Antichrist = Antimessiah?

[Fenris]

Correct me If I am wrong, but I thought the Talmud was the oral traditions of the Jews from their beginning. If that is the case it predates Origen by how many Centuries.

"From their beginning?" Like Abraham? Like Moses? Do you even know what is in the Talmud, that you use it so readily? Or do you only care about the little snippets that you think proves your points?

I have not read all of Origen so I do not know how many times he referenced Isaiah 53, but the one time I know about Origen quoted just one group of Jews. Below is Origen's quote.

"Now I remember that, on one occasion, at a disputation held with certain Jews, who were reckoned wise men, I quoted these prophecies; to which my Jewish opponent replied, that these predictions bore reference to the whole people, regarded as one individual, and as being in a state of dispersion and suffering, in order that many proselytes might be gained, on account of the dispersion of the Jews among numerous heathen nations. ..

So we have Origen, in the second century, quoting a Jewish person who says Is. 53 is about the entire people. What more do I need?

[rejoice44]

"From their beginning?" Like Abraham? Like Moses? Do you even know what is in the Talmud, that you use it so readily? Or do you only care about the little snippets that you think proves your points?

Don't get mad at me. You could, if you wanted, present both sides as presented in the Talmud for all of us to compare.

So we have Origen, in the second century, quoting a Jewish person who says Is. 53 is about the entire people. What more do I need?

Perhaps name a superior number of Rabbi's who stated explicitly that Isaiah 53 was about Israel being the suffering servant.

[Fenris]

Don't get mad at me. You could, if you wanted, present both sides as presented in the Talmud for all of us to compare.

I'm not going to pore over thousands of pages of texts for a few stray lines.

Perhaps name a superior number of Rabbi's who stated explicitly that Isaiah 53 was about Israel being the suffering servant.

Ahem. It was you who brought this point up, and you said that (paraphrasing) "rabbis in 2012 see Is. 53 as being about the entire people, but this was not always so." Now we have the earliest recorded comment with it being about the entire people. From a Christian source, no less. Just accept it.

[rejoice44]

I'm not going to pore over thousands of pages of texts for a few stray lines.
Ahem. It was you who brought this point up, and you said that (paraphrasing) "rabbis in 2012 see Is. 53 as being about the entire people, but this was not always so." Now we have the earliest recorded comment with it being about the entire people. From a Christian source, no less. Just accept it.

Common sense would tell us that no self-respecting Rabbi today would admit to Isaiah 53 relating to Jesus, so a more accurate assessment would have to predate the Messiah. And that is why the Talmud comes into play.

Have to leave for the night.

[Fenris]

Common sense would tell us that no self-respecting Rabbi today would admit to Isaiah 53 relating to Jesus, so a more accurate assessment would have to predate the Messiah.

Sorry, I am not understanding this.

Later I guess.

[rejoice44]

Sorry, I am not understanding this.

Later I guess.

Prior to Jesus Christ coming on earth there would have been no reason for the Jews to have a bias against the reading of Isaiah 53. After Jesus Christ came, and fulfilled all of Isaiah 53, their was a reason for bias. If we look at the Jews perception of Isaiah 53 prior to Jesus, we can conclude that the majority of Jews believed that Isaiah 53 represented the Messiah. There were those who saw the Son of Ephraim as the suffering Servant, and the Son of David as the Lion king. The idea that Israel was the suffering servant was a minority concept until after Christ. The Talmud contains the evidence for this.

But what does the scripture say?

Number 12:3 Now the man Moses was very meek, above all the men who were upon the face of the earth.

Deuteronomy 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;

Zechariah 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

Surely Isaiah 53 portrays a meek servant who bears the burden of the people. As the meek Moses bore the sin of the people and died, rather than enter into the Promised Land, so dies the suffering servant for the sins of his people in Isaiah 53.

The Jews didn’t want a suffering servant, they wanted a lion king.

Numbers 11:11-12 And Moses said unto the LORD, Wherefore hast thou afflicted thy servant? and wherefore have I not found favour in thy sight, that thou layest the burden of all this people upon me? Have I conceived all this people? have I begotten them, that thou shouldest say unto me, Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father beareth the sucking child, unto the land which thou swarest unto their fathers?

When Moses led the people it was to be to a new promised land. To what promised land was the Messiah to lead the people, since they were already in the promised land of Moses?

Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world”. He came as the lamb of God, the suffering servant, he will return as the lion of Judah, to lead his people to the promised land, in which there is eternal life.

