Mass Readings Intentions Liturgical Ministry Messages: Fill & Download for Free

Such a question really makes me wonder about the sincerity of intention, sanity and sensibility of the person who asks these types. The answer is obviously Matthew 22: 29 to him or her. Most children learning catechism will without much effort understand that Mary is neither a deity and nor a person of the Most Holy Trinity.Secondly worshipping or adoring or glorifying is not what most protestants, evangelicals& Bible fundamentalists think it is: kneeling down in prayer, preaching, lifting one's hands, shouting praises and doing liturgical dance. No! However, I am not against this, it is good to have a physical, personal& passionate relationship with your God and (share your knowledge of him with others) evangelise, but you must know that such “worship” services are incomplete (and may even be worthless to God) without the inclusion of the Eucharistic Mass of God's Church!Worship is the essence of the Holy Mass, in which Christ's eternal sacrifice is renewed each time, remembered as he himself intended (Luke 22: 19), and re-offered to God the Father by the celebrant! There is no one who can or will ever please God more than Jesus, because he was also divine himself: immortal, innocent& perfect! If all humanity, right from Adam onward, were to ceaselessly praise and thank (which is worship according to the mainstream evangelical fundamentalist Protestant position) for all eternity with utmost devotion, yet it would still not be counted as even remotely close to Jesus's mediatory worship in just one Holy Mass, by God! This is the true opinion of many theologians, church doctors& saints not mine, I do not have the time to give references for it. And it is only those Christian communities that have the Four Marks of the Church - Wikipedia, are able to truly partake in this blessed form of communal worship.Thirdly, Catholics do not worship the Mother of God/ Theotokos! Have you forgotten the fifth commandment? If your earthly mother should be respected, then how much more should we uphold the mother of Jesus? Mary herself would be mortified if we had given her God's worship, we only regard her as she herself foretold (Luke 1: 48).And here's a WhatsApp message forwarded by a Catholic pentacostalist to me, that should help us all understand better, the role played by Virgin Mary in God's life and man's life:*Why the devil hates Virgin Mary! (Why you should love her even more.)*1. _The lowly handmaid of the Most High._"Be it unto me, according to your word." (Luke 1: 38)By her humble yes to God. She undid Eve's disobedience, and ruined the devil's plans for us, and all he had been working for, over thousands of years. Thus, She snatched us from the snare of the evil one, as any mother would to save her children. She was the only mother in history, to be able to choose her son, Jesus! She could have said, no!2. _Beloved, blessed& benevolent Mother of God/ Theotokos._"Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry." (Luke 3: 23)Jesus spent 9 months+ 30 years serving, loving and learning from his holy mother, and only mere 3 years he spared for us. Why? Why did he not begin his ministry at the temple itself while a teenager? *Jesus chose Mary, he was the only son in history be able to choose his mother.*3. _Powerful intercessor, succourer& advocate._"Son! They have no wine." (John 2: 3)Jesus never refuses anything to Mary, and Mary never ceases to care for anyone. Jesus is not only our saviour but also our judge, but Mary cannot and will not judge us. She is the Advocate who pleads for her clients before the Judge. But for that we must “do whatever He tells you” John 2: 5.4. _Influence, impression& intimacy with God._"Woman, why do you involve me. My time has not yet come." (John 2: 4)Jesus changed his eternally preordained time for his mother, at her request/ command he works his first ever miracle. God as he is Jesus is still an obedient son and Mary, the dearest mother. Mary has an usual impact on God and closeness to him is like none other.5. _The woman of the apocalypse._"And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars." (Revelation 12: 1)"And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed..." (Revelation 12: 17)We know Jesus was not brought forth by the earth, neither did he fall from the skies, nor did he become man out of thin air although he could have. He took flesh from Virgin Mary. He never required Mary, yet he desired to be mothered by Her. *This itself should be reason enough for Christians. It pleased him to come through Mary.* The First Coming of Jesus, began with Mary. So also will the Second Coming be!6. _The only sinless& all holy creature there is. (The Immaculate Conception/ Panagia.)_"Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you...." (Luke 1: 28)Mary's sinlessness does not mean she did not need a saviour. Mary was saved from sin before falling into it, unlike us who are being saved after the fall. Satan never had and still has no chance with only one creature: _Mary!_ She was and is always stronger than all the angels, wiser than all the prophets and braver than all the saints. Until Mary's creation, the creator was the only sinless one. Doctrinally, orthodoxically& scripturally, grace is the opposite of sin. *If you open a protestant evangelical Bible, it will read, "Greetings favoured one..." instead or some other similar terminology will be used. Only Roman Catholic and (eastern orthodox) Byzantine Apostolic Bibles are the closest to the original Aramaic, Latin and Greek Bibles. A great deal of effort is being made by Protestants and evangelical Bible fundamentalists to misinterpret the scriptures and disillusion Christians.*7. _Augmenter of God._"My soul magnifies the Lord.......From now on all generations will call me blessed,....." (Luke 1: 46- 55)Each and every time we praise Mary, preach her and pray to her, she magnifies/ amplifies/ intensifies/ clarifies/ augments God. If it was not so, Mary would have sang: my soul obscures/ diminishes/ deranges the Lord. The veneration of Mary can only result in the glorification of Jesus, in the same way as we gratify an artist by admiring his best work of art. The masterpiece! *But again a Protestant fundamentalist Bible will read "my soul glorifies/ extols/ exalts/ praises/ acclaims the Lord", another misleading distortion and deception.*8. _The primeval, principal& perpetual adversary of Satan. (Protoevangelium.)_"I will place enmity, between you and the woman, between her offspring and your offspring, you shall bruise his heel, while he crushes your head." (Genesis 3: 15)She was prophesied by God the Father himself and already given the promise of Satan's eventual fate and ultimate defeat long before St Ann could even carry her. God himself has placed this irrevocable, irreconcilable& irrefutable& personal enmity between Satan and Virgin Mary. This is no exaggeration. Mary belonged to heaven from the first moment of her existence.9. _Lucifer's replacement in heaven._"The Almighty has done great things for me....He has cast down the mighty from their thrones and uplifted the meek." (Luke 1: 46- 55)The Virgin not only repaired what Eve damaged by disobedience, but also won the second highest place that was lost by Lucifer as confirmed in Isaiah 14: 12. What Lucifer forfeited by pride and opposition, Mary merited through submission and humility.St Max Kolbe: *do not be afraid of loving Mother Mary too much, you can never love her as much as Jesus did.**Mary was forever in God's mind before she was made, once she came to be God himself came down to her for us, when she died she was taken by God wholely body and soul, to be with him forever.**If you hate Mary now, you know in who's side you are, in the eternal contest between heaven and hell.**Please forward this beautiful message to all believers.*PS: this message agrees with my personal Orthodox Christian beliefs, yet it is not endorsed by the clergy of any Church. Pax Christi!

AleteiaWhat is an acolyte in the Catholic Church?Fr Lawrence Lew, O.P. | Flickr CC by NC ND 2.0Philip Kosloski - published on 04/11/19The ministry of acolyte is an official ministry, while the term is also used in other circumstances.At times Catholics may see the word “acolyte” used in parish bulletins or spoken by the parish priest. What does it mean?The term, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia, comes from the “Greek akolouthos; Latin sequens [meaning he who] comes, a follower, an attendant.” In the past it was exclusively part of “minor orders,” one of the stepping stones to become a priest.The acolyte would “light the candles on the altar, carry them in procession, and during the solemn singing of the Gospel; prepare wine and water for the sacrifice of the Mass; and assist the sacred ministers at the Mass.”In 1973 Pope Paul VI abolished “minor orders” with the apostolic letter Ministeria Quaedam, but kept the role of acolyte, calling it instead a “ministry.”The liturgical duties of an acolyte were maintained, as Pope Paul VI describes the updated role.The acolyte is appointed in order to aid the deacon and to minister to the priest. It is his duty therefore to attend to the service of the altar and to assist the deacon and the priest in liturgical celebrations, especially in the celebration of Mass … He may also, to the extent needed, take care of instructing other faithful who on a temporary basis are appointed to assist the priest or deacon in liturgical celebrations by carrying the missal, cross, candles, etc., or by performing other such duties. He will perform these functions more worthily if he participates in the holy Eucharist with increasingly fervent devotion, receives nourishment from it, and deepens his knowledge about it.There are a few other duties entrusted to the acolyte, such as distributing Holy Communion to the sick, for example.This new ministry is always given to men studying to become priests or deacons, but can also be appointed to ordinary lay men who have no intention of receiving ordination.While the Catholic Church defines acolytes in this official capacity, the term is more commonly used when referring to altar servers and even more specifically, those who carry the candles at Mass. For this reason bulletins on occasion will name an “acolyte,” which may simply mean an altar server who will carry the candles.Regardless, this usage corresponds with the ancient duties of the acolyte that have been passed down over the centuries.It is a beautiful and sacred role in the Catholic Church, one that comes with much responsibility in assisting priests and deacons during the celebration of Mass.AleteiaMinistry of AcolyteRev. Mr. Matthew NewsomeFollowJul 15, 2017 · 7 min readInless than one month, I and fourteen other men of the Diocese of Charlotte in formation for the diaconate will be installed in the ministry of acolyte. This is one of two ministries that a man must receive before being ordained in the Roman Catholic Church, the other being that of lector (or reader). Our formation class was installed as lectors last year on July 14. I wrote about that ministry here.Most are familiar with the lector as the person at Mass who proclaims the scripture readings before the gospel (although as I explained in my article, there is a bit more to it than that). But what is an acolyte?Just as a lector’s functions can be performed by a deputed lay person if needed, most (though not all) of an acolyte’s functions can also be performed by deputed lay people such as altar servers. In fact, many parishes refer to their altar servers as “acolytes,” just as most deputed readers are commonly called “lectors.” But there are a few things reserved only to an installed acolyte. We’ll go over those momentarily. First, however, a little historical background…Acolyte and lector both used to be considered minor orders (along with porter and exorcist) which men seeking ordination would receive before entering the major orders of subdeacon, deacon, and priest. In a 1972 document called Ministeria quaedam, Pope Paul VI did away with the minor orders of porter and exorcist, and subsumed the duties of the subdeacon into the roles of lector and acolyte, which he renamed “ministries.” Those seeking ordination in the Catholic Church are now installed into the ministries of lector and acolyte before being ordained deacon, at which time one enters the clerical state. Lector and acolyte are “lay ministries.” Pope Paul VI even states that men not seeking holy orders may be installed into these ministries, though in most dioceses this is not the norm (the Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska being one notable exception in the United States).Ministeria quaedamThis is how Ministeria quaedam defines the ministry of acolyte:The acolyte is appointed in order to aid the deacon and to minister to the priest. It is his duty therefore to attend to the service of the altar and to assist the deacon and the priest in liturgical celebrations, especially in the celebration of Mass;In other words, the things you would typically see an altar server doing .