BibleForums Christian Message Board
Bible Talk => Eschatology => Topic started by: RandyPNW on June 15, 2021, 12:11:53 PM
-
This subject is controversial, but I'd like to share my opinion that God saves nations, as well as individuals. These two concepts are, however, different in their substance. Individual Salvation is a matter of being spiritually reborn, and completely changed on the inside into a new creature so that God can be properly put 1st in everything. But national salvation has to do with preserving the infrastructure of government, society, and people so that an entire organization of people can be blessed by the interrelationship of many unique talents. God wishes to save both individuals and nations in this way.
National Salvation is more like deliverance in wartime, such as deliverance from an enemy. It is the preservation of the entire national structure against the threat of some outside force wishing to destroy it. The OT Scriptures were focused many times on the preservation of the nation Israel, because God promised Abraham natural descendants would form into a nation and an eternal testimony to His faithfulness. It was a reward for the righteousness of Abraham in his response to God's word.
I believe Israel was given, by God, to be a model for all nations, so that all nations would learn how to be righteous and to please God, so that they also would form into nations that God would preserve. We know, from the OT stories, that Israel succeeded as a nation when they were righteous, but fell as a nation when they turned against God's word and rebelled against it.
Though there are many prophecies in the Scriptures that speak of many nations bringing glory to the Lord, and causing His glory to be global, not much is mentioned specifically of "Christian nations." And so, some get the idea that since Israel seemed to have passed away, God doesn't save nations anymore.
But the reality is, God didn't mention "Christian nations" specifically because they had not yet developed in the time of the writing of the NT Scriptures. Historically, God fulfilled the 1st stage in His promises to Abraham by 1st gathering Israel as a nation, and then gathering Christian nations. God had also promised Abraham a family of faith among nations.
The last stage in fulfilling these promises God will send Christ back to judge the world, so that nations can no longer be oppressed and coerced to fall from their Christian faith. When Christ returns, both Israel and many nations will, I believe, become permanent Christian nations.
Just thought I would share this for your interest. Those who have turned against the idea of nations being saved by God are missing out, I think. They don't realize that God is restoring Israel as a nation, after all. Though Israel isn't Christian yet, God may be preparing them for final judgment before He saves them.
Furthermore, it is to our benefit to believe that nations can be saved. By the example of Israel we know that when we repent of our sins, and turn to Christ and live in righteousness, God will hear our prayers and deliver our nation. If we don't know this, we won't testify to the righteousness our nation needs to be saved! Even if the majority in our nation don't listen, it is still necessary to preach the truth of Christian righteousness, because God will use this testimony to hold those who hear accountable. He can then judge and remove the wicked to make a better place for those who are righteous.
-
The only nation of importance in the eyes of God, is the faithful Christian nation of peoples from every tribe, race, nation and language. Revelation 5:9-10
Every country of the world today consists of peoples of many mixed ethnicities. The idea that one of those countries has a special place in God's heart, is quite wrong.
As Ezekiel 34:11-16 tells us, it will only be after a Day of darkness, that the faithful 'sheep' of the Christians, will be gathered and brought out of the world, into their own Land, where God will nurture them.
THEY will be the Hephzibar people of God and their land; Beulah. Isaiah 62:1-5
-
As Ezekiel 34:11-16 tells us, it will only be after a Day of darkness, that the faithful 'sheep' of the Christians, will be gathered and brought out of the world, into their own Land, where God will nurture them.
Ezekiel 34 does not mention Christians.
-
It talks about the Lord's faithful sheep. The people Jesus described in John 10:1-27
Ezekiel 34:11-31 For the Lord says: Now I will take thought for My sheep [every true Christian, Rev 5:9-10] and search for them. As a shepherd gathers his flock when they are lost, so I shall rescue them from all the places that they were scattered in a Day of cloud and darkness. I shall lead them out from the nations and gather them from all the places where they were scattered and bring them home to their own country.”
The pasture for My people is the Land of Israel. They will thrive and find rest there. I shall search for the lost, bandage the injured, strengthen the sick and give My flock the proper food.
Now, I shall judge between the fat sheep and the lean. You rams and goats, [bad leaders] have taken the best pastures and muddied the drinking water. Therefore I will save My flock and they will be ravaged no more. Zephaniah 3:1-8
I shall set over them My servant David he will care for them and will be their God. I shall make a covenant with them to ensure peace and prosperity. The Land will bear great crops of fruit and produce. When I rescue them from the power of their enemies, then they will know that I am the Lord.
Then they will know that I am with them and they are My people. You are My flock, that I feed and I am your God. Isaiah 62:1-5, Jeremiah 4:12-18, Hosea 3:1-5
His Christian people found and rescued from wherever they are after the ‘Day of cloud and darkness” - another description of the Lord’s Day of vengeance. They are brought home to their heritage, the holy Land. Ephesians 1:11, Acts 3:25 All of His people, no matter what their health or age, will thrive and find rest. But first, they will be judged and those priests and leaders who have led their flock astray will not enter the Land. Jeremiah 14:14-16
When His faithful Christian people, out of every tribe, race, nation and language, are rescued – then they will know that; “I am with them and you are My people”. Not yet as a visible Presence, until the Return of Jesus. Jeremiah 14:11-16, Ezekiel 20:34-38
-
In order to understand end time events, it is necessary to be clear about the provable fact of the continued separation of the House of Judah (the Jews) from the House of Israel (the 10 Northern tribes). While, at present, about half of the world’s Jews live in the State of Israel, they do not claim descent from tribes other than Judah, Benjamin and Levi.
It is God’s plan that the ten Northern tribes of Israel and the Jews, be dispersed around the world and that Israel lose its identity; Ezekiel 36. It is them who have, in the main, become Christian.
The restoration and redemption of the Lord’s people, is a theme well covered by almost all the prophets. His people descendants of all the 12 tribes and every Christian who loves the Lord and follows His ways, Jew or Gentile.
Prophecy is quite clear about the eventual gathering of all the Israel of God, Galatians 6:16, into the Land promised to their forefathers. When this will happen is the question to consider. Most church teaching says this will occur at the time of Jesus’ return, when He gathers His chosen from the four corners of the earth’. Matthew 24:31. As Israel is not specified, these people will be from every race nation and language – those who have kept their faith in God and have not taken the mark of the beast.
Careful study of Scripture makes it clear that the Christian Israelites [Amos 9:8b-12] will resettle all of the Land promised to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The current inhabitants of Greater Israel face judgement in this next prophesied event – the Day of the Lord’s vengeance and wrath. Isaiah 2:12-22, Ezekiel 21:6-7, Hosea 3:3-6 & 12-15, Zephaniah 1:1-18, Revelation 6:12-17
His people, the faithful Christian Israelites, from every tribe, race, nation and language, will be saved and protected – Hosea 11:8-9. They will be the Light to the nations and will prepare for the coming Kingdom of Jesus.
Ezekiel 20:36-44 ...’I will state My case with you, as in the days of Egypt’. This second Exodus of the Israelites will take place in a similar way as the first. Then both verses 42 and 44 say: ‘You will know that I am the Lord ‘. Therefore all this takes place before the return of Jesus, as then all the world will know and see His glory and presence.
We, as Christians, must lead lives that will be judged worthy, so when this gathering of His people happens – in the near future, we may be accepted to live in the Land. Isaiah 35:1-10
8
-
The only nation of importance in the eyes of God, is the faithful Christian nation of peoples from every tribe, race, nation and language. Revelation 5:9-10
Every country of the world today consists of peoples of many mixed ethnicities. The idea that one of those countries has a special place in God's heart, is quite wrong.
As Ezekiel 34:11-16 tells us, it will only be after a Day of darkness, that the faithful 'sheep' of the Christians, will be gathered and brought out of the world, into their own Land, where God will nurture them.
THEY will be the Hephzibar people of God and their land; Beulah. Isaiah 62:1-5
The problem with this, brother, is that God does use the word "nations" in His prophecies. And He did call a nation, Israel, into existence, and treated them as such.
Though I don't dispute your sense that the Church is preeminently more important that all nations, as a whole, I would say that God considered nations important along with individuals who are saved. These two things are not mutually exclusive. Saved individuals do live in nations, and it is beneficial if the nation lived in is a Christian nation, particularly when the nation is practicing their Christianity.
I would say that nations rise and fall. The same would be true of Christian nations. And just because Christian nations have fallen, and just because the Israeli nation has fallen, doesn't mean that they can't rise again.
-
Firstly; Isaiah 40:15-17 To the Lord, all the nations are as drops in a bucket, no more than specks of dust, He reckons them as less than nothing.
Then; it will only be righteous, faithful Christian people who will go to live in all of the holy Land soon after the Lord has cleared and cleansed it. Isaiah 62:1-5 The new Christian nation of Beulah.
Beulah won't be a part of the One World Govt, but will be under the control of the 'beast' during the final 42 months. Daniel 7:23-25, Revelation 13:5-8
After Jesus Returns, there will be only believing people on earth. Zechariah 14:3-21
-
The nation of Israel will always exist.
Jeremiah 31
This is what the LORD says, he who appoints the sun to shine by day, who decrees the moon and stars to shine by night, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar-- the LORD Almighty is his name:
"Only if these decrees vanish from my sight," declares the LORD, "will the descendants of Israel ever cease to be a nation before me." This is what the LORD says: "Only if the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth below be searched out will I reject all the descendants of Israel because of all they have done," declares the LORD.
-
The nation of Israel will always exist.
Jeremiah 31
This is what the LORD says, he who appoints the sun to shine by day, who decrees the moon and stars to shine by night, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar-- the LORD Almighty is his name:
"Only if these decrees vanish from my sight," declares the LORD, "will the descendants of Israel ever cease to be a nation before me." This is what the LORD says: "Only if the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth below be searched out will I reject all the descendants of Israel because of all they have done," declares the LORD.
Yes, but does the Jewish State of Israel comprise all of the descendants of Israel, that is: of Jacob?
Surely from the prophesies given to Jacobs descendants also by Moses; Genesis 49:1-27 and in Deuteronomy 33:1-29, they cannot be or even representative of ALL of Jacobs posterity.
God did exile both the House of Israel, the ten Northern tribes and the House of Judah, the two southern tribes. They all were scattered among the nations and just half of Judah have returned; but in apostasy.
God knows who the true Israelites are, Amos 9:9 and He promises that ALL will be gathered back some day. Isaiah 11:11-12
However at that gathering, as stated by Ezekiel 20:33-38, only the righteous will be allowed to go and live in all of the holy Land. Isaiah 35:1-10 Obviously, this is yet to happen.
-
Yes, but does the Jewish State of Israel comprise all of the descendants of Israel, that is: of Jacob?
It doesn't say anywhere "all the descendants of Israel". God simply says that the descendants of Israel will always be a nation. And since the Jewish people, that is to say "the descendants of Israel" have always been a distinct people, it seems safe to say that this is who God is referring to.
Surely from the prophesies given to Jacobs descendants also by Moses; Genesis 49:1-27 and in Deuteronomy 33:1-29, they cannot be or even representative of ALL of Jacobs posterity.
God did exile both the House of Israel, the ten Northern tribes and the House of Judah, the two southern tribes. They all were scattered among the nations and just half of Judah have returned;
Yes, as a distinct people.
but in apostasy.
This seems presumptive. The practice of Judaism is apostasy?
God knows who the true Israelites are, Amos 9:9
Again, God says that the "descendants of Israel" will always be a nation. And the Jewish people have always been a nation, even when "scattered amongst the nations" as Amos 9:9 says.
However at that gathering, as stated by Ezekiel 20:33-38, only the righteous will be allowed to go and live in all of the holy Land.
Verse 42 and 43 say the opposite, that the sinners will remember their wicked ways. So obviously some sinners will be brought back to the land. In fact, verse 44 and elsewhere (36:22 for example) God plainly states that He will bring the Jews back from exile not because they deserve it, but for the sake of His name.
-
all the descendants of Israel". God simply says that the descendants of Israel will always be a nation. And since the Jewish people, that is to say "the descendants of Israel" have always been a distinct people, it seems safe to say that this is who God is referring to.
Reply Keraz -
The scattered Israelites are said to be as many as the sands of the sea.
This is far more than the 8 million Jews in Israel, plus maybe another 8 mill still in dispersion.
The Northern ten tribes have not yet rejoined with Judah, Ezekiel 37 remains to be fulfilled.
Note; in Hosea 8:8 that Israel is swallowed up among the nations.
As for the religion of Judaism, maybe it is acceptable to God, but the schism's in it and the general rejection of any religion by the majority of the citizens of Israel, make that nation just like any other secular people group.
-
The scattered Israelites are said to be as many as the sands of the sea.
This is far more than the 8 million Jews in Israel, plus maybe another 8 mill still in dispersion.
Who's to say how many that is? Considering that they all descended from one man, Abraham, it seems like an impressive number. Furthermore, unlike other nations who have ceased to exist (Ammonites Moabites Idumeans Hittites Assyrians Babylonians and on and on...) every generation has had millions of Jews. Over 30 centuries that amounts to a very large number of people.
