and twisting of our own scriptures.
KAVI will never stop trying to convert you. He will be very nice, and he will be utterly convinced in his beliefs, and convincing in his presentation to you. But you need to understand that you cannot know the true nature of God through the “new testament” lens. The moment you believe what is written in it, your understanding of the truth will become more and more obscured, and you will find it more and more difficult to recognize what God is telling you through His Torah, Prophets and Writings.
Worse than that, you will — like it or not — be guilty of idol worship. And I am sure you already know that there is nothing worse for a Jew. It is true that you cannot worship Jesus and be a Jew. For what is a Jew? If you read Torah, you will see that there are a number of offenses against God that are punished by “karet” — cutting off. This does not refer to physical death. It is being cut off from the congregation by God. Study and you will see it. Therefore, it is clear that before God you cannot remain in the congregation if you sin before God by worshiping that which you cannot.
If you’re a Jew, you have a LOT at stake. You must answer to your parents, your grandparents, all of your predecessors who came before them in your family, your community, and most importantly, God. Will you take the plunge so lightly? Will you so causally listen to well meaning, nice, enthusiastic and sincere missionaries like KAVI? They want to save your soul, but the reality is you will lose it.
There is no original sin brought into the world by Adam that only the blood of Jesus can atone for. If that were true, then God would not have said to Cain, after the fall;
“If thou doest well, shall it not be lifted up? and if thou doest not well, sin coucheth at the door; and unto thee is its desire, but thou mayest rule over it.” (Gen 4:7, JPS)
What does that tell you? That even after Adam, God Himself says sin is there but you have the power to overcome it by doing well. And what is doing well? That is the point of the rest of the Torah.
As to blood atoning, first of all God commanded against sacrificing one’s first born. He declared at the Exodus that all firstborn males are to be redeemed, not sacrificed:
“And every firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break its neck; and all the first-born of man among thy sons shalt thou redeem.” (Ex. 13:13, JPS)
And we know that the sacrifice of children to Molech was an abomination to God. So why would God ever sacrifice his son? It is patently wrong.
Not only that, but blood in the sacrificial system, as shown from the last part of Exodus and into Leviticus did NOT purify people! It purified the tabernacle! I know Leviticus is complex and confusing. Paul and the rest of the NT writers also did not understand it, nor do pastors and believers today.
Some sins commanded the death penalty, and unlike today, the punishment was carried out. What was left was sin of a lower nature and unintentional sin. These polluted the sanctuary, and THAT was how blood was used. As to the people’s sins? They were removed by the live goat on Yom Kippur. On that day, two goats were brought. One was determined by lot to be the sacrifice, and its blood was applied to the Holy of Holies, the Altar and the Tent of Meeting. The blood, because of its life, was the “detergent”, if you will, that cleansed the remaining sin from the holy places. THAT is the meaning of “atonement”.
After that was done, the live goat was brought forth:
“And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, EVEN ALL THEIR SINS; and he shall put them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of an appointed man into the wilderness. And the goat shall bear upon him ALL THEIR INIQUITIES unto a land which is cut off; and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness. (Lev 16:21-22, JPS)
So: No original sin, no blood atonement, no Jesus sacrifice. And the fantasy goes on. There is no end to it. There are hundreds, at least, Christian misappropriation of our scriptures. The missionary arguments are so numerous and so seemingly right, they will make your head spin. I’m not going to continue to discuss scripture with Kavi. Because he does not want to see. He only wants to convert you.
But don’t believe a word of it. You must not believe it. It is not true, and it is not for you.
Read the JPS Tanakh, and don’t regard any Christian bible. Find a teacher (rabbi) you like, listen and learn. Find a congregation you like and become part of the community. There is love, there is family, there is wisdom, and there resides the true revelations of God.
If you’re still on the fence, check out truth2u.org, outreachjudaism.org and jewsforjudaism.ca There, you will hear the real truth.
Shalom.
Shalom,
[] Beliefs?
Jim describes a truthful reality– beliefs have temporal and eternal consequences.
Gene also describes to us a truthful reality– “christianity” has so many false followers and false accusers, does anyone really know what an “xtian” is?
As such, I prefer to identify as one of the “Mashiachim” because it forces me to explain why I believe in “The Way”. I have zero basis for believing in Yeshua as HaMashiach if its deep roots are not found in the Tanakh as HaShem’s redemptive purpose for mankind.
