60 Scholars On Messianic Expectation At The Turn Of The Era

[neilgodfrey]

For example, I think the author/s of Isaiah are part and parcel of what might loosely be called the "Israelite religion" but I don't accept that their religion was "centred around the revealing of a leader" of any kind.

Ummm. I thought when I referenced 'Samaritans' and 'Jews' we were talking about the Second Temple period. So you think there was an Israelite community AT THAT TIME somewhere in the world which didn't use the Pentateuch and only used Isaiah. This is silly. Argument is over. Time to move on. The specific term 'messiah' is not universal but the Deut 18:15 expectation AND OTHERS from the Torah are. Next topic.

Come on Secret. It is as plain as day you're reading my words with hostile intent looking for silly pedantic ways to interpret them idiotically.

We disagree on how to approach historical inquiry. I get tired of you continually having to bash me at every opportunity. I don't think I make a habit of treating you the way you seem obsessed with treating me.

[Secret Alias]

I am being nice. I will admit that the specifically 'warlike' aspects of the Jewish adaptation of this device in the Pentateuch are uniquely Jewish. The Samaritan Ta'eb is not (necessarily) warlike. I would even go so far as to hold that Deut 18:15 was inserted into the text by Ezra to offer a 'foreshadowing' of his own coming. Remember the rabbinic intimation that Ezra wrote the Torah manifests itself in a Mosaic manner. I forget the exact wording but something like 'if anyone could have been equal to the task (of Torah authorship) Ezra was that guy' or something like that.

[Secret Alias]

Sanhedrin 21a:

It has been taught: R. Jose said: Had Moses not preceded him, Ezra would have been worthy of receiving the Torah for Israel.

And then it follows:

Of Moses it is written, And Moses went up unto God, and of Ezra it is written, He, Ezra, went up from Babylon. As the going up of the former refers to the [receiving of the] Law, so does the going up of the latter. Concerning Moses, it is stated: And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments; and concerning Ezra, it is stated: For Ezra had prepared his heart to expound the law of the Lord [his God] to do it and to teach Israel statutes and judgments.

[Secret Alias]

FWIW עזרא = 278 = כְּרוּבִים
מֹשֶׁה‎‎ = 345 = הָשֵׁם

[neilgodfrey]

Sanhedrin 21a:

It has been taught: R. Jose said: Had Moses not preceded him, Ezra would have been worthy of receiving the Torah for Israel.

And then it follows:

Of Moses it is written, And Moses went up unto God, and of Ezra it is written, He, Ezra, went up from Babylon. As the going up of the former refers to the [receiving of the] Law, so does the going up of the latter. Concerning Moses, it is stated: And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments; and concerning Ezra, it is stated: For Ezra had prepared his heart to expound the law of the Lord [his God] to do it and to teach Israel statutes and judgments.

And this may not be the only reasonable perspective on the evidence and the way to conduct historical inquiry. It's not even a reasonable perspective if it is declaimed as dogma.

[iskander]

You think,
The Jewish study bible coment on micah 5 see attachment

I'm not the least interested in what your rashki or rabbinic teachers have to say about Micah 5 if I am studying what it meant to various people in the Second Temple era. Using the opinions of teachers 600 to 1000 years removed from a set period to reconstruct the views held during that set period violates the most fundamental principles of historical inquiry -- and logic.

It is about the history, traditions and culture of a group of people. You are a preacher .

" Outstanding political abilities together with these religio-ethical qualities made David the authentic prototype of the redeemer and the founder of that ruling family one of whose descendants the Messiah must be. Not only did the name "son of David" become a standing title of the King-Messiah, but also the name "David" itself. The prophet Hosea says, concerning the Messianic age, "Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God, and David their king" (Hos. 3:5).
Meanwhile, prophecy was developing in Israel, and in the kingdoms of Ephraim and Judah arose prophets who broadened and deepened the conceptions of the tribes of Israel. In this process the Messianic expectation received an almost entirely new form.
In fact, the Messianic expectation is the positive element in the message of the prophets "


THE MESSIANIC IDEA IN ISRAEL
From Its Beginning to the Completion of the Mishnah
by JOSEPH KLAUSNER, PM).
pg 41

[neilgodfrey]

[
It is about the history, traditions and culture of a group of people. You are a preacher .

You are the one who is preaching. My mind is open to revising what I think I understand according to the relevant evidence. I'm not a mouthpiece for some nonsense dogma.

[iskander]

[
It is about the history, traditions and culture of a group of people. You are a preacher .

You are the one who is preaching. My mind is open to revising what I think I understand according to the relevant evidence. I'm not a mouthpiece for some nonsense dogma.

Prehaps I caught the same disease .

I'm not the least interested in what your rashki or rabbinic teachers have to say

You deliberately and wilfully choose to ignore any argument other that the one that supports your assertion. A preacher is a mindless defender of nothing . In addition to that, you come here to inundate threads with your monotonous litany of simple assertions. You seem to be used to preaching in the comfort of your church.

[Nathan]

Remember the rabbinic intimation that Ezra wrote the Torah manifests itself in a Mosaic manner. I forget the exact wording but something like 'if anyone could have been equal to the task (of Torah authorship) Ezra was that guy' or something like that.

Secret, rabbinic tradition nowhere intimates that Ezra authored the Torah, not in Sanhedrin 21a or anywhere else for that matter. In fact it speaks unequivocally on the subject:

Bava Batra 14b, 15a:

Moses wrote his book ... and [the book of] Job. [However,] Joshua wrote ... the [last] eight verses of the Torah [that mention the death of Moses etc.] ...
Ezra wrote his own book and the genealogy of Chronicles, [up] to his own [genealogy].

[neilgodfrey]

I'm not the least interested in what your rashki or rabbinic teachers have to say

You deliberately and wilfully choose to ignore any argument other that the one that supports your assertion. A preacher is a mindless defender of nothing . In addition to that, you come here to inundate threads with your monotonous litany of simple assertions. You seem to be used to preaching in the comfort of your church.

I am deliberately and wilfully choosing to ignore any argument that is based on irrelevant sources, like centuries after the event being studied.

I am attempting to prompt you to think about the logical invalidity of your methods and expose your faith-based reconstruction of the past.

In your responses to my questions and challenges you quickly drop your pretence at open-minded intellectual inquiry. Ah dear, same old. . . .