The Northern ten tribes have not yet rejoined with Judah, Ezekiel 37 remains to be fulfilled.
Other aspects of 37 have also not been fulfilled. Nonetheless we are on our way.
Note; in Hosea 8:8 that Israel is swallowed up among the nations.
Where do you think we've been the last 2000 years?
As for the religion of Judaism, maybe it is acceptable to God, but the schism's in it and the general rejection of any religion by the majority of the citizens of Israel, make that nation just like any other secular people group.
Jews are not a secular people group. We are reading the same holy books, speaking the same language, and celebrating the same holy days as our ancestors did 3000 years ago. That's not trivial.
-
We have discussed this issue of who are the true people of God, before.
If I remember rightly, I said to you, Fenris; that I had attended a service at the Great Synagogue on George Street, Jerusalem.
There were very few people there and the service seemed to be just a rote show of ceremonially reading the Scroll and some chanting. My wife had to sit in splendid isolation and behind a curtain!
Statistics inform us that over half of the Israelis are atheist's.
There IS coming a terrible Day when the Lord will clear and cleanse all of the holy Land. The nation of the Jewish State of Israel, will not survive. Isaiah 22:1-14, Amos 2:4-5, Jeremiah 25:29, Ezekiel 21:1-7, +
-
We have discussed this issue of who are the true people of God, before.
If I remember rightly, I said to you, Fenris; that I had attended a service at the Great Synagogue on George Street, Jerusalem.
There were very few people there and the service seemed to be just a rote show of ceremonially reading the Scroll and some chanting. My wife had to sit in splendid isolation and behind a curtain!
So you went to one synagogue for one service and now you're an expert on Judaism?
Statistics inform us that over half of the Israelis are atheist's.
No. This is false. A large number of Israelis self identify as "secular". But then you ask them if they believe in God, and they answer "yes". And they keep the Sabbath. And they eat kosher food. And they keep the holidays from the bible. So obviously the word "secular" means something different to an Israeli than it does to an American.
There IS coming a terrible Day when the Lord will clear and cleanse all of the holy Land. The nation of the Jewish State of Israel, will not survive. Isaiah 22:1-14
Isaiah 22 was a warning for the Jews alive that time. Not to anyone now. My goodness, just read the chapter. Verse 15: Go, say to this steward, to Shebna the palace administrator He's long dead and buried.
Amos 2:4-5
As above. The chapter first warns Moab, a country that hasn't existed for 2500 years. It then warns the Jews at that time, not today.
. Jeremiah 25:29,
Again, just read the chapter man. Verse 1: The word came to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah in the fourth year of Jehoiakim son of Josiah king of Judah...
Ezekiel 21:1-7, +
Again, just read the chapter. Stop taking verses out of context. Verse 19 Son of man, mark out two roads for the sword of the king of Babylon to take, both starting from the same country. Make a signpost where the road branches off to the city. Mark out one road for the sword to come against Rabbah of the Ammonites and another against Judah and fortified Jerusalem.
It's a warning for those people at that time. It has no bearing on anyone today. None. Zero.
-
My goodness, just read the chapter.
I'm genuinely convinced most Christians who read the Bible regularly don't know how to read it at all. Everything is a proof-text waiting to be quoted in a debate, or when building elaborate systems of theology. Nothing is part of a book.
I help a Christian friend who runs a study group plan out his talking points each week, as they work through a book of the New Testament verse by verse, chapter by chapter. The people in his group are constantly taking parts of the Bible out of context, or ignoring very clear statements like the ones you pointed out in your reply. They know most of the New Testament by heart, and can quote many verses from memory, but they couldn't tell you what the actual message of a chapter or book is. Isaiah 53 is about Jesus! Okay, but what are Isaiah 52 and 54 about, and how does Isaiah 53 connect to either of them? They couldn't tell you.
keraz clearly knows how to find a verse and make it work in their grand end times timeline, but only when the verse is entirely isolated and the context all around it is willfully ignored. It's really dang convenient they point to Isaiah 22 as a prophecy about the end times, but wait, no, don't read verse 15, only read the first 14 verses! When verse 15 completely undermines their entire interpretation of verses 1 to 14, cutting short like that is purposeful, to the point I question the reader's honesty.
-
I'm genuinely convinced most Christians who read the Bible regularly don't know how to read it at all. Everything is a proof-text waiting to be quoted in a debate, or when building elaborate systems of theology. Nothing is part of a book.
I think this is correct. And it doesn't make sense to me. But then, I am not a Christian. Perhaps this is part of why Christian arguments are so unconvincing to biblically literate Jews. You can't just take a verse and separate it from a chapter, or a chapter and separate it from a book. This is especially true since the whole chapter convention wasn't even originally in the books, it was only added in the Middle Ages. And in some cases the chapter breaks are clearly unnatural.
You cite Isaiah 53 and it's a perfect example of that. First of all, the chapter break is wrong and breaks the flow of the text. Chapter 53 should properly begin at 52:13. And more than that, it's not its own book, it is part of a much longer book. Who is this mysterious "suffering servant"? If one read just that chapter, which does not identify the servant, they wouldn't know and would be willing to listen to any identity someone proposed. But if one read Isaiah 40 straight through to 53, they'd find the servant identified, by name, numerous times. And what's the connection of 53 to the surrounding material? Chapter 52 and 54 talk about the redemption of Zion, the rebuilding of Jerusalem, and the ingathering of the exiles. It would seem logical that chapter 53 would have a meaning pertaining to that topic. But it's not understood that way by most Christians.
keraz clearly knows how to find a verse and make it work in their grand end times timeline, but only when the verse is entirely isolated and the context all around it is willfully ignored.
As observed.
-
I'm genuinely convinced most Christians who read the Bible regularly don't know how to read it at all. Everything is a proof-text waiting to be quoted in a debate, or when building elaborate systems of theology. Nothing is part of a book.
I think this is correct. And it doesn't make sense to me. But then, I am not a Christian. Perhaps this is part of why Christian arguments are so unconvincing to biblically literate Jews. You can't just take a verse and separate it from a chapter, or a chapter and separate it from a book. This is especially true since the whole chapter convention wasn't even originally in the books, it was only added in the Middle Ages. And in some cases the chapter breaks are clearly unnatural.
You cite Isaiah 53 and it's a perfect example of that. First of all, the chapter break is wrong and breaks the flow of the text. Chapter 53 should properly begin at 52:13. And more than that, it's not its own book, it is part of a much longer book. Who is this mysterious "suffering servant"? If one read just that chapter, which does not identify the servant, they wouldn't know and would be willing to listen to any identity someone proposed. But if one read Isaiah 40 straight through to 53, they'd find the servant identified, by name, numerous times. And what's the connection of 53 to the surrounding material? Chapter 52 and 54 talk about the redemption of Zion, the rebuilding of Jerusalem, and the ingathering of the exiles. It would seem logical that chapter 53 would have a meaning pertaining to that topic. But it's not understood that way by most Christians.
Both Christians and Jews tend to be "biblically illiterate" overall. That's because most people are not interested in being Bible scholars. To follow a religion is not equal with religious scholarship. Being "devotional" is sufficient for being "religious."
Isa 53 is viewed by more studied Christians as an "allusion" to Christ as much as a prophecy of Christ. Many messianic prophecies were given through the imagery of earlier times, well before his coming. Israel itself is used as a foreshadowing of Messiah, as were the many great biblical leaders of Israel. Joseph, for example, is a great foreshadowing of Messiah for Christians.
But you would not, for this reason, state that the prophecy is illegitimate, simply because Joseph is used for Messiah! I don't think either Christians or Jews would be unduly upset with the idea that Messiah is foreshadowed in Israel?
-
Both Christians and Jews tend to be "biblically illiterate" overall.
I don't think it's proper to make vast sweeping statements like this. It's not about literate vs illiterate. It's about the entire approach to the bible. For example-
Isa 53 is viewed by more studied Christians as an "allusion" to Christ as much as a prophecy of Christ. Many messianic prophecies were given through the imagery of earlier times, well before his coming. Israel itself is used as a foreshadowing of Messiah, as were the many great biblical leaders of Israel. Joseph, for example, is a great foreshadowing of Messiah for Christians.
But you would not, for this reason, state that the prophecy is illegitimate, simply because Joseph is used for Messiah!
It's not a prophecy though. It's a story of something that occurred. Taking a story and saying it's a prophecy because of convoluted "connect the dots" to a desired outcome is tampering with God's word.
I don't think either Christians or Jews would be unduly upset with the idea that Messiah is foreshadowed in Israel?
The messiah isn't "foreshadowed" at all. There are explicate messianic prophecies like say Isaiah 11. And then there's the rest of the bible, which stands on its own, telling its own stories and teaching its own lessons, all having nothing whatsoever to do with the messiah.
If you believe that say, Isaiah 53 is about national Israel, then say so.
-
Both Christians and Jews tend to be "biblically illiterate" overall.
I don't think it's proper to make vast sweeping statements like this. It's not about literate vs illiterate. It's about the entire approach to the bible. For example-
Isa 53 is viewed by more studied Christians as an "allusion" to Christ as much as a prophecy of Christ. Many messianic prophecies were given through the imagery of earlier times, well before his coming. Israel itself is used as a foreshadowing of Messiah, as were the many great biblical leaders of Israel. Joseph, for example, is a great foreshadowing of Messiah for Christians.
But you would not, for this reason, state that the prophecy is illegitimate, simply because Joseph is used for Messiah!
It's not a prophecy though. It's a story of something that occurred. Taking a story and saying it's a prophecy because of convoluted "connect the dots" to a desired outcome is tampering with God's word.
I don't think either Christians or Jews would be unduly upset with the idea that Messiah is foreshadowed in Israel?
The messiah isn't "foreshadowed" at all. There are explicate messianic prophecies like say Isaiah 11. And then there's the rest of the bible, which stands on its own, telling its own stories and teaching its own lessons, all having nothing whatsoever to do with the messiah.
If you believe that say, Isaiah 53 is about national Israel, then say so.
I think Isa 53 is indeed a *prophecy* of Messiah. But the style is of using a symbol of Messiah in order to communicate him using imagery that the current generation can benefit from. And so, the imagery consists of use of the figure of "Israel" to convey that a Messiah *like Israel* is coming to deliver the people from their sins, and thus from their judgment by God.
I don't get to decide how Messianic Prophecy is given. God wrote "His book" the way He wanted to, sometimes more specific about Messiah, and sometimes less specific. How can one see in "Eve's offspring" in Gen 3 a prophecy of Messiah? It is certainly not clear. And yet it appears to be a Messianic prophecy.
I will indeed make broad sweeping judgments about the "literacy" of both Jews and Christians, because this is the obvious state of mankind everywhere. No matter how much education is delivered, relatively little is picked up by the masses. Sometimes this is due to irresponsibility, but sometimes it is simply due to people having different gifts. So it doesn't have to be a condemnatory statement.
Both Jews and Christians would do well to make their religious decisions based not on a consensus opinion of their own, but rather, on their own studies. Bias tends to rule in every group. And yes, that is a broad, sweeping statement that is true!
-
I think Isa 53 is indeed a *prophecy* of Messiah.
OK, so see, this means ignoring the context of the surrounding chapters and the fact that the servant is named numerous times. This was my point and you're proving it.
But the style is of using a symbol of Messiah in order to communicate him using imagery that the current generation can benefit from. And so, the imagery consists of use of the figure of "Israel" to convey that a Messiah *like Israel* is coming to deliver the people from their sins, and thus from their judgment by God.
So... is 53 about Israel, or not?
I don't get to decide how Messianic Prophecy is given.
No, but you get to decide whether a given passage is or isn't. Again, Isaiah 11 is explicitly messianic. Isaiah 53? Eh.
God wrote "His book" the way He wanted to, sometimes more specific about Messiah, and sometimes less specific. How can one see in "Eve's offspring" in Gen 3 a prophecy of Messiah? It is certainly not clear. And yet it appears to be a Messianic prophecy.
Not to me. Again, what's the context?
I will indeed make broad sweeping judgments about the "literacy" of both Jews and Christians, because this is the obvious state of mankind everywhere. No matter how much education is delivered, relatively little is picked up by the masses. Sometimes this is due to irresponsibility, but sometimes it is simply due to people having different gifts. So it doesn't have to be a condemnatory statement.
My experience is then when people make statements like this, they consider themselves to be "literate" and anyone who agrees with them "illiterate". In other words, it's self serving.
Both Jews and Christians would do well to make their religious decisions based not on a consensus opinion of their own, but rather, on their own studies. Bias tends to rule in every group. And yes, that is a broad, sweeping statement that is true!
As is this.
-
I view Isaiah as speaking of the nation "Israel" as God's "servant." And then there is a perceptible differentiation between the nation and an individual representing that nation.