[Fenris]

Prior to Jesus Christ coming on earth there would have been no reason for the Jews to have a bias against the reading of Isaiah 53.

I'm sorry, I don't understand this "bias". You mean, Jews understand the chapter differently than you personally do, so that is "bias"? Heck, some Christians now understand the chapter as referring to the Jewish people. They "biased" as well?

After Jesus Christ came, and fulfilled all of Isaiah 53, their was a reason for bias. If we look at the Jews perception of Isaiah 53 prior to Jesus, we can conclude that the majority of Jews believed that Isaiah 53 represented the Messiah.

Conclude based on...what? We have no writings on the subject prior to the second century, where a Christian church father quotes a Jew as saying that it's not about the messiah.

There were those who saw the Son of Ephraim as the suffering Servant,

If you're talking about "messiah ben Joseph", that has not, to my knowldge, ever been linked to Is. 53. That's because he doesn't suffer, he dies. In battle.

The idea that Israel was the suffering servant was a minority concept until after Christ.

According to who?

The Talmud contains the evidence for this.

No, it doesn't.

But what does the scripture say?

I'm not following your logic. The messiah is meek, the servant in 53 is meek, ergo, the servant is the messiah?

Surely Isaiah 53 portrays a meek servant who bears the burden of the people. As the meek Moses bore the sin of the people and died, rather than enter into the Promised Land, so dies the suffering servant for the sins of his people in Isaiah 53.

Moses didn't enter into Israel because of his own sin. He didn't bear anyone elses.

The Jews didn’t want a suffering servant, they wanted a lion king.

So then they didn't see 53 as being about the messiah. My very point.

[rejoice44]

If you're talking about "messiah ben Joseph", that has not, to my knowldge, ever been linked to Is. 53. That's because he doesn't suffer, he dies. In battle.

Sanhedrin 98.b

Others say: His name is Menahem the son of Hezekiah, for it is written, Because Menahem ['the comforter'], that would relieve my soul, is far. The Rabbis said: His name is 'the leper scholar,' as it is written, Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him a leper, smitten of God, and afflicted.

[Fenris]

This is not a link to "messiah ben Joseph". It is, in fact, a pun. Not a legal ruling.

[the rookie]

rejoice44 - we're way off topic here.

Either get back to the OP or start a new thread. You could call it the, "I'm going to convince Fenris that Yeshua is Messiah by logic" thread.

[Fenris]

You could call it the, "I'm going to convince Fenris that Yeshua is Messiah by logic" thread.

That's every thread where he and I participate!

[Old man]

Ah, the boomerang! Have at it.

Yup! The “Boomerang.” Throwing it helps me to maintain my position of “Plausible Deniability.”

So, gather the Jewish exiles back to Israel.
No more idolatry.
A Davidic king on the throne (i.e. the messiah)
Scrupulous observance of the law.
No further exiles from the land.
A rebuilt temple.
The nations will be aware that God sanctifies Israel.

Most of these seem to be regarding more of a messianic era rather than specifically about the identity of the messiah. Even in the fulfillment of these (except for the “Davidic king on the throne”) the person whom the Jews will accept as the messiah could still be almost anyone (I am assuming that the very first criteria is that he will be Jewish). So which prophecies do Jews look to in order to specifically identify the person who will or is supposed to sit on David’s throne? How will they know if the messiah is this person or that? What criteria or prophecies does “he” specifically have to fulfill in order for Jews to say, “This is the messiah!”?

So, gather the Jewish exiles back to Israel.

Does this include all Jews, including yourself? Of coarse you may already be there I don't know.

Elijah ascended to heaven alive. The end of Malachi tells us where he fits in-

23 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the LORD. 24 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers; lest I come and smite the land with utter destruction.

Is “… the great and terrible day of the LORD.” generally regarded as the messianic era (or reign) or is it referring to something else? Perhaps it is an event leading up to the appearance of the messiah? Is this referring to the real Elijah coming back (since he never died) or someone in the same “spirit”, manner, prophetic anointing, etc.?

Who is this verse referring to?

Mal 3:1 "Behold, I am going to send My messenger, and he will clear the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple; and the messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, He is coming," says the LORD of hosts.

Is it held that this is also referring to Elijah since in Mal. 4:5 Elijah is specifically named?

He's not expected to visit ever Seder. Rather, there is legal doubt about some aspects of the Seder that will only be resolved "when Elijah comes" (in the messianic era).

