Psalm 22:17, Hebrew Text, "Like A Lion". Who's Lion?

[theterminator]

Good times.

you might want to consider Muhammad as the foretold prophet in Isaiah

https://ponderingislam.com/2016/07/24/p ... the-bible/

[rakovsky]

Terminator,

I have been down this road years ago, just without people using curse words at me.

My default strong assumption was that the rabbis were right and that the Christians were messing with the verses to make it look like they were about a suffering Messiah. The reason is that the rabbis are Jewish like the Old Testament. You could say that they represent the most common institutional, official viewpoint.

The difference though is that I never made it a rock hard ideological conviction that the Old Testament did not speak of a suffering Messiah. I was an actual "skeptic" on the topic itself. That is, I was skeptical and at least somewhat open minded about both interpretations. Someone who professes to be a hardcore "skeptic" against the Christian viewpoint turns out to actually be a "true believer" in the opposite interpretation.

So I had to take the questions as objectively and neutrally as possible, without being scared that the Christian viewpoint could turn out to be right or wrong. So for example, did the concept of one person atoning for another exist in ancient Judaism? Yes, because Moses, the author of the Torah itself, asks to be an "atonement" for the Israelites because of their sins in Exodus 32.

Let's look at the modern rabbis' JPS translation of Exodus 32 to minimize possible Christian bias in translation:

30 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people: 'Ye have sinned a great sin; and now I will go p. 106 up unto the LORD, peradventure I shall make atonement for your sin.'
31 And Moses returned unto the LORD, and said: 'Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them a god of gold.
32 Yet now, if Thou wilt forgive their sin—; and if not, blot me, I pray Thee, out of Thy book which Thou hast written.'
33 And the LORD said unto Moses: 'Whosoever hath sinned against Me, him will I blot out of My book. 34 And now go, lead the people unto the place of which I have spoken unto thee; behold, Mine angel shall go before thee; nevertheless in the day when I visit, I will visit their sin upon them.' 35 And the LORD smote the people, because they made the calf, which Aaron made.

So the plain reading is:
1. Moses asks to "make atonement for their sin"
2. Moses gave God an option: EITHER A) forgive their sin OR B) God still holds the sins against them and blots Moses out. If Moses gets blotted out, it means he undergoes punishment. And what is the punishment for in this context? The sins of the people.
3. God decides: Whoever sins gets blotted out, the angel will PROTECT Moses (not blot him out), and "NEVERTHELESS", God will still punish the Israelites for their own sins.
That means that God did not choose option A OR choose option B. It means that God REJECTED Moses' offer to make "atonement for their sin."

So here I have just sincerely given for you as straightforward, plain, direct, and neutral a reading for you as I can. Moses asked to make atonement for their sins.
Not only that, but to me, it's quite obvious that my reading is the correct one.

So your colleagues gave you the answer:
"He's not stating that he will be the atonement, but that he will make one."
OK, so how does Moses offer to "make atonement" when he goes to talk with God?
He asks to get "blotted out". And what does getting "blotted out" entail? It means getting killed. "Destroyed" is one of the definitions of the dame Hebrew word in Strong's dictionary. And when the word "blotted out" comes up other places, it means that too. Plus, remember - God said to Moses in denying his request: MY ANGEL WILL PROTECT YOU. The OPPOSITE of God's angel protecting Moses would mean Moses gets hurt or killed. That is what would happen if God ACCEPTED Moses' request and BLOTTED HIM OUT.
So to make atonement, Moses asks to get blotted out or destroyed. That is the same thing as Moses asking to be the atonement.

Besides, I already showed you places in modern rabbis' writings where they say that YES, Exodus 32 is about Moses offering to make atonement for sin and getting killed instead of the Israelites.

So this raises the question:
Why are those who fight the Christian understanding of Isaiah 53 making up clearly wrong explanations of passages like Exodus 32 to deny atonement philosophy, even when the rabbis accept that Exodus 32 is about atonement?