You are either seeing the nation being presented, symbolically, as an individual going through suffering, or you're seeing an individual emerging as representative of the whole nation. I take the latter view.
I don't feel I'm destroying interpretive rules in doing this. Rather, I find this to be a literary device, as a normal figure of speech. Conversation about the nation takes a deliberate turn to an esoteric messianic figure.
And why so esoteric? Why so mysterious? I think it's because the Scriptures portray understanding as taking place not with the vast majority in Israel, but largely only with an small elite, who are faithful to God. It's as if this truth is being reserved for those who have "eyes to see."
-
I view Isaiah as speaking of the nation "Israel" as God's "servant."
Very good. Gold star! It's what the text says too. 41:8 But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, you descendants of Abraham my friend 41:9 I brought you from the ends of the earth and called you from its farthest corners. I said, 'You are My servant.' I have chosen and not rejected you.44:1 Yet now hear, O Jacob my servant; and Israel, whom I have chosen: 44:21 Remember these things, O Jacob, for you are My servant, O Israel. I have made you, and you are My servant; O Israel, I will never forget you. 45:4 For the sake of Jacob My servant and Israel who I have chosen, I call you by name
and so on.
You are either seeing the nation being presented, symbolically, as an individual going through suffering,
That's not how I see it at all. God has identified the servant as the nation of Israel. That's it. Now we have to see how chapter 53 works. It's sandwiched between two other chapters, each talking about the redemption of Zion and the ingathering of the Jewish exiles in the messianic era. So what's the point and purpose of chapter 53? In that context, it's showing the perspective of the other nations. Starting with 52:13 (which basically everyone believes should have been the actual beginning of chapter 53)
Behold My servant shall prosper; he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted. Just as there were many who were appalled at him- his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any human being
and his form marred beyond human likeness— so he will startle many nations, and kings will shut their mouths because of him. For what they were not told, they will see, and what they have not heard, they will understand.
What's going on here? God's servant, Israel, will be raised up in the messianic era. Many were appalled at the Jews- accusing them of not even being human -and they will be startled with the knowledge that the Jews were God's servant all along. The leaders of nations won't even know what to say. Thus begins chapter 53 "Who would have believed our report?"
-
What's going on here? God's servant, Israel, will be raised up in the messianic era. Many were appalled at the Jews- accusing them of not even being human -and they will be startled with the knowledge that the Jews were God's servant all along. The leaders of nations won't even know what to say. Thus begins chapter 53 "Who would have believed our report?"
Unfortunately, this belief suits those people who believe in the 'rapture to heaven' theory.
The Jews will be punished for rejecting Jesus, but then saved and redeemed. The Christians sit in heaven, doing what; they don't know.
Unfortunately again; these beliefs do not conform with what the Bible prophets tell us.
But what is really unfortunate, is the virtually total lack of knowledge of what the Lord actually does plan for His people and the world, in the end times.
-
Unfortunately, this belief suits those people who believe in the 'rapture to heaven' theory.
The Jews will be punished for rejecting Jesus, but then saved and redeemed. The Christians sit in heaven, doing what; they don't know.
I have no opinion on this.
Unfortunately again; these beliefs do not conform with what the Bible prophets tell us.
I don't see why not. What I just said was perfectly sensible, and even some Christians believe it to be true.
But what is really unfortunate, is the virtually total lack of knowledge of what the Lord actually does plan for His people and the world, in the end times.
Isaiah 60:
Arise, shine, for your light has come,
and the glory of the Lord rises upon you.
2 See, darkness covers the earth
and thick darkness is over the peoples,
but the Lord rises upon you
and his glory appears over you.
3 Nations will come to your light,
and kings to the brightness of your dawn.
4 “Lift up your eyes and look about you:
All assemble and come to you;
your sons come from afar,
and your daughters are carried on the hip.
5 Then you will look and be radiant,
your heart will throb and swell with joy;
the wealth on the seas will be brought to you,
to you the riches of the nations will come.
6 Herds of camels will cover your land,
young camels of Midian and Ephah.
And all from Sheba will come,
bearing gold and incense
and proclaiming the praise of the Lord.
7 All Kedar’s flocks will be gathered to you,
the rams of Nebaioth will serve you;
they will be accepted as offerings on my altar,
and I will adorn my glorious temple.
8 “Who are these that fly along like clouds,
like doves to their nests?
9 Surely the islands look to me;
in the lead are the ships of Tarshish,
bringing your children from afar,
with their silver and gold,
to the honor of the Lord your God,
the Holy One of Israel,
for he has endowed you with splendor.
10 “Foreigners will rebuild your walls,
and their kings will serve you.
Though in anger I struck you,
in favor I will show you compassion.
11 Your gates will always stand open,
they will never be shut, day or night,
so that people may bring you the wealth of the nations—
their kings led in triumphal procession.
12 For the nation or kingdom that will not serve you will perish;
it will be utterly ruined.
13 “The glory of Lebanon will come to you,
the juniper, the fir and the cypress together,
to adorn my sanctuary;
and I will glorify the place for my feet.
14 The children of your oppressors will come bowing before you;
all who despise you will bow down at your feet
and will call you the City of the Lord,
Zion of the Holy One of Israel.
15 “Although you have been forsaken and hated,
with no one traveling through,
I will make you the everlasting pride
and the joy of all generations.
16 You will drink the milk of nations
and be nursed at royal breasts.
Then you will know that I, the Lord, am your Savior,
your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob.
17 Instead of bronze I will bring you gold,
and silver in place of iron.
Instead of wood I will bring you bronze,
and iron in place of stones.
I will make peace your governor
and well-being your ruler.
18 No longer will violence be heard in your land,
nor ruin or destruction within your borders,
but you will call your walls Salvation
and your gates Praise.
19 The sun will no more be your light by day,
nor will the brightness of the moon shine on you,
for the Lord will be your everlasting light,
and your God will be your glory.
20 Your sun will never set again,
and your moon will wane no more;
the Lord will be your everlasting light,
and your days of sorrow will end.
21 Then all your people will be righteous
and they will possess the land forever.
They are the shoot I have planted,
the work of my hands,
for the display of my splendor.
22 The least of you will become a thousand,
the smallest a mighty nation.
I am the Lord;
in its time I will do this swiftly.”
-
Actually, a lot of Christians do believe in a Jewish redemption, As i said, it suits their false belief of their being 'raptured to heaven. Neither is prophesied to happen.
Isaiah 60:2 mentions darkness covering the earth.
Many other prophesies tell about this literal event:
Isaiah 13:10 The sun, moon and stars will give no light.
Ezekiel 32:7-8 I will veil the sky with clouds and bring darkness over the land.
Zephaniah 1:15 The Day of the Lord’s anger will be a Day of destruction, of darkness and gloom.
Amos 8:9 On that Day, the sun will darken at noon. [after the initial flash]
Revelation 6:12...the sun turned black as a funeral pall and the whole moon blood red.
Psalms 18:11 He made thick darkness His covering, dense vapor His canopy.
Jeremiah 4:23 The earth was in chaos and the sky was in darkness.
It is part of the Sixth Seal worldwide disaster, the forthcoming day in the magnitude of what happen in the days of Noah. Over 100 Bible prophesied graphically detail this sudden and shocking event.
We should know all about it and be prepared for it mentally and physically. If not it is us that is in the dark.
1 Thessalonians 5:4
-
Isaiah 60:2 mentions darkness covering the earth.
And that's the only verse in the whole chapter that you are interested in. Because you cherry pick verses that support your own particular ideology, and ignore the rest. In this case, you pretend that 21 of the chapter's 22 verses don't even exist.
-
Isaiah 60:2 mentions darkness covering the earth.
And that's the only verse in the whole chapter that you are interested in. Because you cherry pick verses that support your own particular ideology, and ignore the rest. In this case, you pretend that 21 of the chapter's 22 verses don't even exist.
If you had the moral fortitude to read any of the over 800 articles on my logostelos website, you would see how wrong your accusation is.
Isaiah 60 is a chapter about how the righteous people of God will inhabit the holy Land. His Light to the nations, Isaiah 60:20-22
Quite a different people to the current inhabitants of all the holy Land.
-
If you had the moral fortitude to read any of the over 800 articles on my logostelos website
"I wrote over 800 articles, so my opinion must be right".
Isaiah 60 is a chapter about how the righteous people of God will inhabit the holy Land.
Verse 10: Though in anger I struck you, in favor I will show you compassion.
God struck the righteous people? Or more likely, God struck the original inhabitants of the land, and exiled them for their sins, but will show compassion. Hence verse 4: your sons come from afar, and your daughters are carried on the hip coming home from their long exile.
Quite a different people to the current inhabitants of all the holy Land.
Amazingly, the prophets over 2500 years ago stated with complete confidence that the Jews would return to the land. And it happened in our lifetime. Yet this fulfilled prophecy means nothing to you.
-
I view Isaiah as speaking of the nation "Israel" as God's "servant."
Very good. Gold star! It's what the text says too. 41:8 But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, you descendants of Abraham my friend 41:9 I brought you from the ends of the earth and called you from its farthest corners. I said, 'You are My servant.' I have chosen and not rejected you.44:1 Yet now hear, O Jacob my servant; and Israel, whom I have chosen: 44:21 Remember these things, O Jacob, for you are My servant, O Israel. I have made you, and you are My servant; O Israel, I will never forget you. 45:4 For the sake of Jacob My servant and Israel who I have chosen, I call you by name
and so on.
You are either seeing the nation being presented, symbolically, as an individual going through suffering,
That's not how I see it at all. God has identified the servant as the nation of Israel. That's it. Now we have to see how chapter 53 works. It's sandwiched between two other chapters, each talking about the redemption of Zion and the ingathering of the Jewish exiles in the messianic era. So what's the point and purpose of chapter 53? In that context, it's showing the perspective of the other nations. Starting with 52:13 (which basically everyone believes should have been the actual beginning of chapter 53)
Behold My servant shall prosper; he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted. Just as there were many who were appalled at him- his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any human being
and his form marred beyond human likeness— so he will startle many nations, and kings will shut their mouths because of him. For what they were not told, they will see, and what they have not heard, they will understand.
What's going on here? God's servant, Israel, will be raised up in the messianic era. Many were appalled at the Jews- accusing them of not even being human -and they will be startled with the knowledge that the Jews were God's servant all along. The leaders of nations won't even know what to say. Thus begins chapter 53 "Who would have believed our report?"
We see this different because I see the reduction from the nation Israel to an individual called "Israel" as a literary feature. It is Messianic to the core. I may have agreed with you if it wasn't for the fact many Messianic allusions exist, and figures are used as symbols of Messiah. Why can't, then, a *nation* be used, briefly, as a symbol of Messiah?
But what makes this a compelling case for me is the reality that Jesus fulfilled this prophecy of suffering. It is so specific that no Christian can miss the description as applicable to what Jesus went through on behalf of the nation Israel. He bore their abuses at a time of terrible Jewish corruption.
Some Christians love to characterize the Jewish People for all time as they were at this one time. The same often characterize the State Church the way it was during the Inquisition. But these are false stereotypes.
Israel had good times and bad times. In the time Jesus died, Israel's sins were at their full measure, as indicated, I believe by Dan 9.24. But Israel, though remaining hostile to Christian conversion, has not always remained hostile to Christians.
So I wouldn't characterize the Jewish People the way many Christians do, as if they are in a constant state of hostility towards Christians. Nor should we characterize the Christian Church the way many Christians characterize the Catholic Church as if it is still engaging in the Inquisition. Over time, nations and institutions change.
-
We see this different because I see the reduction from the nation Israel to an individual called "Israel" as a literary feature. It is Messianic to the core.
You see it this way because it's a central feature of your faith. And that's because you see everything in the bible through the lens of the NT. Because the NT is not holy writ to me, I don't see my bible in the same way that you do.
-
We see this different because I see the reduction from the nation Israel to an individual called "Israel" as a literary feature. It is Messianic to the core.
You see it this way because it's a central feature of your faith. And that's because you see everything in the bible through the lens of the NT. Because the NT is not holy writ to me, I don't see my bible in the same way that you do.
I see it that way because it's a central feature of my faith, yes. But if it wasn't logical to read it that way, it would never convince me otherwise. In fact, Messianic prophecy seems to be, by nature, somewhat obscure, and I do accept that as typical in Scripture.
Who can deny that the prophets used symbolism and acted outside of conventional wisdom of their time? Once I'm open to the idea that Scripture uses the fallenness of Israel to depict Messianic salvation, so much of what is not relevant to me becomes relevant to me. I'm not a Jew, but the salvation of the Jews means salvation of the world.
Seeing Messiah in the experience of Israel really does fit Jesus the way Christians see him, as Savior not merely of Israel but also of the whole world. Israel becomes a portrait not of failure, but of victory through mercy, a way of salvation that simply didn't happen through the Law of Moses.
-
I see it that way because it's a central feature of my faith, yes. But if it wasn't logical to read it that way, it would never convince me otherwise.