[H]e is also to distribute communion as a special minister when the ministers spoken of in the Codex Iuris Canonici can. 845 are not available or are prevented by ill health, age, or another pastoral ministry from performing this function, or when the number of communicants is so great that the celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged.What this is saying is that an acolyte is an extraordinary minister of Holy Communion. However, as an installed minister, he takes precedence over other extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion in distributing the Eucharist.In the same extraordinary circumstances an acolyte may be entrusted with publicly exposing the blessed sacrament for adoration by the faithful and afterward replacing it, but not with blessing the people.Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament is something that a lay person ordinarily may not do. Therefore the ability of an acolyte to do so is truly a special privilege of that ministry. As a non-ordained minister, however, he may not offer Benediction.He may also, to the extent needed, take care of instructing other faithful who on a temporary basis are appointed to assist the priest or deacon in liturgical celebrations by carrying the missal, cross, candles, etc., or by performing other such duties.In other words, the acolyte should train the other servers who will be assisting at the altar.The duties of the acolyte are spelled out in more detail in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, which we will look at next.General Instruction of the Roman MissalThe proper functions of the acolyte at Mass are given in GIRM 187–193. Many of the duties of the acolyte can be carried out by others who have been trained in these functions. In looking at the duties of the acolyte, we will pay special attention to those tasks which only an installed acolyte may perform.Rather than quoting directly, we will simply summarize here what the GIRM calls for (you can read the rubrics for yourself here).GIRM 187 points out that the functions of the acolyte are many, therefore “it is desirable” that they be distributed among several acolytes. If only one acolyte is present, he performs “the more important duties” while the others are given to the other servers.GIRM 188 addresses the procession at the beginning of Mass, during which the acolyte “may” carry the cross. After the procession, “he takes his place in the sanctuary.”GIRM 189 says that since the acolyte will be approaching the priest or deacon multiple times during the Mass he should occupy a place “where he can easily carry out his ministry either at the chair or the altar.”GIRM 190 says that in the absence of a deacon the acolyte, after the Universal Prayer, prepares the altar with the corporal, purificator, chalice, pall and Missal. The acolyte may assist the priest in receiving the gifts from the people, may bring the bread and wine to the altar to hand to the priest, assist the priest while he incenses the offerings, and may himself incense the priest and the people.GIRM 191 states that a duly instituted acolyte (not simply an altar server acting as an acolyte) may assist the priest in distributing Communion to the people. If Communion is offered under both kinds and there is no deacon, the acolyte administers the chalice to communicants.GIRM 192 states that a duly instituted acolyte (not simply an altar server acting as an acolyte) helps the priest and deacon after Communion to purify the sacred vessels. In the absence of a deacon the acolyte does this at the credence table (not at the altar).GIRM 193 simply states that after Mass the acolyte processes out with the priest, deacon and other ministers to the sacristy.One other possible role of the acolyte should be mentioned before we conclude. On such (hopefully rare) occasions when a community must celebrate a Sunday Celebration in the Absence of a Priest, if there is no deacon to lead such a celebration “those to be chosen first by the pastor are lectors and acolytes who have been duly instituted for the service of the altar and of the word of God” (Directory for Sunday Celebrations in the Absence of a Priest 30).The same principle would hold true for public celebrations of the Liturgy of the Hours, as well as certain blessings which are able to be given by lay persons in the Book of Blessings. “An acolyte or a reader who by formal institution has this special office in the Church is rightly preferred over another layperson as the minister designated at the discretion of the local Ordinary to impart certain blessings” (General Introduction to the Book of Blessings 18d).In SummationThe acolyte’s function is to assist the priest and deacon at the altar. This means for the most part that the acolyte does what most of us are used to seeing any altar server do at Mass. The things which only a duly instituted acolyte may do are:Preparing the altar for the Eucharist if there is no deacon present (GIRM 190).Purifying the vessels at the credence table after Communion if there is no deacon present (GIRM 192).Serve as a preferred extraordinary minister of Holy Communion (GIRM 191).Expose and repose the Blessed Sacrament for Adoration (Ministeria quaedam).The GIRM does not specify a particular vestment for the acolyte, but like any liturgical minister assisting at the altar, he should be in choir dress — alb, or cassock and surplice.Just like the ministry of lector, the ministry of acolyte is a life-long ministry at the service of the Church. It is therefore especially important that the acolyte foster a proper spirit for this ministry in his heart. Just as the lector should have a special devotion to sacred scripture, the acolyte should be devoted especially to the Eucharist. In the words of Pope Paul VI:He will perform these functions more worthily if he participates in the holy eucharist with increasingly fervent devotion, receives nourishment from it, and deepens his knowledge about it. As one set aside in a special way for the service of the altar, the acolyte should learn all matters concerning public divine worship and strive to grasp their inner spiritual meaning: in that way he will be able each day to offer himself entirely to God, be an example to all by his gravity and reverence in church, and have a sincere love for the Mystical Body of Christ, the people of God, especially for the weak and the sick (Ministeria quaedam).Ministry of LectorRev. Mr. Matthew NewsomeThe author being instituted as a lector by Bishop Peter Jugis on July 14, 2016.When I was being instituted into the ministry of lector this summer, I was curious as to exactly what my role would be. After all, most of us are only used to having non-instituted lectors at our parishes, who are deputed to read the scriptures in the place of an instituted lector. This is because most men installed into the ministry of lector are doing so in preparation for ordained ministry, either as a priest or a permanent deacon.* Seminary chapels have instituted lectors. A parish church may have an instituted lector for a brief time if a seminarian is visiting for the summer or the parish has a diaconal candidate. But otherwise most parishes make use of deputed readers .*Men not seeking ordination may also be instituted into the ministry of lector by their bishop, although most dioceses do not make wide use of this option.Because there are differences in the ministerial functions of instituted and deputed lectors, and because I was unfamiliar with these differences from experience, I would have appreciated a resource that listed simply all the things that a lector should and could do.When it comes to the function and role of an instituted lector (reader), there are three relevant documents.Ministeria Quaedam, (MQ) the 1972 apostolic letter of Pope Paul VI, which established the ministries of lector and acolyte.The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM).The General Introduction to the Lectionary (GIL).I have compiled the pertinant information from these texts together in simplified form, for my own easy reference as well as for the benefit of others serving (or preparing to serve) in this ministry.Liturgical RoleThe primary role of the lector is to proclaim the readings from sacred scripture, except for the gospel, in the Mass and other sacred celebrations (MQ 5, GIRM 99). This is his proper function and should be exercised even when ministers of a higher rank are present (GIL 51).The lector also recites the psalm between the readings when there is no psalmist (MQ 5, GIRM 196).The lector presents the intentions for the general intercessions if there is no deacon and the intercessions are not being sung by a cantor (MQ 5, GIRM 197, GIL 53).The lector may also read the proper antiphons at the Entrance and Communion if these are not being sung (GIRM 198).The lector may also “direct the singing and the participation by the faithful” (MQ 5).PROCESSION: The lector proceeds with the priest and other ministers at the beginning of Mass. In the absence of a deacon, the lector carries the Book of the Gospels, slightly elevated. “In that case, the reader walks in front of the Priest but otherwise along with the other ministers” (GIRM 194). “Upon reaching the altar, the reader makes a profound bow with the others. If he is carrying the Book of Gospels, he approaches the altar and places the Book of the Gospels upon it. Then the reader takes his own place in the sanctuary with the other ministers” (GIRM 195).PLACE: The lector’s place during Mass is “in the sanctuary with the other ministers” (GIRM 195). The scripture readings, psalm, and intercessions are done from the ambo (GIRM 196, 197).VESTURE: During Mass with a congregation, “an instituted reader must wear the distinctive vestment of their office when they go up to the ambo to read the word of God” (GIL 54). The General Introduction to the Lectionary says this should be in keeping with the customs of the different regions. In my experience, in the United States this means either cassock and surplice (choir dress) or alb.WHEN TO SERVE: “When there are instituted readers available, they are to carry out their office at least on Sundays and festive days, especially at the principal Mass of the day” (GIL 51). Also: “Whenever there is more than one reading, it is better to assign the readings to different readers, if available” (GIL 52).Catechetical RoleThe lector “is to instruct the faithful for the worthy reception of the sacraments” (MQ 5).The lector has the responsibility of preparing the faithful who are appointed on a temporary basis to read the scriptures in liturgical celebrations (MQ 5, GIL 51, 52).Personal FormationThe lector is to meditate assiduously on sacred Scripture, and “to acquire that increasingly warm and living love and knowledge of Scripture that will make him a more perfect disciple of the Lord” (MQ 5).The lector should also develop the technical skills required to read publicly (i.e. good diction, clear articulation, sufficient volume, etc.) (GIL 55).In regard to the daily devotion to the scriptures required in the formation and ministry of a lector, I will close by quoting the General Introduction to the Lectionary paragraph 55 in full.“It is necessary that those who exercise the ministry of reader, even if they have not received institution, be truly suited and carefully prepared, so that the faithful may develop a warm and living love for Sacred Scripture from listening to the sacred readings.” Their preparation must above all be spiritual, but what may be called a technical preparation is also needed. The spiritual preparation presupposes at least a biblical and liturgical formation. The purpose of their biblical formation is to give readers the ability to understand the readings in context and to perceive by the light of faith the central point of the revealed message. The liturgical formation ought to equip the readers to have some grasp of the meaning and structure of the liturgy of the word and of the significance of its connection with the liturgy of the Eucharist. The technical preparation should make the readers more skilled in the art of reading publicly, either with the power of their own voice or with the help of sound equipment.http://testeverthingblog.com