If they are not able to tell you that Exodus 32 is about atonement philosophy when it clearly and admittedly is, how can they be reliable sources to understand whether Isaiah 53 is about atonement philosophy or not?

This is the kind of thing that persuaded me over my studies to the opposite of what I had expected: That actually the Jewish Christians of the 1st century AD did have the right understanding of Isaiah 53. it turns out that these 1st century Christian dissidents and "skeptics" of the establishment view had a correct understanding of Isaiah 53 and other passages that has been lost by the "establishment" over the centuries due to inter-religious polemics and debating.

My requests to you:

• Read my website (rakovskii.livejournal.com) or Talmud scholar Daniel Boyarin's writings on Isaiah 53.
• Please cite from scholarly sources instead of REDIT or word reference forums.

[rakovsky]

Good times.

you might want to consider Muhammad as the foretold prophet in Isaiah

https://ponderingislam.com/2016/07/24/p ... the-bible/

Thank you for sharing, Terminator.
One of the interesting things is that nowhere in the Quran or Hadiths does it ever specify that the Christian reading of Isaiah 53 or Psalm 22 is wrong.

Remember: one of my crucial goals for myself was to understand what Isaiah 53 really teaches, so I researched Islamic views too.
I read wrote long articles by a Muslim writer on Isaiah 53. His position was that actually Isaiah 53 is about the Messiah.

If you are Muslim, you can't go by what most modern rabbis say about the Tanakh or what you find on REDIT or Word Reference Forums. Sometimes the Muslim view is that the Christians are right about the Old Testament and about religion. For example, Muslims teach that Jesus was born of the virgin Mary.

[rakovsky]

in Exodus 32:31-33 - 31
the word kappara is used

in isaiah 53 ,

"This has probably occurred to you at some point, but do you know where else none of the words “pardon”, “forgiveness”, nor “atonement”, – the familiar “selicha, mechila, and kappara” – nor any derivative of them appear even once? Isaiah 53"

this then would imply "bear iniquities" has to be interpreted in a non-atoning way.

Actually the opposite would make sense.
In Exodus 32, Moses says either you forgive the Israelites OR blot out / destroy Moses. God says no, he would still punish the Israelites. That means God rejects Option A (forgiveness of Israel and no blotting out of Moses) and leaves open Option (B) blotting out Moses and atonement by Moses and option (C) punishing the Israelites and not punishing Moses.

In Isaiah 53, God does not choose Option A (forgiveness), because the sin is not forgotten, and atonement is performed.
Therefore, if we are going to strictly follow the options posed in Exodus 32, there is no need to use the word kappara or forgiveness in Isaiah 53.

[John2]

I wrote (re: 11Q13):

"...including Dan. 9:26 in this part..."

But I thought there might be something fishy about that translation I linked to, which is why I said, "this is the only link I could find while I'm at work but I'll check my books and search more later".

I forgot I had a discussion with Neil Godfrey about this on his blog a few years ago in response to an article by Thom Stark about Carrier's dying messiah idea.

http://vridar.org/2012/04/28/the-facts- ... ew-part-2/

As Stark says in his article, "The problem is, there is a lacuna in the scroll precisely here, but this particular website doesn’t give any indication that the verse from Daniel they included in their translation is a guess!”

I noted that "I had a similar headscratching moment when I first read Carrier’s post, as I only have Vermes’ translation of this fragment and also saw 9:25 inserted there."

This happened again last night when I got home from work and checked Vermes. But I think it's significant that Daniel 9 is mentioned at all in this context, whatever the verse in question may have been.

[rakovsky]

I wrote (re: 11Q13):

"...including Dan. 9:26 in this part..."

But I thought there might be something fishy about that translation I linked to, which is why I said, "this is the only link I could find while I'm at work but I'll check my books and search more later".

I forgot about a discussion I had with Neil Godfrey about this on his blog a few years ago in response to an article by Thom Stark about Carrier's dying messiah idea.

http://vridar.org/2012/04/28/the-facts- ... ew-part-2/

As Stark says in his article, "The problem is, there is a lacuna in the scroll precisely here, but this particular website doesn’t give any indication that the verse from Daniel they included in their translation is a guess!”