It's only "logical" to read it that way because you've already accepted that the NT is holy writ. If you didn't, it wouldn't be logical at all.
Who can deny that the prophets used symbolism and acted outside of conventional wisdom of their time?
I do.
The main mission of prophecy was to bring the Jewish people back to God. That's it. Not to send hidden messages to future readers of the bible. The messianic prophecies (which are not "hidden" by the way) are only to tell what will happen when the Jews return to God. That's the message of Isaiah chapters 52 and 54: the eventual redemption of Zion. 53, sandwiched in the middle, tells the reaction of the gentile nations at that time. "Wow, the despised Jews were correct all along". Logical.
Seeing Messiah in the experience of Israel really does fit Jesus the way Christians see him, as Savior not merely of Israel but also of the whole world.
The messiah was never intended to "save the whole world". Save from what?
Israel becomes a portrait not of failure, but of victory through mercy, a way of salvation that simply didn't happen through the Law of Moses.
God's laws (that were not invented by Moses, stop calling them "Law of Moses") have nothing to do with "salvation". They're part of a covenant that God made with the Jews at Sinai to show the world how to lead a Godly life. That's it. There's no salvation and nothing to be "saved" from. Jews follow those laws because we love God, not because there's some sort of reward in it.
-
I see it that way because it's a central feature of my faith, yes. But if it wasn't logical to read it that way, it would never convince me otherwise.
It's only "logical" to read it that way because you've already accepted that the NT is holy writ. If you didn't, it wouldn't be logical at all.
Yes, neither would you accept the logic of Moses opening up the Red Sea and the Israelites hearing the voice of God at Sinai unless you first believed in the God of Israel.
Who can deny that the prophets used symbolism and acted outside of conventional wisdom of their time?
I do.
The main mission of prophecy was to bring the Jewish people back to God. That's it. Not to send hidden messages to future readers of the bible. The messianic prophecies (which are not "hidden" by the way) are only to tell what will happen when the Jews return to God. That's the message of Isaiah chapters 52 and 54: the eventual redemption of Zion. 53, sandwiched in the middle, tells the reaction of the gentile nations at that time. "Wow, the despised Jews were correct all along". Logical.
I don't at all agree. Cryptic messages were understood to be part and parcel with God's message to Israel. It was expected that only some would understand.
Messianic prophecies were couched in esoteric statements, in the characteristics of the fathers of Judaism. One might see Messianic prophecy in the histories of the patriarchs, as symbolic of Messianic character.
Isa 32.4 The fearful heart will know and understand,
and the stammering tongue will be fluent and clear.
Isa 53.1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
Dan 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.
Seeing Messiah in the experience of Israel really does fit Jesus the way Christians see him, as Savior not merely of Israel but also of the whole world.
The messiah was never intended to "save the whole world". Save from what?
Death resulted from Man going his own way, and not listening to the word of God. Now all of mankind die, and there is no hope of restoration to eternal life in blissful fellowship with God apart from NT salvation. That is what Messiah was predicted to do through the lens of the Law of Moses. All of the infrastructure and ritual of the Law, including the temple, the priesthood, and the sacrifices were designed as a temporary form of righteousness in preparation for Christ's ultimate act of atonement, which was dying on behalf of all human sin, and then forgiving those who repent of their sins.
Israel becomes a portrait not of failure, but of victory through mercy, a way of salvation that simply didn't happen through the Law of Moses.
God's laws (that were not invented by Moses, stop calling them "Law of Moses") have nothing to do with "salvation". They're part of a covenant that God made with the Jews at Sinai to show the world how to lead a Godly life. That's it. There's no salvation and nothing to be "saved" from. Jews follow those laws because we love God, not because there's some sort of reward in it.
Everybody engages in discipline for a purpose. If it is for love of God, that in itself is a purpose. Involved in this desire to please God is the desire to remain in good standing with God. That is the hope of salvation, to be liberated from a fallen nature that tends towards sin.
I will not stop calling the Law the "Law of Moses," because that's what I see it as being. It came from God and arrived in Israel through the hands of Moses. That is how God chose it to be delivered to Israel. There is no negative connotation in this. You shouldn't think evil thoughts about me, because I had none. Moses was just doing what God wanted him to do.
-
Yes, neither would you accept the logic of Moses opening up the Red Sea and the Israelites hearing the voice of God at Sinai unless you first believed in the God of Israel.
But what makes one accept a book as holy writ isn't logic, but faith. That you and I differ on what we accept is what leads to the differing outcome. Not "logic".
I don't at all agree. Cryptic messages were understood to be part and parcel with God's message to Israel.
"Understood" by who? Worse, by adopting this line of thought, what you're saying is that you as an outsider understand Jewish holy books better than their recipient, who not only carried these books through the ages much longer than you, but also can actually understand them in the original language.
Messianic prophecies were couched in esoteric statements, in the characteristics of the fathers of Judaism.
Again, according to who? Not the Jews. You're making a broad, sweeping statement, that isn't part of Judaism at all. You don't get to define Judaism. Jews do.
Isa 32.4 The fearful heart will know and understand,
and the stammering tongue will be fluent and clear.
Isa 53.1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
Dan 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.
Someone else here does this. Take a single verse, out of context of the chapter and book, and builds doctrine around it.
I can do the same thing:
Isa 32.4 The fearful heart will know and understand,
and the stammering tongue will be fluent and clear.
Verse 7 is talking about people who use a verse out of context: Scoundrels use wicked methods ;D
In fact, you're creating an entirely new doctrine, where the Jews are wrong and evil going into the end times, and it's the nations of the world who are correct and righteous. You can find this no place in scripture, so you're inventing it.
Death resulted from Man going his own way, and not listening to the word of God. Now all of mankind die, and there is no hope of restoration to eternal life in blissful fellowship with God apart from NT salvation. That is what Messiah was predicted to do through the lens of the Law of Moses. All of the infrastructure and ritual of the Law, including the temple, the priesthood, and the sacrifices were designed as a temporary form of righteousness in preparation for Christ's ultimate act of atonement, which was dying on behalf of all human sin, and then forgiving those who repent of their sins.
This is standard Christian dogma, and that's fine. But as above, if one doesn't accept the NT as holy writ, it isn't in the bible. Period.
Everybody engages in discipline for a purpose. If it is for love of God, that in itself is a purpose. Involved in this desire to please God is the desire to remain in good standing with God.
Again, you're creating a concept because it fits your pre concieved notions. It has nothing to do with "standing". If one loves another, they do things for that person based on love. Not to curry favor.
I will not stop calling the Law the "Law of Moses," because that's what I see it as being. It came from God and arrived in Israel through the hands of Moses. That is how God chose it to be delivered to Israel. There is no negative connotation in this. You shouldn't think evil thoughts about me, because I had none. Moses was just doing what God wanted him to do.
Oh I see. So you're allowed to find things that aren't even in the text, but when I point out what the text explicitly states, I'm wrong. Logical.
-
Yes, neither would you accept the logic of Moses opening up the Red Sea and the Israelites hearing the voice of God at Sinai unless you first believed in the God of Israel.
But what makes one accept a book as holy writ isn't logic, but faith. That you and I differ on what we accept is what leads to the differing outcome. Not "logic".
Logic is an integral part of faith. Faith and Reason are not separate from one another, but are necessarily linked. You must have reason to have faith.
On the other hand, faith, being placed in something supernatural, may appear to be "unreasonable." Nevertheless, with God as its true object, faith properly directed in His word, believes in things that transcend the natural world.
I don't at all agree. Cryptic messages were understood to be part and parcel with God's message to Israel.
"Understood" by who? Worse, by adopting this line of thought, what you're saying is that you as an outsider understand Jewish holy books better than their recipient, who not only carried these books through the ages much longer than you, but also can actually understand them in the original language.
There is a difference between being familiar with a tradition, and being shown something by God. I may be very familiar with navigating at sea, but God may choose to speak to someone in a boat to cast his nets on one side of the boat and get a massive number of fish. A specialized navigator can't accomplish this by his familiarity with the sea.
Revelation is this way. When God sees in a nation that the nation is gradually in spiritual decline, and the people overall are less inclined to follow moral pathways, God begins to speak cryptically to those willing to listen. This is because He knows it would be a waste of time trying to reach those uninterested in His words of correction.
I believe Jewish-Christian truth has now become, in Christianity, universal, and truth is designed to reach not just those familiar with Judaism, but all people interested in hearing God's moral truth. So when Christians study the Jewish Bible, they do understand that God has always had to bypass those who are self-satisfied with their own idea of morality, rejecting God's explicit commandments.
Messianic prophecies were couched in esoteric statements, in the characteristics of the fathers of Judaism.
Again, according to who? Not the Jews. You're making a broad, sweeping statement, that isn't part of Judaism at all. You don't get to define Judaism. Jews do.
This isn't a matter of special revelation given to Jews. The Bible is an open book, and does not require people to live in Judaism to understand what is being said.
When the same God as existed in Judaism speaks to people today, they can relate to how God expressed Himself to Jews in the past. It doesn't require being Jewish to see the connection.
It is quite obvious in all Christian experience that many in the Christian Church are not really interested in God Himself, and tend to neglect moral living, failing to maintain a close connection to God Himself. And so, they fail to hear what God is leading them to do, morally.
And so, it is no different with Christians as it was for Jews. Some don't hear the whole message God is giving them through the ministers of God's word. They think they are hearing just an interesting story, but they are failing to hear the real message that requires going back to God and hearing His moral requirements.
Isa 32.4 The fearful heart will know and understand,
and the stammering tongue will be fluent and clear.
Isa 53.1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
Dan 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.
Someone else here does this. Take a single verse, out of context of the chapter and book, and builds doctrine around it.
And that's your comeback to biblical prophecies and writings? You just disregard it as someone "building a doctrine?"
I can do the same thing:
Isa 32.4 The fearful heart will know and understand,
and the stammering tongue will be fluent and clear.
Verse 7 is talking about people who use a verse out of context: Scoundrels use wicked methods ;D
In fact, you're creating an entirely new doctrine, where the Jews are wrong and evil going into the end times, and it's the nations of the world who are correct and righteous. You can find this no place in scripture, so you're inventing it.
No, that's not what I was doing. I am not lumping the entire group of Jewish People together, and calling them rebellious. I do say they are misled into a corruption of their religion, but I'm not saying they are all bad people.
On the other hand, the same problem exists, I think, in Christianity. Relatively few Christians actually follow God, and hear His word. Those who hear His word and don't respond to it aren't really hearing it.
Death resulted from Man going his own way, and not listening to the word of God. Now all of mankind die, and there is no hope of restoration to eternal life in blissful fellowship with God apart from NT salvation. That is what Messiah was predicted to do through the lens of the Law of Moses. All of the infrastructure and ritual of the Law, including the temple, the priesthood, and the sacrifices were designed as a temporary form of righteousness in preparation for Christ's ultimate act of atonement, which was dying on behalf of all human sin, and then forgiving those who repent of their sins. This is standard Christian dogma, and that's fine. But as above, if one doesn't accept the NT as holy writ, it isn't in the bible. Period.
As a Christian I see the NT blueprint in the Jewish Bible. The fact you reject its fulfillment explains why you don't see the blueprint. But again, it's there, even if you think Jews, as a group, are entitled to give it a separate meaning. As I said, Jews, as a whole, have been misled into a corrupt form of their religion.
Everybody engages in discipline for a purpose. If it is for love of God, that in itself is a purpose. Involved in this desire to please God is the desire to remain in good standing with God. Again, you're creating a concept because it fits your pre conceived notions. It has nothing to do with "standing". If one loves another, they do things for that person based on love. Not to curry favor.
Your sense of "currying favor" is suggestive of manipulation, and that's not what I mean when I say we do something to get something. When our motives are pure, there is nothing wrong with doing good to get favor from God. In fact, that's exactly what the Jewish Scriptures teach, that we should do good to curry favor with God. We should obey His word so that the nation is blessed with prosperity and safety.
-
Logic is an integral part of faith. Faith and Reason are not separate from one another, but are necessarily linked. You must have reason to have faith.
"Faith" means something that transcends logic. I don't understand how you don't know this.
There is a difference between being familiar with a tradition, and being shown something by God.
My ancestors were shown something by God at Sinai. I have a direct parent to child transmission of this fact going back 3,000 years.
Were yours?
Revelation is this way. When God sees in a nation that the nation is gradually in spiritual decline, and the people overall are less inclined to follow moral pathways, God begins to speak cryptically to those willing to listen. This is because He knows it would be a waste of time trying to reach those uninterested in His words of correction.
You just made this up. It isn't in the bible anywhere.
I believe Jewish-Christian truth has now become, in Christianity, universal, and truth is designed to reach not just those familiar with Judaism, but all people interested in hearing God's moral truth. So when Christians study the Jewish Bible, they do understand that God has always had to bypass those who are self-satisfied with their own idea of morality, rejecting God's explicit commandments.