[] Does one really “convert” to HaShem’s truth?
HaShem’s Word came to mankind through the descendents of Abraham– so if upon a thorough, demanding, and critical examination of the Tanakh, the Yehudim find that Yeshua of the B’rit Chadashah is indeed HaMashiach, are they still not the Yehudim that HaShem made them from birth?
Our outer frame dies and, by our sin, we return to dust– so instead, G-d seeks out in mankind not what is external, but the eternal soul.
****Psalm 51:6
“Behold, truth You desire in the innermost being; You shall make me to know concealed wisdom.”
[] A final few thoughts?
For myself, HaShem’s basar of redemption is anchored in the Tanakh– the promised “sure mercies of David” are made known and alive through Emunah in Yeshua HaMashiach. [Psalm 32:1-2, Isaiah 55:3]
HaShem is not unapproachable and beyond mankind bringing Him honest, tough questions! He will always reward those who diligently seek Him and His Truth.
****Isaiah 40:8
“The grass withers, the flower fades, but the Word of our G-d will stand forever.”
Christianity did replace the Jewish G-d with a new pagan G-dhead modeled after Platonian and Pythagorian ideas, the replaces Jewish law with and anti-law very antisemitic replacement theology, they replaced the Jewish people with a third group of genderless none people, they replace the Messianic King Messiah meant to redeem national Israel, establish the Davidic Kingdom initiate the Messianic age of Peace, and rebuild the temple with a mysterious messianic of cosmic invisible powers, Guelah became a mental delusion, a metaphor for brain washing. We stail await Mashiach and national redemption.
I have read this book, The Simple Gospel of the Messiah, by L K Kimble at http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/550805. There is a book two, but this book really opened my eyes as to the many, many mistakes made by the Christian churches today. You should check it out.
Richard, FYI, the messiah has not come yet!
Right. The fact that the book refers to Jesus as “our Messiah” means that there’s no reason to read the work and delve into “mistakes” made by the Christian churches vs what Kimble wants to reveal as “correct” interpretation. We can consider that none of it is correct.
Chrsitan tried to invent their proper interpretation to correct the mistakes of the non-testament. Jesus could not be G-d, so some invented the trinity, other oneness, other they say he was an angel, other say he was the memrah, other say is was a man.
If you are wrong you go to hell, because the gost did not reveal it to you. Too bad, you are saved by your proper interpretation. Only those who have the proper understanding (the small way) of who Jesus was can be saved.
Good luck!
If you are interested in ferreting out the actual sayings of Jesus, this is a book I highly recommend: The Authentic Gospel of Jesus, by Geza Vermes (Oxford). It’s available used on Amazon for about $5 – $6, including shipping — and well worth it.
Vermes, a Jewish-born Hungarian was first a Catholic priest, but “grew out of Christianity” as he studied more deeply. He became an accomplished scholar, an authority on the Dead Sea Scrolls, and was a professor with the Oriental Studies department at Oxford University and professor emeritus after his retirement. He was considered the world authority on the historical Jesus. This book is quite revealing.
No “true” christian would ever read anything that could contradict their core belief and make them doubt Jesus. Just the same the JW, but without the official statement from the church. The first thing they asked me when I told my “messianic” congregation that I did not believe in Jesus, they asked me if I went to Jews for Judaism. I said yes (I doubt first, then I went after), and they told me I should not have gone, because they have good arguments to make you doubt Jesus.
If you are a good christian that never wants to have any doubts, just read everything that will confirm your theology. They will repeat the same garbage you heard since you became a babe in Jesus and they will continue to feed you the same milk-of-lies and you will become strong in the faith, to continue the advancement of the Roman empire, or most likely the clay of the Babylonian Statue (AKA Christian that rebelled against Rome)
“or most likely the clay of the Babylonian Statue (AKA Christian that rebelled against Rome)”
You mean Byzantine?…
I doubt… the Byzantine empire was not destroyed by the stone…
Can we say that the Roman Empire was destroy?
Wasn’t all the empire giving their tributes to Rome and everybody forced to pay their 10% tribute to the shwoly Roman Empire?
Then the protestant would not pay tributes to them and did not mix with them, but still worship the same god.
There are a few possibility.
Rome and HRE
(ROME including the HRE) and Protestant
(Rome including the HRE) and Muslims
who did possess the land for
Rome and Byzantine
None of them mix really well. I still don’t figure that one out totally but they pretty much all the same for me.