Exegeting Exodus 34:7.

[John D. Brey]

We live in utterly unique times such that the tools we have to exegete passages of scripture are so transformative that they can instantaneously reveal aspects of the holy writ, it's transfer, handling, interpretation, and translation, that would shock and stagger the imagination of the greatest sages of old. Case in point. Exodus 34:7.

An exegetical examination of the verse reveals that the fifth Hebrew word in the passage, i.e., נשא, he has something peculiar about it. The fact that the computer-aided exegete today can generate an instantaneous list of every time the word (נשא) is used throughout the Tanakh, means he can immediately see that of the nearly 150 times the word is used, Exodus 34:7 translates it different than all the rest. He notices that in Exodus 37:4, and the few times what's said there is quoted in other places, the word is translated "forgiving," while everywhere else, the other 99 percent of the time, the word isn't translated "forgiving" but refers to something "bearing" a burden, or being "lifted up," something "carrying" something else. Why, in the context of Exodus 34:7 (and the few places it's quoted), is the Hebrew word (נשא) given a new, subtle, nuance, different than the natural meaning that serves the purpose of the word everywhere else?

The word "forgiving" is a translation from the Hebrew such that the serious exegete gets to peer into the process of translation ---which always requires interpretation ---such that he notices that the translator/interpreters saw something in the context of Exodus 34:7 that was important enough that although they used one word or phrase (idea) to translate the Hebrew word 99 percent of the time, here, and where this verse is quoted elsewhere, they see a need to translate the same word differently than every other time the word is used. When the exegete sees that the translators and interpreters of the original Hebrew text (i.e., the producers of the Masoretic Text) felt compelled to change the meaning of the word in just one context, that exegete has a true exegetical gem that he'd be a poor jeweler not to remove from its natural state in order that it be cleaned up so that the dust and dirt that have hid it from view for aeons be removed so its light might shine for all to see.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

We live in utterly unique times when the tools we have to exegete passages of scripture are so transformative that they can instantaneously reveal aspects of the holy writ, it's transfer, handling, interpretation, and translation, that would shock and stagger the imagination of the greatest sages of old. Case in point. Exodus 34:7.

An exegetical examination of the verse reveals that the fifth Hebrew word in the passage, i.e., נשא, he has something peculiar about it. The fact that the exegete can generate an instantaneous list of every time the word (נשא) is used throughout the Tanakh, means he can immediately see that of the nearly 150 times the word is used, Exodus 34:7 translates it different than all the rest. He notices that in Exodus 37:4, and the few times what's said there is quoted in other places, the word is translated "forgiving," while everywhere else, the other 99 percent of the time, the word isn't translated "forgiving" but refers to something "bearing" a burden, or being "lifted up," something "carrying" something else. Why, in the context of Exodus 34:7 (and the few places it's quoted), is the Hebrew word (נשא) given a new, subtle, nuance, different than the natural meaning that serves the purpose of the word everywhere else?

The word "forgiving" is a translation from the Hebrew such that the serious exegete gets to peer into the process of translation ---which always requires interpretation ---such that he notices that the translator/interpreters saw something in the context of Exodus 34:7 that was important enough that although they used one word or phrase (idea) to translate the Hebrew word 99 percent of the time, here, and where this verse is quoted elsewhere, they see a need to translate the same word differently than every other time the word is used. When the exegete sees that the translators and interpreters of the original Hebrew text (i.e., the producers of the Masoretic Text) felt compelled to change the meaning of the word in just one context, that exegete has a true exegetical gem that he'd be a poor jeweler not to remove from its natural state in order that it be cleaned up so that the dust and dirt that have hid it from view for aeons be removed so its light might shine for all to see.

Naturally, the first place one would go to question this exegetical nuance is to the context of the verse. What's the verse saying such that the meaning of its message dictates a unique use of the Hebrew word נשא? A good start in answering that question is Rabbi Samson Hirsch who's an exegete's best friend in that he himself, more than most Hebrew exegetes, often intuits mysteries and problems in the text almost as well as his Jewish predecessor Abarbanel. Whenever there's something unique in a passage of scripture, Rabbi Hirsch can often be counted on to suss it out. And sure enough, here (Exodus 34:7), we're not surprised to see that Hirsch dedicates almost six full pages of his Chumash to this one verse.