And yet observant Jews follow God's commandments in the bible, and Christians generally don't. How peculiar.
This isn't a matter of special revelation given to Jews. The Bible is an open book, and does not require people to live in Judaism to understand what is being said.
The bible was given to Jews. Not the world at large. It was written in the Jewish language and is explicitly a covenant between the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and God. The Ten Commandments begins "I am the Lord your God who brought you forth from Egypt..." That doesn't apply to anyone but the Jews.
When the same God as existed in Judaism speaks to people today, they can relate to how God expressed Himself to Jews in the past. It doesn't require being Jewish to see the connection.
Of course anyone can adopt the bible's values. And that's a good thing. But that doesn't magically make them the recipient of anything else in the bible.
It is quite obvious in all Christian experience that many in the Christian Church are not really interested in God Himself, and tend to neglect moral living, failing to maintain a close connection to God Himself. And so, they fail to hear what God is leading them to do, morally.
I don't know why Christians speak so poorly of other Christians. One thing that Christians do really well is adopt the bible's values for themselves, and so come closer to God.
And that's your comeback to biblical prophecies and writings? You just disregard it as someone "building a doctrine?"
When you take single verses out of context and build a your own personal belief system out of them? Yup. Absolutely.
No, that's not what I was doing. I am not lumping the entire group of Jewish People together, and calling them rebellious. I do say they are misled into a corruption of their religion,
Yeah, and again, you don't get to define who are "good Jews" or "bad Jews".
As a Christian I see the NT blueprint in the Jewish Bible.
Of course you do. Because you accept the NT as holy writ.
Your sense of "currying favor" is suggestive of manipulation, and that's not what I mean when I say we do something to get something. When our motives are pure, there is nothing wrong with doing good to get favor from God. In fact, that's exactly what the Jewish Scriptures teach, that we should do good to curry favor with God. We should obey His word so that the nation is blessed with prosperity and safety.
That's not what Judaism teaches. God does bless the faithful, but that isn't the reason to be faithful. We're to be faithful because we love God with all our heart and all our soul and all our might (Deut 6:4) That's why Jews could go into the gas chambers singing "I believe", when the time for blessing was obviously done. Because of love. You as a Christian should appreciate this.
-
"Faith" means something that transcends logic. I don't understand how you don't know this.
Apparently there are a lot of things you don't understand? Faith and Reason are not opposites. Though faith transcends reason, it is not unreasonable.
My ancestors were shown something by God at Sinai. I have a direct parent to child transmission of this fact going back 3,000 years.
Were yours?
That's an enviable ancestry. However, spiritual values are directly communicated, and not through ancestry. The only value in ancestry is that our forebears prepared a nest for us before we were born.
No, real spiritual value is our own relationship with God--not our relationship with a tradition. The traditions only serve as an aid to advancing our personal relationship with God. Our job is hear God's word to our conscience, and to obey that word--every day!
You just made this up. It isn't in the bible anywhere.
No, the Prophets frequently mentioned that the people were spiritually drowsy, and sometimes stopped listening to their prophets altogether. Their minds were eventually closed completely. The prophet could not speak to the whole group any longer, but could only set forth truths that a few would hear.
And yet observant Jews follow God's commandments in the bible, and Christians generally don't. How peculiar.
It's funny how you pulled that! You referred to "observant" Jews, and then spoke of Christians as a complete class of people, not distinguishing between the observant and the less-observant.
In fact, observant Christians are as loyal to their creeds as observant Jews are to theirs. But if you want to talk about all Jews as a class of people, I'd have to say, just like you, that they *don't* follow even their own religion. At the very least, they redefine their religion as something else.
The bible was given to Jews. Not the world at large. It was written in the Jewish language and is explicitly a covenant between the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and God. The Ten Commandments begins "I am the Lord your God who brought you forth from Egypt..." That doesn't apply to anyone but the Jews.
Your problem is that what you say was true only for its time. As we Christians say, in B.C. Israel was the only chosen nation. But in A.D. there wasn't any "chosen nation" any longer. All nations were given equal access to covenant relationship with God through the NT.
How do I know this? The same way you say the Bible was written in Hebrew and Chaldean, I would say the Bible was translated into Greek and into all other languages. Therefore, God chose Israel and gave them their Bible in order to eventually share their Bible with the rest of the world.
It doesn't matter if you, as a Jew, reject the NT. The fact is, the Bible has been translated into all other languages, and Christianity now is the dominant religion on earth.
Of course anyone can adopt the bible's values. And that's a good thing. But that doesn't magically make them the recipient of anything else in the bible.
Nobody's talking about magic. I'm talking about what God did in history. At the very point where Israel rejected Christ, their Bible began to be taught to all other nations. And I agree--that was a good thing.
I don't know why Christians speak so poorly of other Christians. One thing that Christians do really well is adopt the bible's values for themselves, and so come closer to God.
Here's where I have greater depth than you, in the matter of critiquing other Christians. That's because I was born into Christianity, and can criticize my own, just as you are best equipped to criticize your own kind.
Would you call the Prophets "bad saints" because they criticized Israel? Did they lose their manners?
No, there is a time to correct your own religious brothers, particularly when some in your religion are not truly "brothers." Many follow religions under false pretenses, thinking that it is a means of gain rather than a code of ethics to observe.
Yeah, and again, you don't get to define who are "good Jews" or "bad Jews".
Oh, I most definitely do. Christians are given the authorization from God to judge others, assuming it is not personal judgment, but only God's judgment. We are not doing so as a means of inflicting punishment, but only as a means of testifying of what is proper or not. Having knowledge from God, we are held accountable to share what we know in the hopes of aiding society.
That's not what Judaism teaches. God does bless the faithful, but that isn't the reason to be faithful. We're to be faithful because we love God with all our heart and all our soul and all our might (Deut 6:4) That's why Jews could go into the gas chambers singing "I believe", when the time for blessing was obviously done. Because of love. You as a Christian should appreciate this.
I will always feel devastated for the Jewish People when bringing up the Holocaust. It's the equivalent of the Christians suffering under pagan Rome in some respects. So I don't wish to address any subject with that subject in the background.
You suggest we obey God to curry favor with Him? You're wrong if you think Judaism doesn't believe in the same. The blessings of Gerazim and the curses of Ebal suggest otherwise.
Nobody sucks up to God when worshiping Him. They love Him and respect Him, and want our Creator to be pleased with our behavior, as we try to be like Him.
-
Apparently there are a lot of things you don't understand? Faith and Reason are not opposites.
"faith" are things that can't be proved but we accept anyway. "Logic" are things that can be proved. They're opposites by definition.
That's an enviable ancestry. However, spiritual values are directly communicated, and not through ancestry.
Yes. And my spiritual values were directly communicated, by my parents, by my teachers, and by reading the bible myself.
No, real spiritual value is our own relationship with God--not our relationship with a tradition. The traditions only serve as an aid to advancing our personal relationship with God. Our job is hear God's word to our conscience, and to obey that word--every day!
I have a relationship with God. I obey His word, including keeping the bible's many laws to the best of my ability.
No, the Prophets frequently mentioned that the people were spiritually drowsy, and sometimes stopped listening to their prophets altogether. Their minds were eventually closed completely. The prophet could not speak to the whole group any longer, but could only set forth truths that a few would hear.
"Frequently mentioned" in other words "I don't have any quotes but it bolsters my case so I'm saying it anyway".
It's funny how you pulled that! You referred to "observant" Jews, and then spoke of Christians as a complete class of people, not distinguishing between the observant and the less-observant.
You mean there are Christians who uphold biblical law? Do tell.
In fact, observant Christians are as loyal to their creeds as observant Jews are to theirs. But if you want to talk about all Jews as a class of people, I'd have to say, just like you, that they *don't* follow even their own religion.
I don't follow my own religion? How do you know?
Your problem is that what you say was true only for its time. As we Christians say, in B.C. Israel was the only chosen nation. But in A.D. there wasn't any "chosen nation" any longer.
Paul says that Christians are chosen. So no, you're just swapping one group for another.
How do I know this? The same way you say the Bible was written in Hebrew and Chaldean, I would say the Bible was translated into Greek and into all other languages. Therefore, God chose Israel and gave them their Bible in order to eventually share their Bible with the rest of the world.
I agree with this statement. The Jews were and are God's moral pilot project to the rest of the world. Christians are our younger siblings in this.
It doesn't matter if you, as a Jew, reject the NT. The fact is, the Bible has been translated into all other languages, and Christianity now is the dominant religion on earth.
That doesn't make it correct however.
Nobody's talking about magic. I'm talking about what God did in history. At the very point where Israel rejected Christ, their Bible began to be taught to all other nations. And I agree--that was a good thing.
I would say that it was God's plan that the bible's values spread to the world, via Christianity (and other religion). That doesn't mean the Jews were wrong in rejecting those religions, it means that God used Judaism as a springboard for spreading the bible's values. But God's covenant with Israel is permanent, just as the bible says.
Here's where I have greater depth than you, in the matter of critiquing other Christians. That's because I was born into Christianity, and can criticize my own, just as you are best equipped to criticize your own kind.
You don't seem to have any problem criticizing Jews.
Would you call the Prophets "bad saints" because they criticized Israel?
No, but, and this is a really big thing, they criticized Judaism while remaining Jews. They went into exile with their fellow Jews. Your criticizing Judaism from the outside, to score points and bolster your own beliefs, which have nothing to do with Judaism. It's a huge difference.
Oh, I most definitely do. Christians are given the authorization from God to judge others, assuming it is not personal judgment, but only God's judgment.
How coincidental that your values exactly align with God's. That you can criticize others in His stead.
I will always feel devastated for the Jewish People when bringing up the Holocaust....So I don't wish to address any subject with that subject in the background.
I do wish to bring it up and I do wish it in the background. Jews went into the gas chambers singing "I believe" because they loved God and accepted His judgement. If that bothers you then it is your problem.
-
Question: does anyone here that believes in a rapture event believe that some Christians ("the ones who are READY") will be removed from the earth and that other Christians ("the ones who are not READY") will be "Left Behind?"
-
Question: does anyone here that believes in a rapture event believe that some Christians ("the ones who are READY") will be removed from the earth and that other Christians ("the ones who are not READY") will be "Left Behind?"
The 'rapture to heaven' theory is a false teaching. Nowhere does the Bible say that people will ever live in heaven. Eventually God and therefore heaven; come to the earth, for Eternity, Revelation 21:1-7
The 'rapture' is a lie, from the father of lies.
-
Question: does anyone here that believes in a rapture event believe that some Christians ("the ones who are READY") will be removed from the earth and that other Christians ("the ones who are not READY") will be "Left Behind?"
Ooo that would make a good book!
-
The 'rapture' is a lie, from the father of lies.
Sometimes bad theology just comes from bad reading comprehension, which is a much more widespread problem in the field of "Bible study" than is usually acknowledged.
Not everything you disagree with needs to be attributed to a conspiracy by the supreme architect of all evil in the universe. Sheesh.
-
The 'rapture' is a lie, from the father of lies.
Sometimes bad theology just comes from bad reading comprehension, which is a much more widespread problem in the field of "Bible study" than is usually acknowledged.
Not everything you disagree with needs to be attributed to a conspiracy by the supreme architect of all evil in the universe. Sheesh.
Don't be silly! It's much easier to discount and ignore people when you think they're deceived by Satan, than it is to realise that you could be wrong, or someone could be genuinely mistaken, or find compelling what you don't find compelling, etc. etc.
-
We see this different because I see the reduction from the nation Israel to an individual called "Israel" as a literary feature. It is Messianic to the core.
You see it this way because it's a central feature of your faith. And that's because you see everything in the bible through the lens of the NT. Because the NT is not holy writ to me, I don't see my bible in the same way that you do.
Right, and you don't see the NT as holy writ because of your Jewish faith. ;) That seems to be the perennial obstacle of Jews in accepting Christianity as true, that Judaism wants converts to their faith to adopt a cultural religion--one that embraces, primarily, the history of Israel.
By contrast, Christianity seeks converts so as to convert them not to a specific culture, but rather, to God and to a means of salvation that is not ethnocentric. What would I, as a Gentile, prefer--to revere Passover, the escape of a single nation from their Egyptian oppressors, or look to a form of redemption that embraces the entire world and reveres Christ as Savior, not just of Israel, but of the whole world?
-
Question: does anyone here that believes in a rapture event believe that some Christians ("the ones who are READY") will be removed from the earth and that other Christians ("the ones who are not READY") will be "Left Behind?"
I certainly hope not! ;) I'm just about finished reading "Not Afraid of the Antichrist," by Michael L. Brown and Craig S. Keener. Fine job of presenting the Postrib argument.
-
Right, and you don't see the NT as holy writ because of your Jewish faith. ;) That seems to be the perennial obstacle of Jews in accepting Christianity as true
Only a Christian would refer to someone using their own holy books to remain true to their faith an "obstacle".