Modern day Christians hold that Isaiah 53 refers to their Messiah while modern day Jews hold that it refers to Israel. Which is true? We'll, we can't judge this based on modern interpretations, instead we need to uncover what this verse meant to Jews living in the Second Temple era.It certainly was a puzzling chapter to all Jews before and since the time of Jesus. The portrait it gives of a suffering Messiah was utterly at variance with the popular conception. Yet until nearly in the 11th century the Messianic interpretation of this chapter was almost universally accepted and adopted by many Jews. In fact, here is a sample of the Jewish interpretation as evidence of this. Jonathan ben Uzziel, who was one of the 80 tannaim who studied under Hillel the Elder during the time of Roman occupied Judaea, begins the 52nd chapter his Targum (i.e., an ancient Aramaic paraphrase or interpretation of the Tanakh) on the book of Isaiah with the following:“Behold My Servant Messiah shall prosper, Be exalted and raised to great heights.” (Isa. 52:13, Targ. Yonatan)Targum Jonathan on Isaiah 52:13הָא יַצְלַח עַבְדִי מְשִׁיחָא יְרוּם וְיִסְגֵי וְיִתְקוֹף...https://www.sefaria.org/Targum_Jonathan_on_Isaiah.52.13?lang=biThis is important because Aramaic was the commonly spoken language of virtually every Jew by the start of the Second Temple era. Although the words of the prophets still resounded in the time-honored language, and although Hebrew literature during this period may be said to have actually flourished, nevertheless among the large masses of the Jewish people a linguistic change was in progress beginning with the Babylonian exile. Aramaic, already the vernacular of international intercourse in Asia Minor in the time of Assyrian and Babylonian conquests, took hold more and more of the Jewish populations of Palestine and of Babylonia, bereft as they were of their own national consciousness.There can be little doubt, at present, that the Gospel tradition arose in a Semitic milieu. Jesus himself spoke Aramaic; his Bible was the Hebrew Tanakh, our Old Testament, whether he read it—or heard it read—in Hebrew or in a running translation later known as the Targum; his teaching presupposed a familiarity with the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, with the current synagogue liturgy, based very largely on scripture. Also see this article:Hebrew Usage in the First CenturyThe Galilean dialect was the form of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic (JPA), spoken by people in Galilee during the late Second Temple period, for example at the time of Jesus and the disciples, as distinct from a Judean dialect spoken in Jerusalem. The Aramaic of Jesus, as recorded in the Gospels, gives various examples of Aramaic phrases. The New Testament notes that the pronunciation of Peter gave him away as a Galilean to the servant girl at the brazier the night of Jesus' trial (Matthew 26:73 & Mark 14:70). Galilean Aramaic is also attested in the Palestinian Targum fragments from Cairo Genizah, Diqduq haramit hagalilit (Caspar Levias), the Aramaic Portions of Bereshit Rabba (Hugo Odeberg), and the Aramaic portions of the Pesiqta de Rav Kahana.Babylonian Targunic is the later post-Achaemenid dialect found in the Targum Onqelos and Targum Jonathan, the "official" targums. The original, Hasmonaean targums had reached Babylon sometime in the 2nd or 3rd century C.E. They were then reworked according to the contemporary dialect of Babylonia to create the language of the standard targums. This combination formed the basis of Babylonian Jewish literature for centuries to follow. Today, the Yemenite Jews are the only community to still use the Targum as liturgical texts.However, the Jews in Galilee actually had their own Targum for use in their synagogues. The Galilean Targumic is similar to Babylonian Targumic. It is the mixing of literary Hasmonaean with the dialect of Galilee. The Hasmonaean targums reached Galilee in the 2nd century, and were reworked into this Galilean dialect for local use. The Galilean Targum was not considered an authoritative work by other communities, and documentary evidence shows that its text was amended. From the 11th century onwards, once the Babylonian Targum had become normative, the Galilean version became heavily influenced by it. Taking the tradition as a whole, we find dialectal features that align the mainstream targums with JPA Galilean. Linguistic features of the (Galilean) Aramaic texts, including its many Greek loan words, bear some interesting correlations with the Gospels, which gives a very strong argument in support of the Gospels arising earlier oral transmission in Aramaic.Problems With Peshitta PrimacyFor those of you who are not familiar with Peshitta Primacy, it is the belief that the Syriac Peshitta (the Syriac Bible) is the original text of the New Testament. It is a movement that first gain…http://aramaicnt.org/articles/problems-with-peshitta-primacy/#:~:text=The%20Wrong%20Language,not%20all%20Syriac%20is%20equal.REVIEWSJOHN M. COURT; REVIEWS, The Journal of Theological Studies, Volume 36, Issue 2, 1 October 1985, Pages 444–445, https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/36.2.444https://academic.oup.com/jts/article-abstract/36/2/444/1709687?redirectedFrom=PDFSo if the Targums state that the Suffering Servant is the Messiah then this is most likely what Aramaic speaking Jews would have heard. Not mention, there is a ton of rabbinic support!Since the appearance of Jesus of Nazareth (who was rejected, suffered, and died) this chapter has caused great confusion among the rabbis. Since then attempts have been made to reinterpret the whole chapter, claiming that it does not speak about the Messiah. Up until 1,000 years ago, all the sages understood that Isaiah 53 was about the Messiah. The claim of present day rabbis that the chapter speaks about the people of Israel and not about the Messiah is relatively new. See, for example, what Rabbi Haim Ratig said when he answered a question on the יהדות - פורטל מורשת website. The question asked if Isaiah 53 points to Jesus. You can read the rabbi’s complete answer on the website, but pay attention to the following pearls:“Your question raised a smile on my lips, after all, how can it be possible that any Christian in the world would fit the description of “The Servant of the LORD” who is brought like a lamb to the slaughter?! It is not possible that Isaiah would prophesy regarding a Christian event rather than a Jewish one. Isaiah’s prophecies spoke about the people of Israel. Throughout the generations, the Jewish people offered themselves as an innocent lamb.”It’s important to understand we’re not just talking about a Christian interpretation here – the Jewish Sages of ancient times also always interpreted Isaiah 53 to be about the Messiah. In fact, the well-known term “Messiah ben Yosef” is actually from this very text. As previously mentioned, the 1st century Targum Jonathan opened the section with the words “The Anointed Servant” that is to say Ben Uzziel connected the chapter to the Messiah, the Anointed One.Rabbi Yitzhak Abravanel who lived centuries ago admitted that Jonathan's interpretation was about the coming Messiah and and that this, in fact, just so happened to be the opinion of the Sages as well. This can be seen in much of their commentary.The Book of the Zohar recognizes the principle of substitution that the suffering of the Messiah would come to take the suffering that others deserved for their sins. On the verse “Surely He has borne our griefs”, the Book of the Zohar makes this claim:“There is in the Garden of Eden a palace named the Palace of the Sons of Sickness. This palace the Messiah enters, and He summons every pain and every chastisement of Israel: All of these come and rest upon Him. And were it not that he had thus lightened them off Israel and taken them upon himself, there had been no man able to bear Israel’s chastisements for the transgression of the law.”Midrash Konen in discussing Isaiah 53 puts the following words in the mouth of Elijah the prophet:“‘Thus says the Messiah: Endure the sufferings and the sentence your Master who makes you suffer because of the sin of Yisroel. Thus it is written, “He was wounded because of our transgressions, he was crushed because of our iniquities”, until the time the end comes.’”Tractate Sanhedrin in the Babylonian Talmud (98b), writes about the name of the Messiah:“‘Messiah “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.’”In the Midrash Tanhuma we read:“‘Rabbi Nachman says, it speaks of no one but the Messiah, the Son of David of whom it is said, here a man called “the plant”, and Jonathan translated it to mean the Messiah and it is rightly said, “man of sorrows, acquainted with grief.’”Likewise, the Midrash Shumel says this about Isaiah 53:“The suffering was divided into three parts: One for the generation of the Patriarchs, one for the generation of Shmad, and one for the King Meshiha”.The prayers for Yom Kippur, the ones which Jews utter still to this day, also relates Isaiah 53 to the Messiah. The prayer added for Yom Kippur by R. Eliezer around the time of the 7th century states:“Our righteous Messiah has turned away from us we have acted foolishly and there is no one to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he bears and he is pierced for our transgressions. He carries our sins on his shoulder, to find forgiveness for our iniquities. By his wounds we are healed.”The deeper we go into this prayer for Yom Kippur the more significant it gets. The prayer brings the sense that the Messiah left his people. “The righteous Messiah turned [away]”. That is to say, the Messiah has already come and left. Also, the Messiah suffered in the place of the people, and the sins of people were put on him then after the Messiah suffered, he left them that was the reason for their concern and so the people are praying for his return. A large part of this prayer is taken straight out of Isaiah 53, so from this we can prove that up to the 7th century the Jewish perception—also among the rabbis—was still that Isaiah 53 was about the Messiah.In Genesis Rabbah, Rabbi Moshe haDarshan says that God enabled the Messiah to save souls but that together with that, he would suffer greatly. Also Maimonides relates Isaiah 53 to the Messiah in his Epistle to Yemen. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai wrote:“‘And Messiah of Ephraim died there and Israel mourns for him as it is written: ‘He is despised and rejected of men’, and he goes back into hiding, for it says: ‘and we hid, as it were, our faces from him.’”Also in Tractate Sotah 14, Midrash Rabbah Parasha 5, Midrash Tanhuma, Midrash Konen, Yalkut Shimoni and actually the whole Talmud always related the chapter to the Messiah, as did all the rabbis until about a thousand years ago. Everyone agreed that Isaiah 53 prophesies about the Messiah.In the Tanakh, the book of Isaiah, chapter 53 the prophet prophesies about the Messiah that he would be rejected by his people suffer and die in agony and that God would see his suffering and death as an atonement for the sins of humanity. Isaiah lived and prophesied about 700 B.C.E. According to his prophecy in ch. 53 the leaders of Israel would recognize they had made a mistake at the end of days when they rejected the Messiah, so Isaiah put the prophecy in past tense and because he saw himself as part of the people of Israel he used third-person-plural.THE AISH WEBSITE ACCUSES CHRISTIANITY OF TAKING THE TANAKH OUT OF CONTEXT BUT DOES THE SAME THING WITH THE NEW TESTAMENTIn an article the Aish website, which is titled ‘Isaiah 53: The Suffering Servant,’ Marshal Roth gives one of her reasons why she thinks Isaiah 53 can't possibly be about Jesus:While this description clearly applies to Israel, it cannot be reconciled with the New Testament account which describes Jesus as immensely popular (Matthew 4:25). “Large crowds” of people came from far and wide to hear him speak, and Jesus had to sail into the water to avoid being overrun by the crowds (Mark 3:7-9). Luke 2:52 describes him as physically strong and well respected, a man whose popularity spread and was "praised by all" (Luke 4:14-15). A far cry from Isaiah’s description of “despised and rejected.”This is a classic example of taking the Gospels out of Context. Before we begin refuting rabbinic claims about Israel being the suffering servant, let's first go over the verses she cited. Here's Mark 3:7-9:Jesus withdrew with his disciples to the lake, and a large crowd from Galilee followed. When they heard about all he was doing, many people came to him from Judea, Jerusalem, Idumea, and the regions across the Jordan and around Tyre and Sidon. Because of the crowd he told his disciples to have a small boat ready for him, to keep the people from crowding him.First off, love and respect can also give rise to envy and hatred, which according to the Gospels that's exactly what appeared to have happened. Even today, we often find in society the people who are the most popular also tend to be the the most criticized and resented of all. So Marshall's point is actually in favor of Isaiah 53, because in Isaiah 52 we read about the Suffering Servant receiving glory prior to being rejected. Notice that it says “many” people came from other places across the Jordan river but mostly it was people from Galilee. Why is this important? Well, it just so happens that the Galileans were one of the most despised sects of Judaism.