Rabbi Hirsch tells us that the verse is the fulfillment of two requests come from Moses. First, that God show himself to Moses (Exodus 33:18), and second that God reveal his way/nature to Moses if he want's Moses to guide Israel to the Holy Land. Hirsch states that Moses wants God to reveal the "unity" of what appears to be profound diversity. Exodus 34:7 is the heart and soul of the diversity Moses is trying to understand since in this verse God says he's merciful but gives no mercy:

Isn't it contradictory for God to say that He forgives iniquity but will not remit punishment? How can it be just for God to visit the parent's iniquity upon the children? . . . Some of the attributes listed here ---as interpreted by our Sages ----fall into the category of compassion, and others fall into the category of retribution. But why are they mixed indiscriminately together?​

​

Abarbanel on Exodus 34:7.​

John

 

[John D. Brey]

Naturally, the first place one would go to question this exegetical nuance is to the context of the verse. What's the verse saying such that the meaning of its message dictates a unique use of the Hebrew word נשא? A good start in answering that question is Rabbi Samson Hirsch who's an exegete's best friend in that he himself, more than most Hebrew exegetes, often intuits mysteries and problems in the text almost as well as his Jewish predecessor Abarbanel. Whenever there's something unique in a passage of scripture, Rabbi Hirsch can often be counted on to suss it out. And sure enough, here (Exodus 34:7), we're not surprised to see that Hirsch dedicates almost six full pages of his Chumash to this one verse.

Rabbi Hirsch tells us that the verse is the fulfillment of two requests come from Moses. First, that God show himself to Moses (Exodus 33:18), and second that God reveal his way/nature to Moses if he want's Moses to guide Israel to the Holy Land. Hirsch states that Moses wants God to reveal the "unity" of what appears to be profound diversity. Exodus 34:7 is the heart and soul of the diversity Moses is trying to understand since in this verse God says he's merciful but gives no mercy:

Isn't it contradictory for God to say that He forgives iniquity but will not remit punishment? How can it be just for God to visit the parent's iniquity upon the children? . . . Some of the attributes listed here ---as interpreted by our Sages ----fall into the category of compassion, and others fall into the category of retribution. But why are they mixed indiscriminately together?​

​

Abarbanel on Exodus 34:7.​

Abarbanel's question, along with Rabbi Hirsch's notation concerning the revelation of God's "appearance" by means of the unity of his two aspects, mercy and judgment (hesed חסד and din דן), directs the exegete to one of the many precise scriptures that not only note God's unity in the indiscriminate mixing of mercy and judgment, but a scripture that directly implies that "Hashem" ("the Name") of God ("Hashem" is related to mercy) is hidden in the angel of judgment. Taken literally, Exodus 23:20 implies that Hashem (God's mercy) is hidden in the angel of judgment (Gevurah) in a seemingly indiscriminate sort of mixing.

20 Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.​

​

Exodus 23:20–22 (bold emphasis mine).​

The parallel here is clear:

7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving [נשא] iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will not pardon your transgressions; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children.​

​

Exodus 34:7.​

In Exodus 23:20-22, the text clearly states that God is sending a powerful angel to "guard" שמר Israel from her enemies. Ironically, it's announced unambiguously that "Hashem" (God's "Name") is inside this powerful angel of judgment ("he bears My Name within himself" The Hirsch Chumash Exodus 23:21) such that we have the perfectly indiscriminate mixing of divine attributes (mercy and judgment) that Rabbi Hirsch focuses on as though when Moses spies this indiscriminate mixing of divine attributes he is (Moses is) "seeing" the face or presence of God more fully than anyone before him (so to say). Rabbi Hirsch is clear that Exodus 34:7 is a profound portal into the precise nature of what Moses saw when he was seeing the God of Israel.