I don't think that Christians accepting the NT as holy writ to be an "obstacle" to anything. It is just who they are.
that Judaism wants converts to their faith
Judaism doesn't seek converts because it is not necessary. A person can be good with God without being Jewish. In fact it's easier to be good with God as a non-Jew because one just has to lead a moral life and not follow all the bible's rules. So Jews believe.
By contrast, Christianity seeks converts so as to convert them not to a specific culture, but rather, to God and to a means of salvation that is not ethnocentric.
Jews don't believe that a person needs "salvation," and so the concept Jesus's sacrifice and Christianity in general becomes unnecessary.
-
Right, and you don't see the NT as holy writ because of your Jewish faith. ;) That seems to be the perennial obstacle of Jews in accepting Christianity as true
Only a Christian would refer to someone using their own holy books to remain true to their faith an "obstacle".
Obviously, if Christians have the only true religion, then only they would be the ones to put things properly--yes, even if Jews reject the basis of their own faith, the Jewish Scriptures.
As a Jew, you know what the Scriptures have said about the Jewish People. They are obstinate and fail often, indicating that the whole world has the same problem. I admit that Christians are faced with the same weaknesses. But at least I'm admitting it.
I don't think that Christians accepting the NT as holy writ to be an "obstacle" to anything. It is just who they are.
that Judaism wants converts to their faith
Judaism doesn't seek converts because it is not necessary. A person can be good with God without being Jewish. In fact it's easier to be good with God as a non-Jew because one just has to lead a moral life and not follow all the bible's rules. So Jews believe.
I believe the Jewish People were given by God a mission, to be a city set on a hill, to be a light to the Gentiles. To huddle together to escape the filth of the world is a cop out, and God never allowed the Jewish People to do that.
Even through failure under the Law, God has persisted with His program for the Jewish People, to spread them out across the world to impact the world for good. Ultimately, I'm praying the Jewish People find that the Christian faith and their faith can coalesce around the reality that Jesus was their and our Messiah.
By contrast, Christianity seeks converts so as to convert them not to a specific culture, but rather, to God and to a means of salvation that is not ethnocentric.
Jews don't believe that a person needs "salvation," and so the concept Jesus's sacrifice and Christianity in general becomes unnecessary.
Then the Jewish People fail to see the problem spelled out in the beginning of Genesis, that there is a sin problem and the need to get back to the Garden, to the Tree of Life. That's salvation--not just salvation for Israel, in which they will never be harassed and oppressed again, but salvation for all nations, so that there will be no more fighting, and swords can be remade into plow shares.
-
Obviously, if Christians have the only true religion, then only they would be the ones to put things properly--yes, even if Jews reject the basis of their own faith, the Jewish Scriptures.
The NT isn't "Jewish scriptures" though. Sure much of it was written by Jews. But then so was "Das Kapital" and I don't consider that "Jewish scripture" either.
As a Jew, you know what the Scriptures have said about the Jewish People. They are obstinate and fail often,
That doesn't mean that Jews or Judaism is wrong though, as you're taking it to mean.
I believe the Jewish People were given by God a mission, to be a city set on a hill, to be a light to the Gentiles. To huddle together to escape the filth of the world is a cop out, and God never allowed the Jewish People to do that.
The Jewish mission was never to convert the whole world. You won't find a single verse that says that. Yes, we are meant to be a "kingdom of priests" and a "holy nation" (Ex 19) and a "light unto the nations" (Is 60) by teaching the world to behave morally. I'll even say that God's scattering of the Jews to the four corners of the world is to help in that mission.
Then the Jewish People fail to see the problem spelled out in the beginning of Genesis
There's no failure because there's no problem. God created us imperfect, why would he expect perfection from us? God expects us to make moral choices in life, not be angels.
-
Obviously, if Christians have the only true religion, then only they would be the ones to put things properly--yes, even if Jews reject the basis of their own faith, the Jewish Scriptures.
The NT isn't "Jewish scriptures" though. Sure much of it was written by Jews. But then so was "Das Kapital" and I don't consider that "Jewish scripture" either.
You're comparing NT Scriptures with Das Kapital? Please don't!
But I know what you mean. Jews have been made, by God, to be a very influential people in history. Jews have been behind many influential streams of thought in history, including Christianity. As you say, Jews wrote the NT Scriptures. Should make you proud!
As a Jew, you know what the Scriptures have said about the Jewish People. They are obstinate and fail often,
That doesn't mean that Jews or Judaism is wrong though, as you're taking it to mean.
An argument can be made. That's the point.
I believe the Jewish People were given by God a mission, to be a city set on a hill, to be a light to the Gentiles. To huddle together to escape the filth of the world is a cop out, and God never allowed the Jewish People to do that.
The Jewish mission was never to convert the whole world. You won't find a single verse that says that. Yes, we are meant to be a "kingdom of priests" and a "holy nation" (Ex 19) and a "light unto the nations" (Is 60) by teaching the world to behave morally. I'll even say that God's scattering of the Jews to the four corners of the world is to help in that mission.
Then the Jewish People fail to see the problem spelled out in the beginning of Genesis
There's no failure because there's no problem. God created us imperfect, why would he expect perfection from us? God expects us to make moral choices in life, not be angels.
I don't believe God created mankind imperfect. That's definitely a disagreement between us. God makes everything perfect, but creates them in such a way that free moral agencies can choose imperfection. That's what both angels and men did--chose imperfection in order to have independent choice.
-
You're comparing NT Scriptures with Das Kapital? Please don't!
Both written by Jews. I thought that was such an important criteria?
But I know what you mean. Jews have been made, by God, to be a very influential people in history. Jews have been behind many influential streams of thought in history, including Christianity. As you say, Jews wrote the NT Scriptures. Should make you proud!
I'm not unproud (Is that even a word?) But that doesn't make every Jewish invention correct or true or even good. Communism, for example. We could do without that.
Now, on the balance I believe that Christianity is a Good Thing, because gave the idea of a God Who expects moral behavior to the gentile world. But that doesn't mean that it's correct.
An argument can be made. That's the point.
The argument isn't compelling to me because the prophets rebuked Jews yet remained Jews. The early Christians (and Christians today for that matter) use the words of the prophets to rebuke Jews from outside the faith. It isn't done in love, in other words, but to win a theological debate. Which seems to me to be a bad use of God's words.
I don't believe God created mankind imperfect. That's definitely a disagreement between us.
OK.
-
Even though the bible is the most complex book in all of the Universe, it is also God's only words to mankind, and it is important to understand that God is not the author of confusion and neither is he a respecter of persons.
"Walk" in Christianity always come before "talk".
Adam a son of God walked and talked with God in the garden.
When Adam stopped walking, he also stopped talking, hiding himself in case he was found out.
The bible is very explicit and detailed about the end times. The book of Revelation says it all, to those who have been graced by God to understand it.
Now concerning saving nations or individuals, Corinthians 15 says it all. It takes us from a seed to the final product of God which is a spiritual being and everything else is moot as a seed says it all. It is only what can come from a seed that will determine the end product.
There is nothing temporal in God's plan, purpose and will. Even the very temporal earth, sun, moon will be totally destroyed to usher in a brand new earth, and heaven and the New Jerusalem.
Both folds (other sheep) of God will become one (both the 1st Covenant and 2nd Covenant people will merge into one people to live with Christ forever)
-
You're comparing NT Scriptures with Das Kapital? Please don't!
Both written by Jews. I thought that was such an important criteria?
The important criteria is how the OT and NT agree with one another. That's because they say the same thing. That's how people should know Das Kapital isn't scripture. Having both been written by Jews is incidental, but it was prophecied about. That's impressive.
-
The important criteria is how the OT and NT agree with one another.
But what if someone doesn't think that they agree with one another? :)
-
But what if someone doesn't think that they agree with one another? :)
Then I guess we have fellowship on where we do agree and live at peace over the rest. 😊
-
Amen! Another round of latkes for everyone!!!
-
The important criteria is how the OT and NT agree with one another.
But what if someone doesn't think that they agree with one another? :)
Technically, this would be a higher critical view by liberal theologians, or a position held by a non-Messianic Jew, etc. As I understand, you are the latter. So… it isn’t surprising. If it were different, you would be a convert to the Christian faith. But isn’t that your point?
-
Amen! Another round of latkes for everyone!!!
You're too late. Next Chanukah perhaps.
-
Then I guess we have fellowship on where we do agree and live at peace over the rest. 😊
I suppose that is what we must do until the messiah comes. Or returns, if you're correct. Or maybe we're both wrong and its the Mahdi.
-
If it were different, you would be a convert to the Christian faith. But isn’t that your point?
My point is that's it's possible to be a religious, God fearing person who's literate in the bible and not believe in the NT. Not because of "blindness" and not because of "wickedness". But because of a different perception of what the bible is saying.
-
If it were different, you would be a convert to the Christian faith. But isn’t that your point?
My point is that's it's possible to be a religious, God fearing person who's literate in the bible and not believe in the NT. Not because of "blindness" and not because of "wickedness". But because of a different perception of what the bible is saying.
Yes, of course. Faith is the pivotal factor. But faith isn’t merely a blind hopefulness or wishfulness. The NT can be believed based upon Philological truth alone. Or disbelieved for any number of reasons.
-
I suppose that is what we must do until the messiah comes. Or returns, if you're correct. Or maybe we're both wrong and its the Mahdi.
Yes, we can all agree how great God is!
Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee. For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the LORD shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee. And the gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising. Isa.60:1-3
I love to read about myself in the scriptures.
-
I suppose that is what we must do until the messiah comes. Or returns, if you're correct. Or maybe we're both wrong and its the Mahdi.
Yes, we can all agree how great God is!
Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee. For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the LORD shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee. And the gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising. Isa.60:1-3
I love to read about myself in the scriptures.
Arians, Unitarians, and anti-Messianic Jews cannot agree how great God is because Jesus Christ is homoousios divinity, as is the Holy Spirit. Agreeing how Great the Father alone is doesn’t cut it for redemption and atonement as salvation.
In fact, most of these would need to at least tremble to come up to the level of demons who both believe and tremble. It’s not salvific for them, but believing and trembling demons are far superior to those named above who deny the Son (and/or the Holy Spirit).
-
Arians, Unitarians, and anti-Messianic Jews cannot agree how great God is because Jesus Christ is homoousios divinity, as is the Holy Spirit. Agreeing how Great the Father alone is doesn’t cut it for redemption and atonement as salvation.
In fact, most of these would need to at least tremble to come up to the level of demons who both believe and tremble. It’s not salvific for them, but believing and trembling demons are far superior to those named above who deny the Son (and/or the Holy Spirit).
Is a demon who acknowledges the reality of God, but doesn't live a life of faith, superior to the human who worships God out of faith, according to his or her understanding, even if incomplete, and lives a life of that faith accordingly? I'm not so sure about that.
-
Perhaps off topic, but just a result of my reflections and contemplation this morning.
Although blessed(?) with some degree of intellectual acumen, at times like this discussion -- and perhaps even more so as I have contemplated the last year in retrospect and the coming (current) year in prospect, I find myself weeping at my own self-aggrandizement and self-importance.
I am reminded that I come to the Father only because The Man on the middle cross; He said I could come.
As only Alistair Begg could communicate it...
-
Arians, Unitarians, and anti-Messianic Jews cannot agree how great God is because Jesus Christ is homoousios divinity, as is the Holy Spirit. Agreeing how Great the Father alone is doesn’t cut it for redemption and atonement as salvation.
I disagree,
He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Mic.6:8
There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. Lk.1:5-6
In fact, most of these would need to at least tremble to come up to the level of demons who both believe and tremble. It’s not salvific for them, but believing and trembling demons are far superior to those named above who deny the Son (and/or the Holy Spirit).
Just a few things. Believers in the one true God share a holy reverence of him. Also, "believing" demons are in no way superior to humans. And finally, people who "deny the Son" are people who don't do what Jesus told them to do.
-
Arians, Unitarians, and anti-Messianic Jews cannot agree how great God is because Jesus Christ is homoousios divinity, as is the Holy Spirit. Agreeing how Great the Father alone is doesn’t cut it for redemption and atonement as salvation.
In fact, most of these would need to at least tremble to come up to the level of demons who both believe and tremble. It’s not salvific for them, but believing and trembling demons are far superior to those named above who deny the Son (and/or the Holy Spirit).
Is a demon who acknowledges the reality of God, but doesn't live a life of faith, superior to the human who worships God out of faith, according to his or her understanding, even if incomplete, and lives a life of that faith accordingly? I'm not so sure about that.
Faith cometh by hearing (the noun) and hearing by the Rhema of God. If it’s another rhema and another message, then it isn’t THE faith (once delivered to the saints).
Wrong belief is another faith from another gospel, and there is not another.
There may be a few more people enduring everlasting hellfire than most are willing to concede.
The problem isn’t a lack of faith, it’s faith in the wrong rhema.
That which is not of faith is sin. Most people bring forth most of their action from the source of sin, not faith. It’s an epidemic within the church.