[Note: The section below deals with the historical and cultural context of the Gospels, for more info on Isaiah 53 scroll down to the section where is says in huge letters, “Isaiah 53 Exposed!!!”]Inhabitants of Despised by the JewsTorrey's Topical Textbook John 7:41,52 Others said, This is the Christ. But some said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? Torrey's Topical Textbook Library In Galilee at the Time of Our Lord ... Rabbis, and that even wherein they were despised by those ... was said to cost as much as five in Galilee . ... of jealousy on the part of the inhabitants of Jerusalem ... /.../edersheim/sketches of jewish social life/chapter 3 in galilee at.htm Barriers Broken Down ... Jesus withdrew from Capernaum, and crossing Galilee , repaired to ... of mercy toward one of a despised people for ... preaching the gospel to the inhabitants of Sychar ... /.../white/the desire of ages/chapter 43 barriers broken down.htm The Calamities and Slaughters that came Upon the Jews . ... own number was so great that they despised their attempts ... the city with ease; and as the inhabitants had made ... of the twelfth legion, into Galilee , and delivered ... /.../chapter 18 the calamities and.htm The Antiquities of the Jews ... The People Of Israel And The Inhabitants Of Jerusalem. ... Mattathias, The Son Of Asamoneus, Alone Despised The King ... Antipater Committed The Care Of Galilee To Herod ... //christianbookshelf.org/josephus/the antiquities of the jews/ The Sun Rising Upon a Dark World ... This despised and least valued part of the land of ... Though Galilee was favoured with the Scripture, and with synagogue worship; and the inhabitants were a ... //christianbookshelf.org/newton/messiah vol 1/sermon viii the sun rising.htm Intercourse of Jesus with the Pagans and the Samaritans. ... He despised still more a multitude of modern observances ... The road from Jerusalem into Galilee passes at the ... and if other planets have inhabitants gifted with ... /.../renan/the life of jesus/chapter xiv intercourse of jesus.htm The Historical Situation ... lived in the land, a people despising and despised . Their territory separated Galilee from Judea, and they ... allow any intercourse with the inhabitants of Samaria ... /.../rhees/the life of jesus of nazareth/i the historical situation.htm Last Journey of Jesus to Jerusalem. ... His disciples were despised as being Galileans ... to the kindly communism of Galilee , remarks continually ... 1] which served as a pleasure garden to the inhabitants . ... /...//christianbookshelf.org/renan/the life of jesus/chapter xxi last journey of.htm "We have Seen his Star" ... themselves, and to show how God despised all other ... He shall be called a Nazarene." Galilee was under ... a much larger admixture of foreign inhabitants than Judea. ... //christianbookshelf.org/white/the desire of ages/chapter 6 we have seen.htm The Child-Life in Nazareth ... by His Divinely-appointed early residence), small and despised in its ... the 240 towns and villages of Galilee , each with not less than 15,000 inhabitants . ... /.../the life and times of jesus the messiah/chapter ix the child-life in.htm Resources Did Jesus lie to His brothers in John 7:8 10? | GotQhttps://biblehub.com/topical/ttt/g/galilee--inhabitants_of_despised_by_the_jews.htmIn Isaiah 53:2-3 we read:He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance 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.It is not difficult to see why one would corelate this with Jesus, since he was a rural Galilean, which is practically the 1st century Jewish version of a country bumpkin. He probably would have been an outcast, not a man of particularly great social standing at all. People were not drawn to him because of any physical attraction, that's the last reason why people followed him. He was hailed as the Messiah because of his words and actions which were undeniably from God. His moral teachings were profound, exciting, and humorous. Yet many Jews hated him because of his social status.Galilee was a very poor area. People there would have worn simple clothing, the traditional garb of the common Jewish folk, which was usually quaint, drab, and unbleached. Such cloth was hand-woven, usually from sheep or goat's wool.The term “Galilean” seems to have been used in a variety of ways in this period. It is used in rabbinical writings with a twinge of disdain. To some, it just mean an outsider, or someone who’s not really an old Jew of the traditional sort. Precisely because the Galilee had traditionally been Jewish at the time of the Maccabean Revolt a hundred or 150 years before Jesus. Galileans had a reputation as being of the dirty, uncomely, and rustic sort, such that they were considered by the religious leaders to be unfit to even enter the inner sanctums of the Temple.Judean Pharisees, in particular, were less than impressed with Galilean observance of the fine points of Jewish religious observance. While praised for their passionate identification with Judaism and the Jewish people, their ignorance in law and disinterest in study was an almost never ending source of fuel for Judean snobbery. The Jerusalem Talmud records the despair of the great First Century sage, Yohanan ben Zakkai, at having been asked no more than two questions about Jewish law during his 18-year posting in the Galilee: “O Galilee, O Galilee, in the end you shall be filled with wrongdoers!” (Shabbat 16:7, 15d). Needless to say, it is highly doubtful that Jesus was a looker, and since he was a menial artisan it's likely that he was probably a bit more on the ugly side in regards to appearance.Although we don't find much indication of this in the Gospels. However, this is typical of Ancient biographical accounts and totally expected that the texts wouldn't go into very great detail about Jesus' appearance. We are told his age, as "about 30 years of age" (Luke 3. 23), but there is hardly anything that dramatically distinguishes him. However, he appears later in the New Testament.Extra-biblical descriptions:Tertullian wrote that Jesus's outward form was despised, that he had an ignoble appearance, and the slander he suffered proved the 'abject condition' of his body. According to Irenaeus, he was a weak and inglorious man, and in the Acts of Peter he is described as small and ugly to the ignorant.Then there is additionally Andrew of Crete, who once related that Christ was bent or even crooked (possibly related to some woodcutting injury, since Jesus was a craftsman). The Acts of John describes Jesus as small with no good looks.Both Hierosolymitanus and John of Damascus claim that Josephus detailed Jesus as having had connate eyebrows with goodly eyes and being long-faced, crooked and well-grown.In a letter of certain bishops to the Emperor Theophilus, Jesus's height is described as three cubits (four foot six), which was also the opinion of Ephrem Syrus (320-379 A.D.), "God took human form and appeared in the form of three human ells (cubits); he came down to us small of stature."The first century Jewish writer Josephus (37-100 A.D.) penned the earliest non-biblical testimony of Jesus. In his work Halosis or the "Capture (of Jerusalem)," written around 72 A.D., Josephus discussed "the human form of Jesus and his wonderful works." Biblical scholar Robert Eisler in a classic 1931 study of Josephus' Testimony was able to reconstruct the unaltered testimony based on a newly-discovered Old Russian translation that preserved the original Greek text. According to Eisler's reconstruction, the oldest non-Biblical description of Jesus read as follows:Nicephorus Callistus also claims that Josephus had described Christ as having been seven spans (5 feet 1.5 inches) tall, with beautiful eyes, a long nose, tawny hair, black eyebrows and his neck gently bent 'so that the carriage of his body was not quite upright and rigid'.1st century Nazareth was a rural villageOne argument a lot of mythicists like to make is that Jesus is a fictional character because Nazareth didn't exist until the 3rd century A.D. However, this is an exaggeration of the facts. Nazareth was founded as an early rural settlement in 2200 B.C., but was grown into a major city at roughly 300 A.D. So Nazareth did exist in the first century, it was just a rural town and not a major city. When we read the Gospels in context this is exactly what we find.Not to mention, this argument is simply illogical. Agnostic skeptic Bart Ehrman once pointed out:"I could dispose of this argument fairly easily by pointing out that it is irrelevant. If Jesus existed, as the evidence suggests, but Nazareth did not, as this assertion claims, then he merely came from somewhere else. Whether Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or not (for what it is worth, he was) is irrelevant to the question of whether he was born."Lastly, the argument has been falsified through a blatant dismissal of numerous archaeological discoveries which clearly establish that Nazareth was indeed a town inhabited in the first century at the time of Jesus. Archaeologists even showed us how Jesus would have lived in the rural village of "Naṣrəṯ" (נַצרֲת), as it was likely called back then.There is a consensus among researchers, and findings which clearly show evidence that 1st century Nazareth was a Jewish community with less than 400 people living there. Archaeologists unearthed a stone quarry there, terraced farmland, a wine press, and watch-towers like the ones which Jesus describes in the Parable of the Wicked Vinedressers in Matthew 21 and Mark 12. They also discovered a house with a still intact cistern, with stone vessels typically used by Jewish people during that period to preserve purity of food. But what wasn't found there was just as telling. No glass, mosaics, frescoes, paved roads, or imported materials were found in this town from the 1st century, suggesting that this was a simple, rural village at that time (this is typical of many small towns in Galilee at this time).Reported in all four Gospels and Acts, Jesus is hailed as coming from Nazareth, but this connection is not something to be bragged about. For one thing, Nazareth was a small village during the days of Jesus, perhaps boasting a population of only a few hundred. For another, Nazareth did not have the greatest of reputations politically. Following the death of Herod the Great in 4 B.C., the Roman armory in Sepphoris (four miles from Nazareth) was robbed, and the Romans retaliated by crucifying 2,000 Jews as a disincentive to such revolts. Sepphoris was burned to the ground, and its inhabitants were sold into slavery. Maybe that’s where Joseph and Jesus did some of their construction work. Less than a decade later, when Jesus was just a boy, Judas the Galilean instituted a tax revolt, evoking another crackdown by the Romans in which many were also crucified. Therefore, one can appreciate the jaded words of Nathanael in John 1:46: “Can any good thing come from Nazareth?”Now, let's continue on with the rest of Marshall's claims about Jesus being popular well liked by everyone. In Luke 4:14-15 we read:Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. He was teaching in their synagogues, and everyone praised him.Notice, here that this only applies to Galilee. Jesus is preaching in Galilean synagogues being praised by Jewish Galileans. None of the verses say that Jesus was popular and admired among the Jews of Judaea, in fact they hated him. Jesus was an outcast by many of the Jews. Besides, most Jews outside of Galilee probably never even hears of Jesus apart from the religious leaders he argues with.First off, the Bible uses hyperbole on numerous occasions. Take John 4:39 as an example. In this passage, a Samaritan woman spoke of Jesus and said: “He told me a̲l̲l̲ that I ever did.” Had Jesus really told that woman everything that she had ever done in her life? No, she was using hyperbole to make her point.To illustrate further, consider Mark 1:4-5: “John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. Then a̲l̲l̲ t̲h̲e̲ l̲a̲n̲d̲ of Judea, and those from Jerusalem, went out to him and w̲e̲r̲e̲ a̲l̲l̲ b̲a̲pt̲i̲z̲e̲d̲ by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins.” Taken literally, these verses would mean that John baptized every single person (man, woman, and child) in all of Judea and Jerusalem. But these verses are