Exactly what Moses saw is not made known to us, but we do have here a record of the words, the "Names" by which the vision he beheld was explained to him, and of these we can try to attain some understanding.​

​

The Hirsch Chumash, Exodus 34:7.​

John

 

[John D. Brey]

Abarbanel's question, along with Rabbi Hirsch's notation concerning the revelation of God's "appearance" by means of the unity of his two aspects, mercy and judgment (hesed חסד and din דן), directs the exegete to one of the many precise scriptures that not only note God's unity in the indiscriminate mixing of mercy and judgment, but a scripture that directly implies that "Hashem" ("the Name") of God ("Hashem" is related to mercy) is hidden in the angel of judgment. Taken literally, Exodus 23:20 implies that Hashem (God's mercy) is hidden in the angel of judgment (Gevurah) in a seemingly indiscriminate sort of mixing.

20 Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.​

​

Exodus 23:20–22 (bold emphasis mine).​

The parallel here is clear:

7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving [נשא] iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will not pardon your transgressions; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children.​

​

Exodus 34:7.​

In Exodus 23:20-22, the text clearly states that God is sending a powerful angel to "guard" שמר Israel from her enemies. Ironically, it's announced unambiguously that "Hashem" (God's "Name") is inside this powerful angel of judgment ("he bears My Name within himself" The Hirsch Chumash Exodus 23:21) such that we have the perfectly indiscriminate mixing of divine attributes (mercy and judgment) that Rabbi Hirsch focuses on as though when Moses spies this indiscriminate mixing of divine attributes he is (Moses is) "seeing" the face or presence of God more fully than anyone before him (so to say). Rabbi Hirsch is clear that Exodus 34:7 is a profound portal into the precise nature of what Moses saw when he was seeing the God of Israel.

Exactly what Moses saw is not made known to us, but we do have here a record of the words, the "Names" by which the vision he beheld was explained to him, and of these we can try to attain some understanding.​

​

The Hirsch Chumash, Exodus 34:7.​

In his examination of the statement above, Rabbi Hirsch continues:

Perhaps this is the reason for the large נ in the word "נצר": Scripture wants to call our attention precisely to this way of God's governance. . . . From the root נצר we get נֵצֶר, the bud which encloses and protects the flower and fruit until they blossom.​

​

Ibid.​

What the text of Exodus 34:7 is saying seems to be intuited subconsciously more than consciously for Rabbi Hirsch. What it's saying appears at odds, to some degree, with his traditional understanding. Case in point. Rabbi Hirsch has clearly zeroed in on the fact that two aspects of God's nature (seemingly contradictory aspects, mercy and judgment) are in the cross hairs of the verse. Rabbi Hirsch is clear that in this verse Moses is attempting to understand the nature of this bizarre syzygy since understanding this strange unity is the seeing of God that Moses long sought.

It's precisely Rabbi Hirsch's willingness to note the peculiarity of the enlarged nun נ (that begins the verse) which lends itself to a more conscious appreciation of what Rabbi Hirsch is wanting to examine thoroughly, though he's wont to keep his traditional understanding intact. What Rabbi Hirsch (along with any other Jew with even a vague familiarity with the verse and the Hebrew text) intuits is that the first word in Exodus 34:7 should undeniably be linked to the second word in the Hebrew text.

נצר חסד is interpreted and translated, "Keeping mercy . . .," with the enlarged first letter (the nun) standing out like a sore thumb such that Rabbi Hirsch acknowledges, subconsciously, that it probably shouldn't be translated "keep" or "keeping" at all. He notes that the Hebrew word (נצר) is used for a "branch" or more specifically a "sprout" which shoots up from a root that's been coppiced to the ground. The word "nazar" נצר speaks of an asexual root coming out of the ground without sexual propagation such that it's a "basal-shoot" cloning the original tree rather than growing from the fertilization of two distinct trees.