-
Perhaps off topic, but just a result of my reflections and contemplation this morning.
Although blessed(?) with some degree of intellectual acumen, at times like this discussion -- and perhaps even more so as I have contemplated the last year in retrospect and the coming (current) year in prospect, I find myself weeping at my own self-aggrandizement and self-importance.
I am reminded that I come to the Father only because The Man on the middle cross; He said I could come.
As only Alistair Begg could communicate it...
Yes, it often seems like I’m arrogant because I speak so plainly and directly, so I get your implications. The real problem in this regard is that our culture has produced hearts and minds that depend upon their false concepts for identity, value, and worth; so everything that comes against their ideology is taken extremely personally.
I’m not important at all except the finite local reach of that to which I’m called. But I do have a hard time switching out of teaching mode into discussion mode, especially if the discussion includes a lot of non-orthodox topics.
Ecumenism is an epidemic. There’s far more pride in that than I suffer from being too zealous at times
-
Arians, Unitarians, and anti-Messianic Jews cannot agree how great God is because Jesus Christ is homoousios divinity, as is the Holy Spirit. Agreeing how Great the Father alone is doesn’t cut it for redemption and atonement as salvation.
I disagree,
He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Mic.6:8
There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. Lk.1:5-6
In fact, most of these would need to at least tremble to come up to the level of demons who both believe and tremble. It’s not salvific for them, but believing and trembling demons are far superior to those named above who deny the Son (and/or the Holy Spirit).
Just a few things. Believers in the one true God share a holy reverence of him. Also, "believing" demons are in no way superior to humans. And finally, people who "deny the Son" are people who don't do what Jesus told them to do.
Those 2 examples are from the Old Covenant(s). Contrary to popular misunderstanding, the Mosaic Law COULD be kept. There was provision within the Law for not keeping the Law and making sacrifice to atone. That was still keeping the Law even while failing to observe it.
The Gospel is about us being translated into Christ and having put on Christ because of His finished work on the cross and His resurrection. Works of the Law and works of the flesh aren’t going to save anyone, then or now.
Since that which is not of faith is sin, merely engaging in action without it coming from the proper source is irrelevant and futile. Faith and the works therefrom are all that matter. If the source is not faith, the works are dead.
Faith requires a specific object. That thing believed is faith (the noun). Faith is not believING. Faith is also not actING. Doing is no litmus test for the source OF the doing. Most are doing many things, and it’s mostly of sin and not of faith. Even the allegedly “good” things.
-
Faith cometh by hearing (the noun) and hearing by the Rhema of God. If it’s another rhema and another message, then it isn’t THE faith (once delivered to the saints).
Wrong belief is another faith from another gospel, and there is not another.
There may be a few more people enduring everlasting hellfire than most are willing to concede.
The problem isn’t a lack of faith, it’s faith in the wrong rhema.
That which is not of faith is sin. Most people bring forth most of their action from the source of sin, not faith. It’s an epidemic within the church.
That's all very academic but what is the existential reality for the individual (or person, perhaps, if you also think people are tasked with becoming individuals)? Are you suggesting that God speaks to all people such that they might enter into a relationship with Him, holding to the tenets of orthodoxy? Or reject Him in favour of their own rhema? Of the demonic? Or that it's messier? Does hamartia preclude a life of faith where the Rhema of God has not yet been heard?
Reminds me of that song:
-
Faith cometh by hearing (the noun) and hearing by the Rhema of God. If it’s another rhema and another message, then it isn’t THE faith (once delivered to the saints).
Wrong belief is another faith from another gospel, and there is not another.
There may be a few more people enduring everlasting hellfire than most are willing to concede.
The problem isn’t a lack of faith, it’s faith in the wrong rhema.
That which is not of faith is sin. Most people bring forth most of their action from the source of sin, not faith. It’s an epidemic within the church.
That's all very academic but what is the existential reality for the individual (or person, perhaps, if you also think people are tasked with becoming individuals)? Are you suggesting that God speaks to all people such that they might enter into a relationship with Him, holding to the tenets of orthodoxy? Or reject Him in favour of their own rhema? Of the demonic? Or that it's messier? Does hamartia preclude a life of faith where the Rhema of God has not yet been heard?
Reminds me of that song:
As regards (alleged) faith… what about the “existential reality” of Muslims? Or Hindus? Or Buddhists? Or Bahai? Or Mormons? Or JWs? Or Arians? Or Unitarians? Or Sabellians? Or Pneumatomachians? Or Nestorians, Apollinarians, or Eutychians? Or Monophysites? Or Pantheists? Or just the plain old primitives? Are they all candidates for salvation because of their “faith”? They “believe” something that includes God, with or without a Son. Many “believe” in the Son improperly. Do they all receive salvation for “a” faith of some kind?
At what point is the message and the thing believed NOT salvific versus salvific in any or all of the above? Or with other gradients of false doctine or complete ignorance and vague, illegitimate concepts?
What’s the threshold or perimeter of salvific faith? Is the presence of some kind of belief in some incomplete or insufficient message the nebulous arbitrage point for redemption? Are there many ways? Many truths?
Aren’t these comparable and disparate forms of your questions? Just exactly what can one believe and not believe and still ultimately be saved? Can one believe that those adamantly endorsing sexual immorality and perversion are believers? What about those who are advocates for abortion? Can someone have an entirely anti-Christian morality and ethicity in place in their lives and still be saved?
Repentance is metanoia. It’s a noun. It’s not merely the verb that comes from it in action. Metanoia is the changed condition and state of being of the mind beind brought amidst God’s for moral reflection and agreement with His standards for inward character and outward conduct. That’s the lexical definition, which many reject for trivial phrases like “making a 180º turn-around and going the other way”, etc. (That’s the verb, BTW. It’s repentING, not repentANCE. The latter is the “thing” granted by God. No one can repent without having been given repentANCE from God. The noun has the verb within it.)
If someone hears the message and frustrates grace to hold onto their false doctrines, it’s a demonstration of impenitence. To what degree is that a salvation issue. Well… since we’re both already saved and not yet saved (no one has received the end of their faith, which is the saving of their souls), I’d suggest it’s really important to have a heart for truth rather than one’s own internal production of ideology and philosophy in lieu of actual theological truth.
The JWs aren’t going to be avoiding the lake of fire. Why? Because of their wrong belief from a wrong source, and their stubbornness and rebellion to hear anything beyond what they think they know. They don’t have to murder, rape, steal, and other heinous acts. They’ll be facing judgment without hope because of what they both have and haven’t believed. It’s the quality of faith and its object that matters, not just that some kind or degree of faith is present. Everyone believes lots of things. Few (none?)are devoid of belief. It’s the object OF belief that matters. It’s the message that is crucial.
Mercy rejoices against judgment, so ultimately all of this is above my pay grade. But it does matter what one believes and if one is authentically penitent or not. The invalid external can be manufactured to mimic the valid internal. Works and the outward appearance won’t necessarily tell the story here.
When someone resists Christological truth or other primary things, it’s cause for concern not reason to gloss it all over for “fellowship”. I won’t pretend that the Christian faith does anything but anathematize non-Messianic Jews or cultists, etc. Anathema is anathema. The problem today is no central spiritual authority to determine such things. It’s everyone’s individual subjective opinions against all others.
Lexicography and grammar of the original languages are the Philological foundations for knowing and proclaiming the truth, even if you perceive I’ve done it in an undesirable manner. It doesn’t change that sin is a privation and that Cappadocian and Chalcedonian core doctrines aren’t just a guideline for today’s Modernists to submit approval for and pass judgment upon. If someone isn’t Trinitarian, it’s not a small matter. If someone doesn’t understand it, that’s different than reformulating it and becoming the source for alleged acceptable terminology.
The truth stands if no one believes it. Philology’s demise as the primary discipline for knowing truth is an unfortunate casualty of the rise of Empiricism and dozens of others -isms. The real question ought to be “How can God still save anyone when everyone’s epistemological foundations are so corrupted in every way and they can’t/don’t/won’t admit it because they refuse to give up their own godhood status from indoctrination far preceeding any religious kind from doctrinal divergence?”
For a professing Believer, it’s far more important to rid oneself of wrong thought and belief than it is to gain knowledge (gnosis) of theology. Building on an old foundation (including hows and whys, not merely whats) means Christ is not the only foundation.
Correct belief is far more crucial than just believing whatever. How can that not be true? It can’t be an Ecumenistic free-for-all. Oprah’s god doesn’t save. Vishnu, alone or in company, doesn’t save. Neither does the “Father” God of a created son. Tell me when absolute objective truth doesn’t matter?
-
Those 2 examples are from the Old Covenant(s). Contrary to popular misunderstanding, the Mosaic Law COULD be kept. There was provision within the Law for not keeping the Law and making sacrifice to atone. That was still keeping the Law even while failing to observe it.
The observation of OT sacrifice has led us to our Lord Jesus. The Lamb of God shows us how all sin is against God, and he patiently endures our sins. The Son of God perfectly displayed Gods' endurance when sinners mistreated him in horrible ways and he forgave it, because he loved his enemies,
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. Mt.5:48
The Gospel is about us being translated into Christ and having put on Christ because of His finished work on the cross and His resurrection. Works of the Law and works of the flesh aren’t going to save anyone, then or now.
Since that which is not of faith is sin, merely engaging in action without it coming from the proper source is irrelevant and futile. Faith and the works therefrom are all that matter. If the source is not faith, the works are dead.
Faith requires a specific object. That thing believed is faith (the noun). Faith is not believING. Faith is also not actING. Doing is no litmus test for the source OF the doing. Most are doing many things, and it’s mostly of sin and not of faith. Even the allegedly “good” things.
Jesus hasn't finished his work yet. He's at work in believers, demonstrating Gods'love toward all. He conqueres all evil this way, along with judgement day.
-
The NT can be believed based upon Philological truth alone.
I don't know what this means.
-
I don't know what this means.
Since our conspicuous friend may have already flown the coop, I would have to imagine that 'philological truth' means the language of the NT, when properly studied, understood, applied, and recognised to be not just the Logos of God, but the Rhema of God as well. If so, there's an interesting set of assumptions in this schema, not least of which is the almost Platonic notion of why some believe and others don't (ignorance). Well, it's not almost Platonic is it?
Perhaps our φιλόλογος κοινωνός (?) will return with a nice, respectful attitude to confirm. Or maybe not. Either way, it's an untenable claim if one is to properly respect the myriad ways people engage with a text, the different things different people find compelling, and so on.
-
Since our conspicuous friend may have already flown the coop, I would have to imagine that 'philological truth' means the language of the NT, when properly studied, understood, applied, and recognised to be not just the Logos of God, but the Rhema of God as well. If so, there's an interesting set of assumptions in this schema, not least of which is the almost Platonic notion of why some believe and others don't (ignorance). Well, it's not almost Platonic is it?
Ah. Indeed not.
φιλόλογος κοινωνός
Google translate tells me that this means "philological guinea pigs". I love this place! Even the rebukes are highbrow.
-
I don't know what this means.
Since our conspicuous friend may have already flown the coop, I would have to imagine that 'philological truth' means the language of the NT, when properly studied, understood, applied, and recognised to be not just the Logos of God, but the Rhema of God as well. If so, there's an interesting set of assumptions in this schema, not least of which is the almost Platonic notion of why some believe and others don't (ignorance). Well, it's not almost Platonic is it?
Perhaps our φιλόλογος κοινωνός (?) will return with a nice, respectful attitude to confirm. Or maybe not. Either way, it's an untenable claim if one is to properly respect the myriad ways people engage with a text, the different things different people find compelling, and so on.
My brother is a big text guy, and admits he avoids the "theological" controversies. I, on the other hand, love to face the theological controversies, and always want to find a systematic theology resolving all of the issues.
I see nothing wrong with entertaining different ideas, because if anybody is going to come to the truth, he is going to have to begin with a set of ideas, true or not. We have to begin where we're at.
But viewing the text as a sword to separate brothers isn't the way to go, in my opinion. Jesus separated the sheep from the goats. But he went after the one lost sheep, right? That is also in the text! ;)
-
Google translate tells me that this means "philological guinea pigs". I love this place! Even the rebukes are highbrow.
Ha! I was going for something like, philological partner (in the faith), with the implication that said partner prefers excessive argument.
But viewing the text as a sword to separate brothers isn't the way to go, in my opinion. Jesus separated the sheep from the goats. But he went after the one lost sheep, right? That is also in the text! ;)
Er, what do sheep, goats, and shepherding have to do with the proper dividing of the word? There is a Berean impulse behind CONSPICILLUM's philological push. What's offputting isn't the practice itself, but the attitude and relationship that's followed from this push.
-
But viewing the text as a sword to separate brothers isn't the way to go, in my opinion. Jesus separated the sheep from the goats. But he went after the one lost sheep, right? That is also in the text! ;)
Er, what do sheep, goats, and shepherding have to do with the proper dividing of the word? There is a Berean impulse behind CONSPICILLUM's philological push. What's offputting isn't the practice itself, but the attitude and relationship that's followed from this push.