I noted that "I had a similar headscratching moment when I first read Carrier’s post, as I only have Vermes’ translation of this fragment and also saw 9:25 inserted there."

This happened again last night when I got home from work and checked Vermes. But I think it's significant that Daniel 9 is mentioned at all in this context, whatever the verse in question may have been.

Daniel 9 was definitely a major verse for Jewish people and sects in that time. One pagan writer from the era said that the Jews had heightened expectations of a Messiah because of the chronology for his arrival that the prophecies set down. Evidently this was in Daniel 9. Rashi and Maimonides both did the math for the chronology in Daniel 9 and one or both of them came out with a date in the 1st c. AD. A couple passages in the New Testament reference Daniel 9 too, talking about the "abomination of desolation" being a sign that the Jewish Christians need to get out fast from Jerusalem. So 1st centuries sects were thinking a lot about this passage and its calculations.

[John2]

Here's the thing though. As Gordon points out:

...the prophet himself does not understand to what historical events this chronology refers. In his vision Daniel protests to the angel that appears to him:

"And I heard but did not understand and I said, 'Master, what is the End (Aharit) of all these things?' (Dan 12:9)

The angel explains to Daniel that the meaning of the visions will remain undecipherable until the events of the End of Days itself:

"And he said, 'Go Daniel, for the things are closed up and sealed until the end time." (Dan 12:10)

Do you think that the end time -and the consequent revelation of the meaning of Daniel's visions- occurred during the first century CE?

[rakovsky]

Here's the thing though. As Gordon points out:

...the prophet himself does not understand to what historical events this chronology refers. In his vision Daniel protests to the angel that appears to him:

"And I heard but did not understand and I said, 'Master, what is the End (Aharit) of all these things?' (Dan 12:9)

The angel explains to Daniel that the meaning of the visions will remain undecipherable until the events of the End of Days itself:

"And he said, 'Go Daniel, for the things are closed up and sealed until the end time." (Dan 12:10)

Do you think that the end time -and the consequent revelation of the meaning of Daniel's visions- occurred during the first century CE?

According to the text, it would have occurred then. I don't think it was contingent on repentance.

“The interpretation was received by most subsequent commentators. It would indeed have been a strange exception to the language of the prophets, and of Isaiah himself, who, in this later part of his book too, upbraids his people with their wickednessk, their neglect of Godl, their dullness and blindnessm, hypocrisyn, idolatries and disobedience0, and who tells them, ‘p Your iniquities have separated between you and your God’ – it would have been a strange contradiction had he, in the midst of this, described them as God’s righteous servant, who should bear the sins of all the world besides; (Christians and Mohammedans, as they say, Edom and Ishmael;) and that we, when converted upon their prosperity and our own overthrow, at the coming of their Messiah, should own that they suffer in our stead, the just for the unjust, and atoned for us. It is strangely contrary to their solution of other prophecies, or of the disappointment of their own expectations, which point to an earlier coming of the Messiah during the time of the Second Temple, viz, that his coming was delayed by their sins, that he would come if they repentedq.”

(The “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah According to the Jewish Interpreters, translated by Samuel R. Driver and Adolf Neubauer, with an introduction by Edward B. Pusey [Hermon Press, New York 1877, Reprinted in 1969],

Also, I see how some key events lined up with the prediction, like the desolation of the Temple and city, and the dying of the Messiah.

[MrMacSon]

One pagan writer from the era said that the Jews had heightened expectations of a Messiah because of the chronology for his arrival that the prophecies set down. Evidently this was in Daniel 9.

Who was that pagan writer?

[rakovsky]

One pagan writer from the era said that the Jews had heightened expectations of a Messiah because of the chronology for his arrival that the prophecies set down. Evidently this was in Daniel 9.

Who was that pagan writer?

Mr Macson.