The reason Rabbi Hirsch approaches this sound exegesis gingerly is that interpreted correctly, it shines a bright light on the word נשא (translated "forgiving") that was in focus earlier in this examination. In fact, with the foregoing in his mind, Rabbi Hirsch himself points out that with the context somewhat clarified the word נשא should be interpreted correctly:

​

נשא עון: He lifts the burden of the sin off the remorseful penitent who seeks atonement.​

​

Ibid.​

The word נשא means to "lift up" to "bear" or to bear by being lifted up. The huge issue for Rabbi Hirsch's conscious mind is the fact that in the true context of the verse it's implying that it's the nazar (נצר) the "branch," that's being "lifted up" in order to "bear" the iniquity of the sinner. Carefully exegeted the text isn't saying that God "keeps" mercy for thousands of sinners, "forgiving" iniquity, transgression, and sin. It's saying a "branch" (נצר) of "mercy" (חסד) is "being lifted up to bear" (נשא) the sins and iniquities of thousands. Which segues back to the early question of this examination: Why is "נשא," which should be translated "to lift up" or "bear by lifting up" (like a shield), instead translated, and here alone out of 150 uses of the word, "forgiving," rather than "being lifted up to bear"? We have this vertiginously Christo-centric statement about a branch being lifted up bearing the sins of the world, and we have it in a verse that's the very heart and soul of seeing God in his most naked appearance:

The Nazar-ene of mercy (the Branch, Zechariah 6:12) is lifted up to bear the iniquity, transgression, and sins, of many.

By forcing "keeping mercy" (נצר חסד) out of the text, instead of "The merciful Nazarene who saves by being lifted up to bear the sins of multitudes," Rabbi Hirsch guards his eyes from seeing what Moses undoubtedly saw as his seeing is being revealed beneath the fore-skene of exegesis designed to guard a tradition rather than unguardedly peer into the great mystery of the nakedness of God (Isaiah 52:10). The enlarged nun in the word nazar is enlarged for a plain and simple reason: the word "nazar" is the "Name" (Hashem) of God hidden beneath the angel of judgment (Exodus 23:20-22). The capitalizing of nazar is because this nazar, this Branch, is the Nazar-ene whose Name is hidden from Israel.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

In his examination of the statement above, Rabbi Hirsch continues:

Perhaps this is the reason for the large נ in the word "נצר": Scripture wants to call our attention precisely to this way of God's governance. . . . From the root נצר we get נֵצֶר, the bud which encloses and protects the flower and fruit until they blossom.​

​

Ibid.​

What the text of Exodus 34:7 is saying seems to be intuited subconsciously more than consciously for Rabbi Hirsch. What it's saying appears at odds, to some degree, with his traditional understanding. Case in point. Rabbi Hirsch has clearly zeroed in on the fact that two aspects of God's nature (seemingly contradictory aspects, mercy and judgment) are in the cross hairs of the verse. Rabbi Hirsch is clear that in this verse Moses is attempting to understand the nature of this bizarre syzygy since understanding this strange unity is the seeing of God that Moses long sought.

It's precisely Rabbi Hirsch's willingness to note the peculiarity of the enlarged nun נ (that begins the verse) which lends itself to a more conscious appreciation of what Rabbi Hirsch is wanting to examine thoroughly, though he's wont to keep his traditional understanding intact. What Rabbi Hirsch (along with any other Jew with even a vague familiarity with the verse and the Hebrew text) intuits is that the first word in Exodus 34:7 should undeniably be linked to the second word in the Hebrew text.

נצר חסד is interpreted and translated, "Keeping mercy . . .," with the enlarged first letter (the nun) standing out like a sore thumb such that Rabbi Hirsch acknowledges, subconsciously, that it probably shouldn't be translated "keep" or "keeping" at all. He notes that the Hebrew word (נצר) is used for a "branch" or more specifically a "sprout" which shoots up from a root that's been copiced to the ground. The word "nazar" נצר speaks of an asexual root coming out of the ground without sexual propagation such that it's a "basal-shoot" cloning the original tree rather than growing from the fertilization of two distinct trees.