not to be taken literally. They are utilizing hyperbole, in which intentional “exaggeration” is employed to explain that John’s baptism was extremely popular.The importance of understanding hyperbole can be seen when comparing another passage to Mark 1:4-5. In Luke 7:24-35, Jesus extolled the righteousness of John the Baptizer. Some of His listeners appreciated Jesus’ comments about John and some did not. Verses 29 and 30 explain: “And when all the people heard Him, even the tax collectors justified God, having been baptized with the baptism of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.” Are we to conclude that the Pharisees and lawyers did not dwell in Judea and Jerusalem and that is why they had not been baptized—as Mark 1:4-5 would imply if taken literally? That would certainly be a stretch. The best answer in this case is to show that Mark’s use of hyperbole would allow some, such as the Pharisees and lawyers, to have rejected John and not to have received his baptism.Another example of hyperbole is found in John 3:26. In that context, John’s disciples were telling John about the increasing popularity of Jesus’ ministry. They said to him: “Rabbi, He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified—behold, He is baptizing, and a̲l̲l̲ are coming to Him!” Was it true that literally “all” the people in the world were coming to Jesus? No, it was simply the case that John’s disciples were intentionally exaggerating, using hyperbole, to describe Jesus' spreading fame.Jesus was hated more than he was lovedJesus was also rejected by his countrymen in his own hometown of Nazareth. Because Jesus was rejected by His own family and neighbors, He said in Matthew 13:57, "A prophet is not without honor, save in his own country, and in his own house." By the time Jesus was in the garden of Gethsemane only 12 of his followers remained and all the crowds abandoned him. His own disciples couldn't even pray with him for so much as an hour, Peter eventually renounced him three times, and Judas betrayed him, probably because he was disappointed and fustrated that Jesus wasn't fighting the Romans.There are numerous reasons as to why Jesus was widely hates by the upper class. It is sometimes said that Jesus was killed on account of his inclusion and tolerance, that the Jews hated him for hanging out with sinners and tax collectors. This is the sort of sentiment which has a bit of truth to it, but only a tiny bit. No doubt, Jesus infuriated many of the Jewish leaders because he offered an olive branch of mercy to people who they considered unworthy and unclean. However, Jesus was solely hated being too compassionate, as if his tolerance and religious passion were the prime. cause of his enemies' disdain. No, it was more than just that. See these pages as well:Rejection of JesusHometown rejection Edit In the sixth chapter of the Gospel of Mark there is an account of a visit by Jesus to his hometown together with his followers. On the Sabbath , he enters a synagogue and begins to teach. The account says that many who heard him were 'astounded', and offended, and they asked him "is this not the carpenter, the son of Mary?" It adds that he could do no 'deeds of power there' except to heal a few sick people. Amazed at the community's lack of belief in him, Jesus observes that "Prophets are not without honour, except in their hometown, and among their own kin, and in their own house." ( Mark 6:1-6 ) The account which is given in the Gospel of Matthew differs from this account by having those in the synagogue describe Jesus as the "son of the carpenter" and stating that he could not do many deeds of power (rather than none). [1] ( Matthew 13:54-58 ) The Gospel of Luke moves this story to the beginning of Jesus' preaching in Galilee; according to Lutheran commentator Mark Allan Powell , this was done in order to introduce what follows it. [2] In this version, Jesus is described as performing a public reading of scripture ; he claims to be the fulfillment of a prophecy at Isaiah 61:1–2 . ( Luke 4:16-30 ) In Matthew and Mark the crowd is also described as referring to Jesus as being the brother of James , Simon, Joseph, and Judas (in Mark they also mention, but do not name, Jesus's sisters) in a manner suggesting that the crowd regards them as just ordinary people, and criticising Jesus' quite different behaviour. Luke adds that Jesus recounted stories about how, during the time of Elijah , only a Sidonian woman was saved, and how, during the time of Elisha , though there were many lepers in Israel, only a Syrian was cleansed. This, according to Luke, caused the people to attack Jesus and chase him to the top of a hill in order to try to throw Jesus off, though Jesus slips away. Some scholars conclude that the historical accuracy of Luke's version is questionable , in this particular case citing that there is no cliff face in Nazareth. [3] There are, however, several sharp precipices in the vicinity. [4] The negative view of Jesus' family may be related to the conflict between Paul the Apostle and Jewish Christians . A. N. Wilson suggests that the negative relationship between Jesus and his family was placed in the Gospels (especially in the Gospel of Mark) to dissuade early Christians from following the Jesus cult that was administered by Jesus’ family: "…it would not be surprising if other parts of the church, particularly the Gentiles, liked telling stories about Jesus as a man who had no sympathy or support from his family." [5] Jeffrey Bütz [6] is more succinct: "…by the time Mark was writing in the late 60s, the Gentile churches outside of Israel were beginning to resent the authority wielded by Jerusalem where James and the apostles were leaders, thus providing the motive for Mark’s antifamily stance… (p. 44)." Other promhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rejection_of_Jesus#Hometown_rejection3 Reasons Why Jesus Was HatedHating Jesus has always been a popular position by many different cultures. In fact, any society that rejects God ultimately rejects Jesus.https://churchleaders.com/outreach-missions/outreach-missions-articles/312922-3-reasons-jesus-hated-josh-buice.htmlThe cleansing of the Temple incident was probably the biggest factor in Jesus' execution. However, from the perspective of the Sanhedrin in the first century (i.e. the chief priests, scribes, and Pharisaic leaders), there several other reasons why the religious leaders felt that this man needed to die:First off, He claimed to be the Messiah, at least indirectly. His disciples and later many of the poor or common people - i.e. the "am-ha'aretz" - believed Him to be the promised Saviour. But as the Jewish leaders saw it, this obviously could not be the case. How could a Messiah come from a small backwater village such as Nazareth of Galilee? He was obviously misleading the common people (John 7:52; Mark 14:61-64).What's more, this man boldly proclaimed himself to be one with God. In the Pharisaic understanding—which eventually became the Jewish orthodox view—this was blasphemy of the highest order. Especially considering that they didn't even see him as being any kind of Messiah (John 7:58; 10:30-38; Matt. 22:41-48; Mark 14:61-64).With the growing popularity of Jesus among the common peasants, believing Him to be the Messiah, there was a danger that the Romans might react in violence against the whole Jewish people, destroying the temple-along with their influential positions within Jerusalem (John 11:47-53). This danger was made worst by the fact that Galilee was a brewing pot for zealots.Jews since ancient times accepted not only the historical existence of Jesus but also the role of certain Jews in bringing about his crucifixion and death. For one thing, Palestine under Roman occupation had numerous charismatic would-be messiahs, so Jesus would not have been viewed as anything new until after his resurrection, nor was his following the largest of its kind. Jews have long been blamed for Jesus’s death and stigmatized for rejecting him. But Jesus lived and died a relatively obscure figure at the margins of Jewish society. Indeed, it is difficult to argue that “the Jews” of his day rejected Jesus at all, since most Jews had never heard of him. The figure they really rejected, often violently, was Paul, who convinced the Jerusalem church led by Jesus’s brother to accept gentiles into accept gentiles without forcing them to observe Mosiac law. Since in Judaism it was a requirements for gentile converts to follow the law this caused a lot of controversy. Also see:How Paul Was MisunderstoodHad the Church replaced Israel?Replacement Theology Undone by One Greek Word in Galatians 6:16Did Paul Abolish the Torah’s Dietary Laws?Is there One Law for Everyone?“Not Under the Law” in CorinthiansDoes the Law Give Life?Torah and Gentile ChristiansPaul’s Better InvestmentLet's look at food laws. Christianity from the start did not apply these food laws to Gentiles, as shown in two key New Testament passages. It's generally assumed Jesus as a faithful Jew would have observed the common dietary practices. However, Jesus taught, "Do you not see that whatever goes into a man from outside cannot defile him, since it enters, not his heart but his stomach, and so passes on?" (Mark ⅤⅠⅠ. 14-19). Here Jesus is making a general point about the sinfulness of the human heart, but Mark adds an editorial comment on one way the earliest Christians understood his words: “Thus he declared all foods clean.” Jesus' implicit message turns explicit in the tenth chapter of the Book of Acts which depicts the Christian conversion of the Roman soldier Cornelius. This was one of the formative episodes in Christianity's rapid expansion, underscored by the fact that it is repeated in chapter 11 and referred to obliquely in chapter 15. Cornelius was a "God-fearer," one of many in the Roman Empire who were attracted to Judaism's one God but did not formally convert.An angel directs Cornelius to meet Peter, who simultaneously receives a trance vision in which heaven opens, "all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air" descend while a voice says "Rise, Peter, kill and eat." Peter declares he has never eaten any foods the Scriptures forbid as unclean. This occurs three times. Upon meeting Cornelius, Peter realizes "I should not call any man common or unclean" so he teaches the soldier and other Gentiles about Jesus and when they believe has them baptized as pioneer converts. After hearing about this, Peter's fellow Jewish Christians "glorified God" and agree on outreach to Gentiles without mandating Jewish observances. That same policy is suggested in Philip's baptism of the Ethiopian official in chapter 8. But enough of this, let's get to the question at hand. Does Isaiah 53 refer to Jesus?The Great Isaiah Scroll and the Masoretic TextTopics The Dead Sea Scrolls The Great Isaiah Scroll and the Masoretic Text By Jeff A. Benner The Isaiah Scroll and the Aleppo Codex Comparing Isaiah 53:11 Interlinear of Isaiah 53 Selections from the Isaiah Scroll The Isaiah Scroll and the Aleppo Codex A section of the Isaiah Scroll The most famous of the Dead Sea Scrolls found within the Dead Sea Caves is the "Great Isaiah Scroll." Dead Sea Scroll fragments on display (Photograph courtesy of Berthold Werner) While most of the scrolls are fragmented, deteriorating or incomplete, the Isaiah scroll is the only complete scroll found within the Dead Sea caves. A Torah Scroll The life of a scroll depends on its handling and storage, but can be in use by a community for several hundred years. Some Torah Scrolls, still in use in synagogues today, are over 500 years old. The Isaiah scroll from the Dead Sea Caves has been dated to around 200 B.C. Isaiah wrote his original scroll around 700 B.C. and may have been in use up until around 200 B.C. This means that it is possible for the Isaiah Scroll from the Dead Sea Caves to be a copy made directly from Isaiah's original scroll. The Isaiah scroll, as well as many other scrolls and fragments from the Dead Sea, are currently stored and on display in Jerusalem at the Shrine of the Book. A page from the Aleppo Codex Up until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest existing complete Hebrew Bible was the Aleppo codex, one of the Masoretic texts, which was written in the 10th Century A.D., a thousand years after the Dead Sea Scrolls. For centuries, this text has been the foundation for Jewish and Christian translators. The major difference between the Aleppo Codex and the Dead Sea Scrolls is the addition of the vowel pointings (called nikkudot in Hebrew) in the Aleppo Codex to the Hebrew words. These pointings provide the vowel sounds that are not present in the Hebrew language and were probably inserted into the text to standardize the pronunciation of the Hebrew words in