I think it was non-pagan Josephus, like where he talks about Vespasian as being the Messiah. The writer mentioned the timing of the prophecies in explaining why the Jewish people were earnestly expecting a Messiah in that period, and were causing troubles for Rome. See page 162 here:
https://books.google.com/books?id=_ugjt ... el&f=false


The other date-calculated Jewish End Times prophecy that comes to mind is the theory that the history of the world was to be divided into millenial periods. It's not in the Bible but one of the Jewish traditions outside of the Bible written down after the 1st century AD. Here is one version of it:

"The world endures 6000 years: two thousand before the law, two thousand with the law and two thousand with the Messiah."

(Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 96b-99a)

"The world endures 6000 years and one thousand it shall be laid waste, that is, the enemies of God shall be laid waste, whereof it is said,'the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day.' As out of seven years every seventh is a year of remission, so out of the seven thousand years of the world, the seventh millennium shall be the 1000 years of remission, that God alone my be exalted in that day."

Talmud, Rabbi Kattina

"This world is to last 6000 years; 2000 years it was waste and desolate, 2000 years marks the period under the law, 2000 years under the Messiah. And because our sins are increased, they are increased."

~Yalkut on the Psalms




The other thing is if you look at John the Baptist, he was a major figure among the Jews of his day, a kind of outcast/outsider/hermit prophet in the wilds, and he was telling people that the Messiah was coming soon. Josephus talks about John Baptist as being a major figure, but doesn't mention that part. It's more evidence about how people's expectations were high at that time.

Here are some more helpful citations about the timing expectations:

.The First Century, however, especially the generation before the destruction [of the Second Temple] witnessed a remarkable outburst of Messianic emotionalism. This is to be attributed, as we shall see, not to an intensification of Roman persecution, but to the prevalent belief induced by the popular chronology of that day that the age was on the threshold of the Millennium...when Jesus came into Galilee, 'spreading the gospel of the kingdom of God and saying the 'time is fulfilled' and the Kingdom of God is at hand,' he was voicing the opinion universally held that...the age of the kingdom of God-was at hand...it was this chronological fact which inflamed the Messianic hope rather than the Roman persecutions...Jesus appeared in the procuratorship of Pontius Pilate (26-36 c.e.)...It seems likely, therefore, that in the minds of the people the Millennium was to begin around the year 30 C.E. Be it remembered that it is not the Messiah who brings about the Millennium. It is the inevitable advent of the Millennium which carries along with it the Messiah and his appointed activities. The Messiah was expected around the second quarter of the First Century C.E. because the Millennium was at hand. Prior to that time he was not expected, because according to the chronology of the day the Millennium was still considerably removed."

Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver, A History of Messianic Speculation in Israel,

"And the (voice from heaven) came forth and exclaimed, who is he that has revealed my secrets to mankind?.. He further sought to reveal by a Targum the inner meaning of the Hagiographa (a portion of scripture which includes Daniel), but a voice from heaven went forth and said, enough! What was the reason?--because the date of the Messiah was foretold in it!"

Targum of the prophets, in Tractate Megillah 3a, which was composed by Rabbi Jonathan ben Uzziel

"Had I been there, I should have said to them: is it not written, the temple of the Lord the temple of the Lord the temple of the Lord are these, which points to the destruction of the first and Second Temples? Granted that they [the rabbis of the Second Temple period] knew it would be destroyed, did they know when this would occur? Rabbi Abaye objected: and did they not know when? Is it not written, seventy weeks are determined upon the people, and upon the holy city. All the same, did they know on which day?"

Babylonian Talmud (tractate Nazir 32b), words of Rabbi Joseph

"And God made in six days the works of his hands; and he finished them on the seventh day, and he rested on the seventh day and sanctified it. Consider my children what that signifies, he finished them in six days. The meaning of it is this: that in six thousand years the Lord God will bring all things to an end. For him one day is as a thousand years...therefore children, in six days, that is in six thousand years, shall all things be accomplished...then he shall rest on the seventh day."

Epistle of Barnabus