The reason Rabbi Hirsch appproaches this sound exegesis gingerly is that interpreted correctly, it shines a bright light on the word נשא (translated "forgiving") that was in focus earlier in this examination. In fact, with the foregoing in his mind, Rabbi Hirsch himself points out that with the context somewhat clarified the word נשא should be interpreted correctly:

​

נשא עון: He lifts the burden of the sin off the remorseful penitent who seeks atonement.​

​

Ibid.​

The word נשא means to "lift up" to "bear" or to bear by being lifted up. The huge issue for Rabbi Hirsch's conscious mind is the fact that in the true context of the verse it's impying that it's the nazar (נצר) the "branch," that's being "lifted up" in order to "bear" the iniquity of the sinner. Carefully exegeted the text isn't saying that God "keeps" mercy for thousands of sinners, "forgiving" iniquity, transgression, and sin. It's saying a "branch" (נצר) of "mercy" (חסד) is "being lifted up to bear" (נשא) the sins and iniquities of thousands.

Returning to the early question of this examination: Why is "נשא" not translated "to lift up" or "bear by lifting up" (like a shield) instead translated, and here alone out of 150 uses of the word, "forgiving," rather than "being lifted up to bear," we have the vertiginously Christo-centric literal text saying, and in the verse that's the heart and soul of seeing God's most naked appearance:

The Nazar-ene of mercy is lifted up to bear the iniquity, transgression, and sins, of many.

By forcing "keeping mercy" (נצר חסד) out of the text, instead of "The merciful Nazarene who saves by being lifted up to bear the sins of multitudes," Rabbi Hirsch guards his eyes from seeing what Moses undoubtably saw as his seeing is being revealed beneath the fore-skene of exegesis designed to guard a tradition rather than unguardedly peer into the great mystery of the nakedness of God (Isaiah 52:10). The enlarged nun in the word nazar is enlarged for a very simple and undeniable reason: the word "nazar" is the "Name" (Hashem) of God hidden beneath the angel of judgment (Exodus 23:20-22). The capitalizing of nazar is because this nazar, this Branch, is the Nazar-ene whose Name is hidden from Israel.

Throughout Isaiah, messiah is associated with, and referred to as, a branch נצר (nazar). In Isaiah 11:1, and 60:21, the Hebrew consonants nun-tsaddi-reish נצר (associated with the city of Nazareth), are used to speak directly concerning messiah. In Isaiah 53:2, this messianic-branch is said to sprout from dry, un-watered, ground; and throughout the book of Isaiah there’s constant reference to the relationship between messiah, and a nazar נצר, or branch. That Jesus, who’s purportedly Isaiah's branch, would be called Jesus the Nazar --ene, is quite a coincidence. Perhaps worse, is the happenstance that the prophet Zechariah claims messiah's very name will include the word "branch" (Zechariah 6:12). Zechariah uses different consonants, צמח (tsaddi-mem-chet), nevertheless, the consonants translate, "branch," all the same, such that regardless of the consonants used (in order to say messiah's name will include a Hebrew word for "branch," נצר or צמח), Zechariah's prophesy concerning messiah's name claims part and parcel of what he's called ---his title ----will include the idea that he's a branch, or has one in his title.​

​

Isaiah 48:6.​

Keeping in mind that Rabbi Hirsch explicity states that we're not told what Moses saw when he saw his naked vision of God, we should remember that Rabbi Hirsch says that his "seeing" is mysteriously revealed in the text by his engagement with the Names of God (see Hirsch quotation above). When, secondarily, we note, that Rabbi Hirsch notes that for some important reason the word "nazar" (נצר) is capitalized in the text of Exodus 34:7, it's easy to see that what Moses saw is the Branch of mercy, or even salvation from sin, lifted up with the sins of the multitudes.

Prophesy is often oracular. It doesn't give every detail in a linear or completely rational way. But it does get some really strange facts and realities correct. Like, for instance, the oracle of the prophets noting that messiah will, for whatever reason, be associated with the word nazar נצר. Maybe his arm is deformed and looks like a branch so he's nicknamed "branch" נצר? Maybe he's tall and thin so he's nicknamed "branch"? Maybe he gets nailed to one? The prophets don't give every detail. They just note that in the oracle they received through the spirit of prophesy, messiah will have נצר (nazar) as part of his title, name, or perhaps even his final destination.​

​

Ibid.​

​

Notwithstanding the disorienting relationship between God being hidden from Israel behind an angel, and a would-be aspirant to the throne of David, the foregoing gets even more bizarre when the prophet Isaiah goes so far as to unambiguously claim that the Name hidden from Israel (though revealed to Moses), the Name hidden in a syzygy-ous hiding place, is the name of a man come from Nazareth, a man who is a Nazarene.