The other thing is that Elijah slandered the Jews when he said "I alone am left" because there were in fact other faithful Jews. So Elijah's "punishment" is that he has to "visit every Seder" and see that there are still religious Jews.

Very interesting!

Jews understand that this is not referring to any one person, but rather the phenomena of prophecy in general. Moses was the first prophet who spoke to Israel. Was he the last? As per Deuteronomy 18, no; there will be others.

Understood and understandable. Thanks for the clarification.

Please forgive me if this is too personal I don’t mean to be rude or disrespectful, but I understand that there are many sects of Judaism just as there are an inordinate number of denominations and sects within Christianity. But even with the differences in interpretation regarding many passages of scripture the majority still have core beliefs that they hold in common. Is this true in Judaism? I ask because your answers may be based on the understandings of the sect you are part of which may or may not be what the majority believe. Are your views reflective of the mainstream and align with the majority of Jewish beliefs? Are these views common among the majority of sects within Judaism?

[Fenris]

Most of these seem to be regarding more of a messianic era rather than specifically about the identity of the messiah. Even in the fulfillment of these (except for the “Davidic king on the throne”) the person whom the Jews will accept as the messiah could still be almost anyone (I am assuming that the very first criteria is that he will be Jewish). So which prophecies do Jews look to in order to specifically identify the person who will or is supposed to sit on David’s throne? How will they know if the messiah is this person or that? What criteria or prophecies does “he” specifically have to fulfill in order for Jews to say, “This is the messiah!”?

He will presumably be a part of this process. Jewish sage Maimonides codified in his writings:

If a king will arise from the House of David who delves deeply into the study of the Torah and, like David his ancestor, observes its mitzvos as prescribed by the Written Law and the Oral Law; if he will compel all of Israel to walk in the way of the Torah and repair the breaches in its observance; and if he will fight the wars of G-d; - we may, with assurance, consider him the messiah. If he succeeds in the above, builds the Temple on its site, and gathers in the dispersed remnant of Israel, he is definitely the messiah.

He will then perfect the entire world, motivating all the nations to serve G-d together, as it is written [Zephaniah, 3:9], "I will make the peoples pure of speech so that they will all call upon the Name of G-d and serve Him with one purpose."

Does this include all Jews, including yourself?

Yes.

Is “… the great and terrible day of the LORD.” generally regarded as the messianic era (or reign) or is it referring to something else?

Could just as easily be read "great and awesome day of the Lord," which sounds kinda different. Presumably the coming of the messiah.

Who is this verse referring to?

Mal 3:1 "Behold, I am going to send My messenger, and he will clear the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple; and the messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, He is coming," says the LORD of hosts.

Is it held that this is also referring to Elijah since in Mal. 4:5 Elijah is specifically named?

I don't know. Again, translations differ. Could just as easily be read "Behold, I am going to send My angel..." which again, means something totally different.

Please forgive me if this is too personal I don’t mean to be rude or disrespectful, but I understand that there are many sects of Judaism just as there are an inordinate number of denominations and sects within Christianity. But even with the differences in interpretation regarding many passages of scripture the majority still have core beliefs that they hold in common. Is this true in Judaism? I ask because your answers may be based on the understandings of the sect you are part of which may or may not be what the majority believe. Are your views reflective of the mainstream and align with the majority of Jewish beliefs? Are these views common among the majority of sects within Judaism?

Yes, there are many sects in Judaism. The sects that are more traditional/more religious are waiting for a scion of David to fulfill the assorted prophecies. The less traditional expect more of a messianic process than a messiah per se.

[Old man]

Yes, there are many sects in Judaism. The sects that are more traditional/more religious are waiting for a scion of David to fulfill the assorted prophecies. The less traditional expect more of a messianic process than a messiah per se.

If you don't mind me asking (I won't push for an answer) but what side do you hold to ... the 'more traditional/more religious" (waiting for a scion of David) or the "less traditional" (messianic process)?

Is the scion of David supposed to be from the Kingly lineage i.e. Solomon through the reigning kings of Judah or can he be from any of David's sons?

[Fenris]

If you don't mind me asking (I won't push for an answer) but what side do you hold to ... the 'more traditional/more religious" (waiting for a scion of David) or the "less traditional" (messianic process)?

I myself am more traditional/more religious.

Is the scion of David supposed to be from the Kingly lineage i.e. Solomon through the reigning kings of Judah or can he be from any of David's sons?

He has to be from the royal line, through Solomon.