The dividing of the word is noble. But as I said, my brother and I have had many discussions, with his focus on the text and my focus on theology. And we don't always see eye to eye.
The temptation is to get frustrated, because neither approach resolves every problem definitively. If anybody is looking for the golden key to solve every interpretive problem, they won't find it, because our own myopia and pride are the problem. We're defective and impatient. We don't always see clearly, as Paul said.
So we have to combine integrity in studying the text with an emphasis on spirituality, without which we are not renewed and don't generate the character and virtues of Christ. That will ensure that even if we understand nothing, we'll still be good people and can enjoy a measure of brotherhood. Right?
In other words, I believe we're saying much the same thing. Good study-Bereans. Good character-spiritual emphasis when studying.
I've heard it said for years that we can use the word of God as a sword for killing or for edifying and correction. When we use our understanding as a battering ram, we're not really understanding.
We shouldn't be dividing brothers over the "truth we know." Rather, if someone is lost and confused, we should seek them out and try to give them aid, rather than expose them as "idiots" who aren't worth the time of day.
-
I've heard it said for years that we can use the word of God as a sword for killing or for edifying and correction. When we use our understanding as a battering ram, we're not really understanding.
We shouldn't be dividing brothers over the "truth we know." Rather, if someone is lost and confused, we should seek them out and try to give them aid, rather than expose them as "idiots" who aren't worth the time of day.
Yes, well, except when it comes to stubborn obstinance. :) But it's a forum, so what else is expected.
-
You cite Isaiah 53 and it's a perfect example of that. First of all, the chapter break is wrong and breaks the flow of the text. Chapter 53 should properly begin at 52:13. And more than that, it's not its own book, it is part of a much longer book. Who is this mysterious "suffering servant"? If one read just that chapter, which does not identify the servant, they wouldn't know and would be willing to listen to any identity someone proposed. But if one read Isaiah 40 straight through to 53, they'd find the servant identified, by name, numerous times. And what's the connection of 53 to the surrounding material? Chapter 52 and 54 talk about the redemption of Zion, the rebuilding of Jerusalem, and the ingathering of the exiles. It would seem logical that chapter 53 would have a meaning pertaining to that topic. But it's not understood that way by most Christians.
Hey Fenris, long time no see.
The servant obviously is a person. I can't name anyone in the OT who qualifies. You?
-
Hey Fenris, long time no see.
Hiya!
The servant obviously is a person.
Why is the servant "obviously" a person? Isaiah very clearly names national Israel as God's servant multiple times. To wit-
Is 41:8 But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, you descendants of Abraham my friend. I took you from the ends of the earth, from its farthest corners I called you. I said, ‘You are my servant’
Is 43:10 “You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen"...
Is 44:1 But now listen, Jacob, my servant, Israel, whom I have chosen.
Is 45:4 For the sake of Jacob My servant and Israel My chosen one
Is 49:3 He said to me, “You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will display my splendor.”
We could debate all day about whether the servant in 53 is an individual or national Israel (and we may!) but there's nothing logically incorrect about interpreting the servant as national Israel. Even some Christian commentators have accepted this reading.
-
Of course I understand the Jewish perception, you don't ours?
I read Isa 52:13-53 once again and it so perfectly fits the Christian understanding upon total denial if otherwise.
13 Behold, my servant shall act wisely;
he shall be high and lifted up,
and shall be exalted.
14 As many were astonished at you—
his appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance,
and his form beyond that of the children of mankind—
15 so shall he sprinkle many nations;
kings shall shut their mouths because of him;
for that which has not been told them they see,
and that which they have not heard they understand.
1 Who has believed what he has heard from us?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 For he grew up before him like a young plant,
and like a root out of dry ground;
he had no form or majesty that we should look at him,
and no beauty that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by men;
a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
And so on for the rest of the chapter, in the Christian perspective Isa 53 is not about a nation but about a person. A person not found in the OT, thus in the future, he can't be the victorious Messiah Judaism expects since: because he poured out his soul to death (v12), so who is the person Isa 53 speaks of?
I could go on.
-
Of course I understand the Jewish perception
Do you, though? Because I've addressed this many times and yet here we are again as if I've never said anything at all.
I read Isa 52:13-53 once again and it so perfectly fits the Christian understanding upon total denial if otherwise.
Why start at 52:13, though? Aren't the surrounding chapters also relevant to our understanding? Isaiah 53 isn't its own book, it is part of a larger book.
What is the subject of chapter 52?
Awake, awake, Zion,
clothe yourself with strength!
Put on your garments of splendor,
Jerusalem, the holy city.
The uncircumcised and defiled
will not enter you again.
Shake off your dust;
rise up, sit enthroned, Jerusalem.
snip
Burst into songs of joy together,
you ruins of Jerusalem,
for the Lord has comforted his people,
he has redeemed Jerusalem.
The Lord will lay bare his holy arm
in the sight of all the nations,
and all the ends of the earth will see
the salvation of our God.
In short, the redemption of Zion at the end of days.
What is the subject of chapter 54?
The Lord will call you back
as if you were a wife deserted and distressed in spirit—
a wife who married young,
only to be rejected,” says your God.
“For a brief moment I abandoned you,
but with deep compassion I will bring you back.
In a surge of anger
I hid my face from you for a moment,
but with everlasting kindness
I will have compassion on you,”
says the Lord your Redeemer.
Again, this is the redemption of Zion and the return of the Jewish exiles.
This is not from another book in the bible. This is from the chapters right before 53. And so it provides context. Chapter 53, too, takes place at the end of days. So let's begin. What happens at the end of days?
Behold, my servant shall act wisely;
he shall be high and lifted up,
and shall be exalted.
OK, the servant will be exalted. This tells us nothing about who it is. You seem to find the fact that the "servant" is mentioned in singular means that it has to be an individual. As I've pointed out, this is not so. God refers to national Israel as His "servant" many times, and I provided 5 such quotes that you unfortunate ignored.
Let's continue.
As many were astonished at you—
his appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance,
and his form beyond that of the children of mankind—
The servant was viewed as inhuman. Again, this doesn't tell us who it is. Although Jesus is never referred to as "inhuman" in the NT. Historically, unfortunately, the Jews have been viewed this way though.
so shall he sprinkle many nations;
kings shall shut their mouths because of him;
for that which has not been told them they see,
and that which they have not heard they understand.
I prefer the alternate translation "he shall startle many nations". In any case, the world's leaders will be surprised by the servant's identity. Which begs a question: Which would be more startling, the world's 2.3 billion Christians being right, or the world's 13 million Jews being right? Just throwing that out there?
Who has believed what he has heard from us?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
Ok, now who is the speaker here? It seems logical to me that the speaker is the startled kings from the last verse.
For he grew up before him like a young plant,
and like a root out of dry ground;
he had no form or majesty that we should look at him,
and no beauty that we should desire him.
He was despised and rejected by men;
a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
How does any of this describe Jesus, who was quite popular according to the NT? On the other hand, it describes Jewish history very well.
And so on for the rest of the chapter, in the Christian perspective Isa 53 is not about a nation but about a person.
Yes, I understand this. But that isn't the only way to read it, nor is it illogical to see the individual as national Israel who are, after all, referred to as God's servant. Shall I post the verses again?
A person not found in the OT, thus in the future,
Why would anyone think this person was in the past? All of Isaiah from chapter 40 and on is describing future events.
he can't be the victorious Messiah Judaism expects
Jews don't think it's referring to the messiah.
because he poured out his soul to death (v12), so who is the person Isa 53 speaks of?
It also says the servant will go like a sheep to the slaughter, which is exactly how the Jewish Holocaust is described.
I could go on.
I can do this all day.
-
I could go on.
I can do this all day.
:)
because he poured out his soul to death (v12), so who is the person Isa 53 speaks of?
It also says the servant will go like a sheep to the slaughter, which is exactly how the Jewish Holocaust is described.
Israel (the Jewish people) never died, that would be against God's promises anyway, the person in Isa 53 did.
I am not really impressed by the context of the surrounding chapters (<53 and >54), chapter 53 has a total different dynamic, it's as if it doesn't belong there, but of course it does.
I guess it all comes down if you believe in the Gospel or not. If I were born in a traditional Jewish family, went to the synagogue each week I would probably say the same things as you.
One more thing, v12 - yet he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors.
How do you interpret that and how it can be linked to Israel.
-
Israel (the Jewish people) never died, that would be against God's promises anyway
Never died? Slaughtered wholesale by the millions in the last century.
I am not really impressed by the context of the surrounding chapters (<53 and >54)
It doesn't matter if you're impressed or not. You don't get to pretend that Isaiah 53 is its own book in the bible, because it isn't. The servant is identified by name, yet you won't even acknowledge the verses that I posted.
I guess it all comes down if you believe in the Gospel or not.
And that's the sum of the matter right there. Although as I have said, there are Christian commentators who believe as I do, that the servant is national Israel.
One more thing, v12 - yet he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors.
How do you interpret that and how it can be linked to Israel.
On Yom Kippur, the biblical day of atonement, we spend all day in prayer and contemplation. We confess a lengthy list of sins and ask for forgiveness for all of them. This includes sins that I, personally, have not committed. The request for forgiveness is thus communal, and even more, covering all of humanity. Yes, On Yom Kippur I ask for forgiveness for all transgressions of mankind. Similarly, in Temple times the number of bulls sacrificed over Sukkot totaled 70, which is the number of nations in the world (see Genesis 10). The Talmud states that if the Romans knew how much good was done on their behalf by temple sacrifice, they never would have destroyed it.
-
Israel (the Jewish people) never died, that would be against God's promises anyway
Never died? Slaughtered wholesale by the millions in the last century.
You know, I am raised pro Israel, till the age of 30 collected the stamps of Israel. When I became a Christian at the age of 24 and started to explore the Bible I became a bit jealous on Jews, wow the chosen people of God! what a privilege! But when knowledge increased and I became aware of all the persecutions Jews went through the centuries the jealously disappeared rapidly. Even now today, the world is still mad with Jews. There is no race (or nation, entity) in history that has been persecuted so much as Jews. So where is all that hate coming from? Obviously the answer is a spiritual one, somewhere in the Bible, let the speculations (and disagreements) begin, but maybe better not.
I am not in agreement with your statement, despite all the horrors the Jewish people never died, the person in Isa 53 did die. You are still with how many millions? And since 1948 you are on the map again. And that's what the Lord has promised you.
I guess it all comes down if you believe in the Gospel or not.
And that's the sum of the matter right there. Although as I have said, there are Christian commentators who believe as I do, that the servant is national Israel.
Exactly and for me counts that the NT on several places refers to Isa 53 being the Christ.
One more thing, v12 - yet he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors.
How do you interpret that and how it can be linked to Israel.
On Yom Kippur, the biblical day of atonement, we spend all day in prayer and contemplation. We confess a lengthy list of sins and ask for forgiveness for all of them. This includes sins that I, personally, have not committed. The request for forgiveness is thus communal, and even more, covering all of humanity. Yes, On Yom Kippur I ask for forgiveness for all transgressions of mankind. Similarly, in Temple times the number of bulls sacrificed over Sukkot totaled 70, which is the number of nations in the world (see Genesis 10). The Talmud states that if the Romans knew how much good was done on their behalf by temple sacrifice, they never would have destroyed it.
Fenris, that's awesome, I did not know.
-
You know, I am raised pro Israel, till the age of 30 collected the stamps of Israel. When I became a Christian at the age of 24 and started to explore the Bible I became a bit jealous on Jews, wow the chosen people of God! what a privilege! But when knowledge increased and I became aware of all the persecutions Jews went through the centuries the jealously disappeared rapidly. Even now today, the world is still mad with Jews. There is no race (or nation, entity) in history that has been persecuted so much as Jews. So where is all that hate coming from? Obviously the answer is a spiritual one, somewhere in the Bible, let the speculations (and disagreements) begin,
I find this a laughable theological point. Jesus warns his followers that "You will be hated because of me" (this is all over Matthew). So your point being that when Christians are hated, it's a good thing, but when Jews are hated, it's a bad thing?! It's simpler to say that Jews and Christians are hated for the same reason, because they represent the monotheistic deity Who has expectations from mankind that people would rather not be.
I am not in agreement with your statement, despite all the horrors the Jewish people never died, the person in Isa 53 did die.
Actually, what is says is "because he poured out his soul to death..." Which is to say, the servant was willing to die. And Jews were willing to die, and millions did; and not just in the 20th century, but over the last 20 centuries. It also says "he shall see children, he shall prolong his days" and yup, we are still here.
Exactly and for me counts that the NT on several places refers to Isa 53 being the Christ.
It doesn't directly in any place. And what's more, none of his disciples see it as a fulfillment of anything.
Fenris, that's awesome, I did not know.
We both learned things in this discussion. Awesome!