For what it’s worth, Matthew 2:23 doesn't explicitly say that the prophesy fulfilled by Jesus was a claim that he would be “from” Nazareth (though the verse does imply that). Matthew says he’ll be "called" (καλεω) a “Ναζωραιος.” Even the Talmud calls him Yeshua ha-Nosri (Jesus the . . . .), not Jesus "from." Exegetically, it could probably mean either. It might mean Jesus "from" Nazareth. But it could also mean Jesus "the" Nazarene. On the latter, we have Acts 24:5, where Paul of Tarsus is called a "ringleader of the Nazarenes" by his Jewish antagonists. “Ringleader of the Nazarenes” doesn't mean Paul's cadre are all from Nazareth. That term, "Nazarene," came to be associated with Jesus, his disciples, and, in the Talmud, with all Christians. This fact seems to lends itself to Matthew’s amazement that Jesus and his clan are given a title associated with the word for a "branch," just as the prophets clearly implied would be the case.​

​

Ibid.​

Ramban (Nachmanides) states that there's a direct parallel between God telling Israel that he will hide his face from them in the Law, and the meaning of Isaiah 48:6. Ramban says explicitly that Isaiah 48:6 (where "Ha-Shem" is hidden in "Nazareth") is parallel to God hidding his face from Israel. And since Rabbi Hirsch specifically relates this "hidden" vision of God, with various revelations of Ha-Shem (the Name), Ramban is likely presaging this very examination to some extent. In Isaiah 48:6, the Name "Nazar-ene" is hidden in the Hebrew word translated "hidden" (נצרות), even as in Exodus 34:7, the face of God is hidden in the Name of God, the Nazar נצר or Nazar-ene.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

Throughout Isaiah, messiah is associated with, and referred to as, a branch נצר (nazar). In Isaiah 11:1, and 60:21, the Hebrew consonants nun-tsaddi-reish נצר (associated with the city of Nazareth), are used to speak directly concerning messiah. In Isaiah 53:2, this messianic-branch is said to sprout from dry, un-watered, ground; and throughout the book of Isaiah there’s constant reference to the relationship between messiah, and a nazar נצר, or branch. That Jesus, who’s purportedly Isaiah's branch, would be called Jesus the Nazar --ene, is quite a coincidence. Perhaps worse, is the happenstance that the prophet Zechariah claims messiah's very name will include the word "branch" (Zechariah 6:12). Zechariah uses different consonants, צמח (tsaddi-mem-chet), nevertheless, the consonants translate, "branch," all the same, such that regardless of the consonants used (in order to say messiah's name will include a Hebrew word for "branch," נצר or צמח), Zechariah's prophesy concerning messiah's name claims part and parcel of what he's called ---his title ----will include the idea that he's a branch, or has one in his title.​

​

Isaiah 48:6.​

Keeping in mind that Rabbi Hirsch explicity states that we're not told what Moses saw when he saw his naked vision of God, we should remember that Rabbi Hirsch says that his "seeing" is mysteriously revealed in the text by his engagement with the Names of God (see Hirsch quotation above). When, secondarily, we note, that Rabbi Hirsch notes that for some important reason the word "nazar" (נצר) is capitalized in the text of Exodus 34:7, it's easy to see that what Moses saw is the Branch of mercy, or even salvation from sin, lifted up with the sins of the multitudes.

Prophesy is often oracular. It doesn't give every detail in a linear or completely rational way. But it does get some really strange facts and realities correct. Like, for instance, the oracle of the prophets noting that messiah will, for whatever reason, be associated with the word nazar נצר. Maybe his arm is deformed and looks like a branch so he's nicknamed "branch" נצר? Maybe he's tall and thin so he's nicknamed "branch"? Maybe he gets nailed to one? The prophets don't give every detail. They just note that in the oracle they received through the spirit of prophesy, messiah will have נצר (nazar) as part of his title, name, or perhaps even his final destination.​

​

Ibid.​

​

Notwithstanding the disorienting relationship between God being hidden from Israel behind an angel, and a would-be aspirant to the throne of David, the foregoing gets even more bizarre when the prophet Isaiah goes so far as to unambiguously claim that the Name hidden from Israel (though revealed to Moses), the Name hidden in a syzygy-ous hiding place, is the name of a man come from Nazareth, a man who is a Nazarene.