the text. The name ישראל (Israel) in a Dead Sea Scroll (left) and the Aleppo Codex (right) The name ישראל (yis'ra'el – Israel), is spelled in Hebrew with five letters; י (yud-Y), ש (sin-S), ר (resh-R), א (aleph) and ל (lamed-L), and can be transliterated as Y-S-R-L. Only these five letters are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls to spell out the name Y-S-R-L, but in the Aleppo codex, vowel pointings, in the form of dots and dashes are placed above and below each letter to represent the vowel sounds (i, a and e), providing the pronunciation YiSRa'eL. A Jewish Scribe, c. 1935 While the Masoretic text and the Dead Sea Scrolls were transcribed a thousand years apart, they are amazingly similar proving that the copying methods employed by the Jewish scribes over the centuries were very sophisticated and successful. However, there are some differences; some are simple variations of a reading, while others are much more complex. Besides the addition of the vowel pointings, other changes have occurredhttps://www.ancient-hebrew.org/dss/great-isaiah-scroll-and-the-masoretic-text.htmWithout a doubt, Isaiah 53 is one of the most significant chapters in the Old Testament regarding the Messiah. It is also one of the most troubling chapters for the rabbis, because it prophesies very clearly that the Messiah will be rejected by his own people, will suffer, and will die for the sins of humanity. The interpretation that Isaiah 53 is referring to Israel was perpetuated later by rabbis so that they could deceive themselves into believing that Jesus is not the Messiah. Christian missionaries did not make this interpretation up.Rashi’s Revision In The Middle AgesRashi lived in Spain, at a time when Jews and Christians lived together and so naturally, arguments arose between them. Christian friends and neighbors of Rashi tried to convince him that Biblical prophecy pointed to Jesus. Among other prophecies, they of course showed him Isaiah 53. Because the prophecy in Isaiah 53 is so sharp and clear, Rashi had no choice. He obviously didn’t want to admit that Jesus was the Messiah, so he had to try to reinterpret the prophecy so that it was no longer about the Messiah but instead about the people of Israel. Rashi’s claim was that the suffering servant is a metaphor of the people of Israel who suffered at the hands of the gentiles.M̳a̳n̳y̳ d̳i̳f̳f̳e̳r̳e̳n̳t̳ r̳a̳b̳b̳i̳s̳ — : Gaon Rabbi Saadia, Rabbi Naphtali ben Asher, and Rabbi Moshe Alshich adamantly opposed Rashi’s new interpretation, and demanded that the Sages of Israel should ignore him and return to the original interpretation, the most famous of among them was Mamonides, who categorically declared that Rashi was completely mistaken.But today, it is Rashi’s interpretation that is accepted among the rabbis who also are not interested in admitting that Jesus could have been the Messiah who was rejected, suffered and died exactly as Isaiah prophesied.A good example comes from Rabbi Haim Rettig, who writes, “Is it possible that any Christian anywhere in the world could fit the description of the Servant of the Lord that is led like a sheep to the slaughter? It cannot be that Isaiah the prophet could prophesy about a Christian event rather than a Jewish one. The prophecy of Isaiah is talking about the people of Israel throughout the generations, the Israel has given itself to be the innocent lamb”. What irony! Despite the fact that rabbis twisted Yeshua’s name into “Yeshu haNotzri”, changing his name didn’t turn him into a Christian. The official religion of Christianity was only established in the 3rd century. Jesus was in fact a Galilean Jew, as I fully demonstrated earlier.Also, when Rabbi Rettig claims that the prophecy of Isaiah 53 is not about the Messiah but about Israel, that gave itself up as an innocent lamb, can we really say that the people of Israel could be described as “an innocent lamb”? Innocent lamb is a Biblical definition for one without sin, who is blameless, spotless, never does evil and would never sin, but is perfect, pure and clean from sin. Does the people of Israel really this description? It’s enough just to open the paper or listen to the news to get your answer.Therefore, we clearly see that classical Jewish thought, the source and authority of the Jewish religion, almost unanimously attributes Isaiah 53 to a single person and not to the people of Israel as a whole. That single person being, of course, the Messiah. And what about Rabbi Ratig’s claim that the people of Israel are an “innocent lamb”? Can the people of Israel be considered the innocent lamb? “Innocent lamb” is a biblical definition for someone who is without sin or blemish—someone who is never wrong, never does evil, and never sins, someone who is perfect, pure, and sinless. Do the people of Israel really fit this definition? It’s enough to open the newspapers or listen to the news to find the answer to this, but since we’ve already started with the prophet Isaiah, let’s allow him to answer this question as well. Pay attention to his words to the people of Israel:“For your hands are defiled with blood and your fingers with iniquity. Your lips have spoken lies, your tongue mutters wickedness. No one sues justly, and none pleads a case honestly. Their feet run after evil. They rush to shed innocent blood. Their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity. Violence and ruin are on their highways. They do not know the path of peace, and there is no justice in their tracks. They have made their paths crooked. Whoever walks in them will not experience shalom.”One thing’s for sure, as far as Isaiah’s concerned Israel was no “innocent lamb”! The prophecy of Isaiah 53 has caught Rabbinic Judaism “with their pants down” over and over again. Therefore, it’s not surprising to read the words of Rafael Levi, the 17th century Jewish researcher, who discovered that in the past Isaiah 53 was read in the synagogues; however, since the chapter caused so much confusion and so many arguments, the rabbis decided that the simplest solution would be to remove the prophecy from the reading order of the Haftorah in synagogues. This, of course, was done in order to hide Jesus from you. Here's the Messianic interpretation of the words of the prophet Isaiah:The term “servant” is supposed to connect back to sections earlier in the book that speak of “the Servant of the Lord.” For example, in chapters 42, 49 and 50, where the Messiah is described as a servant that suffers.This is to emphasize the eminence of the Messiah who would attract entire crowds of people, perform miracles, and rise from the dead, and ascend to the heavens and sit next to the Father. His actions would give him a higher status that every human king or ruler.Before the Messiah is exalted he would suffer and be humiliated. His body would be abused and tortured so badly that he would be completely disfigured and unrecognizable.Despite the horrific suffering the day would come when even kings would come to look to him with reverence. The term “sprinkle” is very interesting. It could be interpreted as Jesus sprinkling his blood—the Wine of God—over the kings to wash away their sins.AND NOW, LET’S DIVE INTO CHAPTER 53 ITSELF…Prophetically, Isaiah anticipates at least two things here. First, he anticipates how strange and contradictory it seems that this suffering Messiah, whose visage is marred more than any man, is at the same time salvation and cleansing to the nations. Second, he anticipates the rejection of the Messiah, that many would not believe our report. This is describing the lack of faith among the people of Israel who don’t believe what they’ve heard. This fits the context of the New Testament perfectly as the Gospels are in fact described as a report, which many did not believe. The word “Evangelion” literally means good-news, likewise the Hebrew/Aramaic equivalent is בְּשׂוֹרָה｜bəśôrāh｜‎ , which means:Tidings is an old-fashioned word for recent news. If someone says "I bring you good tidings!" it means they have information, specifically a report, piece of news, for which to share and spread, and it has positive implications. The root word is said to have a connection to the word for flesh, which is בשר, because important news has an impact on our flesh, either brightening our faces or the opposite.The Hebrew word in the masoretic text of Isaiah 53:1 is שְׁמוּעָ֥ה｜šəmûʿāh｜, which has a very similar meaning. It's literally defined as a rumour, news, message, or a report.The report is the information relayed by the prophets, of John the immerser, and the Messiah's own report of himself. Many people did not receive the report, and for this reason it is written, “To among its own it came and it's own did not receive it,” (John 1:11). Before the Father he grew up as a tender plant: but to the Jews he was as a root out of a dry ground.Isaiah calls the Messiah the “Arm of the Lord”. Earlier, in chapter 40 Isaiah declares that the “Arm of the Lord” would rule for him. In chapter 51 the gentiles put their hope in the “Arm of the Lord”, and the “Arm of the Lord” would redeem them. In chapter 52 the “Arm of the Lord” brings salvation. It refers to God's ultimate power: the ability to wash sinners of their sin and to redeem them, save them from destruction. Now, in 53, Isaiah reveals to us that the “Arm of the Lord” is in fact the Messiah. The Messiah is very much part of God himself. He is the olive branch that is extended as a mercy to all the children of Adam—not just Israel—to end he exile of humankind from Eden.In this context of the Messiah’s suffering and agony, this line seems out of place. The arm of the LORD is a picture of His strength, power, and might. Yet we will see a Messiah weak and suffering. But the strength, power, and might of God will be expressed in the midst of this suffering, seemingly weak Messiah.In the New Testament, the gospel is not unfrequently called “the power of God,” (Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 1:18) for it is that by which God displays his power in saving people. The idea here is, that comparatively few would be brought under that power, and be benefited by it; that is, in the times, and under the preaching of the Messiah. It is to be remembered that the scene of this vision is laid in the midst of the work of the Redeemer. The prophet sees him a sufferer, despised and rejected. He sees that few come to him, and embrace him as their Saviour. He recalls the report and the announcement which he and other prophets had made respecting him; he remembers the record which had been made centuries before respecting the Messiah; and he asks with deep emotion, as if present when the Redeemer lived and preached, who had credited what he and the other prophets had said of him.He sees that few come to him, and embrace him as their Saviour. He recalls the ‹report‘ and the announcement which he and other prophets had made respecting him; he remembers the record which had been made centuries before respecting the Messiah; and he asks with deep emotion, as if present when the Redeemer lived and preached, who had credited what he and the other prophets had said of him. The mass had rejected it all. The passage, therefore, had its fulfillment in the events connected with the ministry of the Redeemer, and in the fact that he was rejected by so many. The Redeemer was more successful in his work as a preacher than is commonly supposed, but still it is true that by the mass of the nation he was despised, and that the announcement which had been made of his true character and work was rejected.Jesus did grow up, as He increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men (Luke 2:52). But all the while, He was as a tender plant – of seeming weakness and insignificance, not like a mighty tree. A tender plant is weak and vulnerable – unless it is before Him, that is, before the LORD God. In God’s presence, that what seems to be weak is strong. If the plant is before Him, it doesn’t even matter that the ground is dry. God will sustain it with His presence.Jesus grew up in the Galilee region of Roman occupied Palestine. In respect to spiritual, political, and standard of living matters, it was indeed dry ground. God can bring the most wonderful things out of dry ground! As Spurgeon likewise remarks:“Do not say, ‘It is useless to preach down there, or to send missionaries to that uncivilized country.’ How do you know? Is it very dry ground? Ah, well, that is hopeful soil; Christ is a ‘root out of a dry ground,’ and the more there is to discourage the more you should be encouraged. Read it the other way. Is it dark? Then all is fair for a grand show of light; the light will never seem so bright as when the night is very very dark.”Moreover, Jesus was a shoot in spiritually dry ground – there had been no word from God for 400 years. This is known as the Silent Years, or in Christology as the Intertestamental period, during which God no longer spoke to the Jewish people because they were in exile due to breaking the Covenant which God had made with them. The 400 years of silence began with the warning that closed the Tanakh:“Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the LORD. He will restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers, so that I will not come and smite the land with a curse.” (Malachi 4:5-6)The years of silence ended with the coming of John the Immerser, the Messiah’s forerunner. As we read in Aramaic:And he proclaimed saying; “After me comes he who is mightier than I, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and loosen. I baptized you in water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.”Behold the Lamb of God, who bears the debts of the world!!!At the time of Malachi’s warning, about 430 B.C., the Jews had returned to Israel from the Babylonian captivity (as merchants, not shepherds). The Medo-Persian Empire still ruled Israel, and the temple had been rebuilt. Both the Law and the priesthood of Aaron’s line had been restored, and the Jews had given up their worship of idols. Nevertheless, Malachi’s warning was not without cause. The Jewish people were mistreating their wives, marrying pagans and not tithing, and the priests were neglecting the temple and not teaching the people the ways of God. In short, the Jews were not honoring God.In 333 B.C., Israel fell to the Greeks, and in 323 B.C. it fell to the Egyptians. The Jews generally were treated well throughout those reigns, and they adopted the Greek language and many of the Greek customs and manners, and in Egypt the Old Testament was translated into Greek. That translation, the Septuagint, came into widespread use (and is quoted frequently in the New Testament).Jewish law and the priesthood remained more or less intact until Antiochus the Great of Syria captured Israel in 204 B.C. He and his successor, Antiochus Epiphanes, persecuted the Jews and sold the priesthood, and in 171 B.C. Epiphanes desecrated the Holy of Holies. This desecration resulted in an uprising by Judas Maccabeus of the priestly line of Aaron, and in 165 B.C. the Jews recaptured Jerusalem and cleansed the temple. However, fighting continued between the Jews and the Syrians until the Romans gained control of Israel in 63 B.C., at which time Pompey walked into the Holy of Holies, once again shocking and embittering the Jews. In 47 B.C., Caesar installed Antipater, a descendant of Esau, as procurator of Judea, and Antipater subsequently appointed his two sons as kings over Galilee and Judea.As the New Testament opens, Antipater’s son, Herod the Great, a descendant of Esau, was king, and the priesthood was politically motivated and not of the line of Aaron. Politics also resulted in the development of two major factions, the Sadducees and the Pharisees. The Sadducees favored the liberal attitudes and practices of the Greeks. They held to only the Torah as regards religion but like all aristocrats they did not think God should have any part in governing the nation. The Pharisees were conservative zealots who, with the help of the scribes, developed religious law to the point where the concerns and care of people were essentially meaningless. Additionally, synagogues, new places of worship and social activity, had sprouted up all over the country, and religious and civil matters were governed by the lesser and the greater Sanhedrins, the greater Sanhedrin being comprised of a chief priest and seventy other members that handed out justice, sometimes by 39 lashes administered with full force.The books of the Apocrypha were written during the four hundred silent years between the Book of Malachi and the announcement of the birth of John the Immerser. Jewish and New Testament sources both agree that no divinely inspired prophetic utterance occurred during this time. Thus Jesus came like a sapling out of dry ground, for the first time in millennia God dwelled with Man as he always wanted to.He was not appealing to us. We didn’t want him. His appearance wasn’t particularly glorious or impressive, and the way he showed up didn’t cause people to desire him. In contrast to what rabbinic Halacha teaches today, according to this prophecy, the Messiah would not be born to a prestigious rabbinic family or grow up in the grand residences of wealthy rabbis. We can say with near certainty that the external appearance of the Messiah was nothing extraordinary at all. In fact, I've proved that this does match Jesus in another one of my answers.The life of the Messiah was characterized by pain, rejection and suffering. He didn’t get the honor due to the Messiah, but was despised and rejected by the leaders of his people. We considered him some kind of social misfit – someone we might hide our faces from when we pass someone on the street that we are embarrassed to see.We didn’t think he was the Messiah. We didn’t even register it could be him.Jesus was not a “life of the party” man. It would be wrong to think of Him as perpetually sad and morose; indeed, He certainly showed great joy (such as in Luke 10:21). Yet He knew sorrow and grief so intimately that He could be called a Man of sorrows. This, among other reasons, made Him despised and rejected by men.i. Most of our sorrow is really just self-pity. It is feeling sorry for ourselves. Jesus never once felt sorry for Himself. His sorrow was for others, and for the fallen, desperate condition of humanity.ii. “He was also ‘a man of sorrows,’ for the variety of his woes; he was a man not of sorrow only, but of ‘sorrows.’ All the sufferings of the body and of the soul were known to him; the sorrows of the man who actively struggles to obey; the sorrows of the man who sits still, and passively endures. The sorrows of the lofty he knew, for he was the King of Israel; the sorrows of the poor he knew, for he ‘had not where to lay his head.’ Sorrows relative, and sorrows personal; sorrows mental, and sorrows spiritual; sorrows of all kinds and degrees assailed him. Affliction emptied his quiver upon him, making his heart the target for all conceivable woes.” (Spurgeon)iii. In 1 Timothy 3, one of the requirements for leaders in the church is that they be soberminded. This word describes the person who is able to think clearly and with clarity. They do not constantly joke, but know how to deal with serious subjects in a serious way. It doesn’t mean solemn and somber, but it does mean an appropriate seriousness.The Messiah suffered in our place—he carried our sicknesses, our suffering, our pain… and the sins we committed, while the Jewish people thought he was being punished, and that his suffering was God’s punishment for sins that he himself had committed. They didn’t understand that it was for THEIR sin—as well as the sins of all of mankind. Therefore OUR sin.Here, he has in view how the Messiah took our pain upon Himself. He made our griefs His own, and our sorrows as if they were His. The image is that He loaded them up and carried them on His back, so we wouldn’t have to.i. How many people carry around pain – griefs and sorrows – that Jesus really carried for them? He took them from us, but for it to do us any good, we must release them.The Hebrew says wounded, pierced. He died. Like someone who has fallen wounded, or someone perforated with bullets – not for any fault of his own, but it was our wrongdoing. He was crushed because of our inequities, our sins – the punishment and discipline we deserved went to him. The “stripes” are hard blows that leave marks, and by his scars we are healed. In exactly this way, hundreds of years later, the prophecy was fulfilled. Yeshua was went to the cross in order to take the death we deserved.OTTC ZECHARIAH 12:10 “look upon him whom they have pierced,” OR “look upon me whom they have pierced”?The Father is the speaker here, the subject of this clause and the shift from the pronoun “me” to “him” in the next clause makes it sounds as though God the Father was the one to be pierced instead…https://www.google.com/amp/s/christianpublishinghouse.co/2019/06/30/ottc-zechariah-1210-look-upon-him-whom-they-have-pierced-or-look-upon-me-whom-they-have-pierced/amp/Biblical Dead Sea ScrollsZechariah 12 from Scroll 4Q80 Minor Prophets e 7 Yahweh also will save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of David’s house and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem not be magnified above Judah. 8 In that day Yahweh will defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem . He who is feeble among them at that day will be like David, and David’s house will be like God, like Yahweh’s angel before them. 9 It will happen in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. 10 I will pour on David’s house, and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication; and they will look to me whom they have pierced ; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for his only son, and will grieve bitterly for him, as one grieves for his firstborn. 11 In that day there will be a great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon . 12 The land will mourn, every family apart; the family of David’s house apart , and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart; Zechariah 12 from Scroll 4Q82 Minor Prophets g 1 A revelation, Yahweh’s word concerning Israel. Yahweh, who stretches out the heavens, and lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him says: 2 “Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of reeling to all the surrounding peoples, and it will also be on Judah in the siege against Jerusalem. 3 It will happen in that day, that I will make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all the peoples. All who burden themselves with it will be severely wounded, and all the nations of the earth will be gathered together against it.http://dssenglishbible.com/zechariah%2012.htmThe Dead Sea Scrolls - 4Q Minor ProphetsThe Leon Levy Dead Sea Scrolls Digital Library offers an exceptional encounter with antiquity. Using the world's most advanced imaging technology, the Digital Library preserves thousands of scroll fragments, including the oldest known copies of biblical texts, now accessible to the public for the first time.https://www.deadseascrolls.org.il/explore-the-archive/manuscript/4Q80-1?locale=en_USWhy does the LXX not match up to the MT or John with regards to Zechariah 12:10?Peace be with you all I have a question regarding the LXX. Saint John writes: >For these things took place that the scripture might be...https://www.reddit.com/r/OrthodoxChristianity/comments/ckmjvh/why_does_the_lxx_not_match_up_to_the_mt_or_john/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=post_bodyThe Pierced Messiah - Zechariah 12:10 - ONE FOR ISRAEL MinistryYou know these huge crosses we see inside big churches? For us Jews, the cross today is mostly identified as the symbol of Catholicism. But what if we told you that the idea of a Messiah nailed to a cross comes from our own Hebrew Scriptures? What if we told you that Zechariah, the prophet who lived and prophesied in […]https://www.oneforisrael.org/holidays/pierced-messiah-zechariah-1210/The Crucifixion Foretold by Zechariah - ONE FOR ISRAEL MinistryWe are all very familiar with the famous icon of “the Crucified Jesus”, probably mostly recognized as the symbol of Christianity. But what if we told you that this image of the pierced Messiah is actually a biblical Jewish concept? And what if we told you that there is a prophecy in the Old Testament […]https://www.oneforisrael.org/bible-based-teaching-from-israel/the-crucifixion-foretold-by-zechariah/The “stripes” part seems to be a perfect match when it comes to Jesus' flogging, i.e. fagellation by means of the whip called flagrum taxillatum or flagra was a Roman legal preamble to all execution. We can see how the prophet saw through the centuries to glean the way in which the Messiah would be beaten with many stripes (Mark 15:15). More so, the prophet announces that provision for healing is found in the suffering of Jesus, so by His stripes we are healed.In general, the instrument used was a short whip called a flagrum with several loose or braided leather strips of different lengths, which had iron balls tied at intervals or sharp pieces of bone from sheep ... When Roman soldiers vigorously whipped the victim's back again and again, the iron balls caused deep bruises, and the leather strips with sheep bones cut the skin and subcutaneous tissues. Before the condemned was taken to be nails to the cross, he was first scourged. Very few people can really appreciate just how brutal this was. As the flogging continued, the lacerations would tear into the underlying skeletal muscles and produce quivering ribbons of bleeding flesh.The soldier would use a whip of braided leather thongs with metal balls woven into them. When the whip would strike the flesh, these balls would cause deep bruises or contusions, which would break open with further blows. And the whip had pieces of sharp bone as well which would cut the flesh severely. The back would be so shredded that part of the spine was sometimes exposed by the deep, deep cuts. The whipping would have gone all the way from the shoulders down to the back, the buttocks, and the back of the legs. It was just terrible. The 3rd century historian Eusebius described a flogging as such:“The sufferer's veins were laid bare and the very muscles, sinews and bowels of the victim were open to exposure.”His entire back torn open by the flagrum so he was probably already half deadn. Roman floggings were so severe that sometimes the inner anatomy of a persons bowels would be exposed, it wasn't uncommon for a person to bleed out. No doubt, many people would die from this kind of beating even before they could be crucified. Some biblical scholars believe that the clotting of the wounds caused by the flagra may have contributed to how surprisingly quick Jesus died while on the cross.Not to mention Jesus sweated tears of blood in Gethsemane. This is because that was where the Father has to crush his spirit to make spiritual wine. As Dr. Metherel notes:When Jesus prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane, before He was captured by the Sanhedrin, He sweated blood out of distress about the crucifixion. This is a rare known medical condition called hematidrosis. It's not very common, but it is associated with a high degree of psychological stress. What this did was set up the skin to be extremely fragile so that when Jesus was flogged by the Roman soldier the next day, his skin would be very, very sensitive. Roman floggings were known to be terribly brutal. They usually consisted of 39 lashes but frequently were a lot more than that.So the flogging would have been far worse than it typically was! What's more, many theologians have noted that the primary factor in Jesus' death wasn't so much the crucifixion itself as it was the grief. I believe that Jesus partly died of a broken heart. His own beloved people rejected him, cast stones at him, and had him crucified. It is not known how many lashes Jesus received, as according to Jewish law there were only 39 strokes, while the Romans used to give much more. The subsequent humiliation, which included being disguised as a king with a red cloak, a reed in his right hand as a scepter and a crown of thorns, seems to follow a custom of the legions, who chose a slave in the Saturnalia at the end of year to dress him as a king, humiliate him and then sacrifice him.The bottom line here is that Jesus most certainly had stripes!!!The Hebrew talks of going astray like sheep wander off and get lost. His own people ignored him and went on our way, but despite this, God put all our sin and iniquity on him —on the Messiah. Here the prophet describes our need for the Messiah’s atoning work. Sheep are stupid, headstrong animals, and we, like they, have gone astray. We have turned – against God’s way, every one, to his own way. The children of Israel along with all of the other children of Adam are equally guilty and deserving of God's wrath.The Hebrew says he was exploited, abused… his dignity and right to a fair trial were taken from him. The Hebrew says he was afflicted—tortured—but he didn’t open his mouth. This shows that he did not resist his unjust sentence. He didn’t try to rebel or escape, and he didn’t take legal representation in spite of the fact he was facing a death sentence, but he was led like a sheep to the slaughter, or to be sheared without resisting the injustices being done to him.They arrested him and took his to trial. As a result of the trial he was “cut off from the land of the living”. A death sentence. Not for his own crimes, but those of his people. In the Scriptures, “My people” always means the people of Israel. The Messiah would die not for his own sin but for the sin of his people – the people who should be taking the punishment for their own sins – but the Messiah took it upon himself. He is the one who died.His generation wouldn’t care to bring him up in conversation, but would rather sweep his existence under the carpet. So for the last 2000 years, Yeshua the Messiah has been the best kept secret in Judaism, and this is precisely why he was labelled “Yeshu” in Judaism, which stands for “May his name and memory be blotted out”. In Israel you can't even find the New Testament in bookstores.Even though he was taken out to be executed like a criminal, even though he did nothing wrong, and never lied, in his death he was to be buried in the fancy tomb of a rich man. Jesus really was killed on the cross and was buried in the grave of a rich man a member of the Sanhedrin, Joseph of Arimathea. It’s a clear symbol of the ironic situation in which the Messiah receives honor for the noblest deed of them all—taking the death sentence we deserve on himself.Gordon’s Calvary - IsraelFrom the time the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was first erected until the 18 th Century, there was very little dissent on the location of Christ’s crucifixion. This all changed though as biblical archaeology came into its own and Westerners gained increasing access to the Holy Land. No longer would tradition be the sole arbitrator of the locations of sites. Scriptural Significance Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered outside the gate. Hebrews 13: 12 The Scripture is clear that Jesus Christ was crucified outside of Jerusalem. Over time this has led to some consternation regarding the authenticity of the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Today, it is found within the city walls of Jerusalem.  Though there are good reasons to believe this was not the case during the time of Christ’s crucifixion, many nonetheless began to question the location. Couple this with the fact that the Sepulchre was in a general dilapidated state, and you can see why pilgrims yearned for an alternate site for the holiest place in Christendom. Historical Significance In 1738, a German publisher by the name of Jonas Korte visited Jerusalem. He concluded that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was too close in proximity to Herod’s Temple to have been outside of Jerusalem’s city walls. In 1801, a Cambridge mineralogist named Edward Daniel Clarke visited Jerusalem.  He concluded that Christ’s crucifixion must have taken place in a different location than the west side of the city. In 1838, Edward Robinson visited the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. He had recently been appointed the Professor of Biblical Literature at Union Theological Seminary in New York. He took great issue with some of the lore associated with site. He thought it preposterous for example that Helena (Emperor Constantine’s mother) would have just happened to have come across the actual Cross of the Lord – some 3 centuries later. He also found it a bit of a stretch to conclude that Golgotha would be situated so close to a burial tomb. While the Orthodox and Catholic Churches were strongly connected to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the same did not exist for Protestants. Robinson’s concerns further fueled the desire to find an alternate location for the place where Christ died.  This is not to say that many Protestants didn’t find good scholarly reasons for accepting the traditional site. However, the debate began anew. Robinson did not propose a particular alternative site. He did offer that Christ was probably crucified along one of the main roads leading to either Joppa or Damascus. Jeremiah’s Grotto A German preacher and scholar by the name of Otto Thenius did propose Calvary to be a rocky outcropping on the Northern side of the city in 1842. The area was referred to as Jeremiah’s Grotto.  Tradition tabbed this as the place where Jeremiah had penned the Book of Lamentations as he grieved over Jerusalem’s destruction. One of the more appealing aspectshttps://christianevidences.org/gordons-calvary-israel/http://ancientamerica.org/library/media/HTML/6ckqo7xg/3.ARCHAEOLOGICAL%20EVIDENCES%20FOR%20THE%20GARDEN%20TOMB.htm?n=0http://ancientamerica.org/library/media/HTML/6ckqo7xg/3.ARCHAEOLOGICAL%20EVIDENCES%20FOR%20THE%20GARDEN%20TOMB.htm?n=0The Historicity of Joseph of ArimatheaThe burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea is a very important event surrounding the death and resurrection of Jesus. If Joseph of Arimathea did not exist, then he obviously didn’t help bury Jesus. If this was the case, how would we know what happened to Jesus’ body after his death? How would we knohttps://clearlens.org/blogs/historicity-joseph-of-arimatheaSo who is responsible for the unjust trial and execution of the Messiah? The Catholic Church went out of it's way to stigmatize the Jewish people for crucifying Jesus. Is this true? Does the NT say that Jews to blame? How about the the Roman Empire? After all, the Romans were the ones who actually crucified him? No.God is the only one able to forgive and bring salvation to the world and he turned himself into a sacrifice. What kind of sacrifice? A guilt offering. The death of the Messiah was no accident—God used his own stiff-necked people as priests in order to bring about the forgiveness of sins not only for his people Israel, but for the whole of humanity. In contrast to the Yom Kippur sacrifice which was only valid until the following year and just ‘covered over’ sin, the atonement of the Messiah took away our sin once and for all! None of us as human beings are perfect – we are not able to be that perfect sacrifice. Only God himself could do that.In spite of the fact he would be killed, he would also prolong his days. He would rise again from the dead and would see the “fruit of his seed”, planted in his resurrection. He is the True Vine and we are branches (John 15). The word for “offspring” in Isaiah 53:10 is the Hebrew word זרה, which literally means seed. As so often with Hebrew and Greek terms, it can have a wide range of meanings, including “the royal race” (Ⅱ Kings. 11:1; I Kings. 11:14), and (as seen in the same book), ” a race of men” (in an evil or a bad sense: Isa. 1:4; 6:13; 57:4; 65:23). This is according to Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1979, 254; Strong’s Concordance #-2233).Also, one must take into account the often metaphorical application of words in the Bible. The context of the great messianic passage Isaiah 53 makes this clear; for example, 53:5: “with his stripes we are healed” is meant in the sense of “we are saved”; not of physical healing (as some in the “hyper-faith” movement falsely claim, in their promulgation of the false, unbiblical teaching that all men are physically healed and that this is God’s will, but some lose out on that because of their lack of “faith”).Jesus is compared to a lamb in 53:7. Offspring in 53:10 is easily seen to refer to his spiritual offspring; not literal. How do we know this? Well, by the very next verse: “he shall see the fruit of the travail of his soul…many to be accounted righteous.” It is the spiritual fruit. We see the same dynamic in, for example, the parable of the sower (Mt. 13:24-30; 36-40), which uses the metaphor of seed and planting and watering, to describe spiritual descendants (not physical). Hence Jesus says, in giving the proper interpretation:“He who sows the good seed is the Son of man [i.e., Himself]; the field is the world, and the good seed means the sons of the kingdom; the weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sowed them is the devil.” (Matt. 13:37-39)The Messiah would see and be satisfied by his labor, because many would be made righteous by the suffering he endured, as a righteous man when he took on himself the sins and iniquities of many. All who recognize him as the Messiah will be his “seed” in a spiritual sense.The Messiah was the one interceding for us an advocate for us as sinners before a holy God. The Messiah took on his shoulders the sin of all who believe in him. It’s an encouraging prophecy of hope and a future. God is not just interested in forgiveness expressed in words but also demonstrated in actions. That’s why he took on the appearance of a servant and took the punishment that we deserve on himself.PLEASE ALSO SEE:Damien Cowl's answer to Was God truly having fun and pleasure when Jesus was suffering on the cross (Isaiah 53:10; EPH 5:2)?Damien Cowl's answer to What is Eloi Eloi Lama Sabachthani?Damien Cowl's answer to Is Jesus the Jewish Messiah?Damien Cowl's answer to In which way was Jesus most likely crucified?