For what it’s worth, Matthew 2:23 doesn't explicitly say that the prophesy fulfilled by Jesus was a claim that he would be “from” Nazareth (though the verse does imply that). Matthew says he’ll be "called" (καλεω) a “Ναζωραιος.” Even the Talmud calls him Yeshua ha-Nosri (Jesus the . . . .), not Jesus "from." Exegetically, it could probably mean either. It might mean Jesus "from" Nazareth. But it could also mean Jesus "the" Nazarene. On the latter, we have Acts 24:5, where Paul of Tarsus is called a "ringleader of the Nazarenes" by his Jewish antagonists. “Ringleader of the Nazarenes” doesn't mean Paul's cadre are all from Nazareth. That term, "Nazarene," came to be associated with Jesus, his disciples, and, in the Talmud, with all Christians. This fact seems to lends itself to Matthew’s amazement that Jesus and his clan are given a title associated with the word for a "branch," just as the prophets clearly implied would be the case.​

​

Ibid.​

Ramban (Nachmanides) states that there's a direct parallel between God telling Israel that he will hide his face from them in the Law, and the meaning of Isaiah 48:6. Ramban says explicitly that Isaiah 48:6 (where "Ha-Shem" is hidden in "Nazareth") is parallel to God hiding his face from Israel. And since Rabbi Hirsch specifically relates this "hidden" vision of God, with various revelations of Ha-Shem (the Name), Ramban is likely presaging this very examination to some extent. In Isaiah 48:6, the Name "Nazar-ene" is hidden in the Hebrew word translated "hidden" (נצרות), even as in Exodus 34:7, the face of God is hidden in the Name of God, the Nazar נצר or Nazar-ene.

נצר חסד ל אלפים (Nazar hesed alapim) ----Translated literally, the first three words of Exodus 34:7 say, "Branch of mercy for thousands." The image induced from the literal reading is the reason the next word ---נשא nasa--- is translated different than it is anywhere else in the Tanakh. With the literal meaning of the first Hebrew words in view it's easy to see why the interpreters and codifiers of the Masoretic Text chose to impose a different meaning for the consonants nun-shin-alef (נשא). ----Just imagine the discomfort the interpreters would have had interpreting literally: "Branch of mercy for thousands that's lifted up bearing the sins of this multitude."

The Hebrew idiom for forgiving iniquity is literally "carrying" it away . . . Biblical Hebrew also refers to a sinner "carrying" his sin in the sense of bearing its burden.​

​

Ibn Ezra on Exodus 34:7.​

​

The verb נשא Forgiver, has several interpretations. Ramban takes it to signify carry in the sense of to bear.​

​

Rabbi Elie Munk, The Call of the Torah, Exodus 34:7.​

The Dictionary of Biblical Languages (DBL Hebrew) says:

5951 נָשָׂא (nā·śā(ʾ)): v.; ≡ Str 4984, 5375, 5379, 7721; TWOT 1421—1. LN 15.101–15.106 (qal) lift up, i.e., cause to move up or lift up an object to a higher elevation of any amount (Ge 7:17; Jer 4:6); (qal pass.) be lifted up; (nif) be lifted up, raised, lofty (Ps 24:7; Isa 2:2; Isa 2:13, 14; 30:25; 40:4; 57:7, 15; Jer 51:9; Eze 1:19, 19, 20, 21, 21; 8:3; Mic 4:1; Zec 5:7+); 2. LN 15.187–15.211 (qal) bear, carry, i.e., pick up and move an object in linear movement (Ge 44:1​

​

Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Hebrew.​

The word (נשא) doesn't generally mean to "forgive." That's read into the word. At best it's idiomatic. It means to carry, bear, being lifted up. The Branch נצר of mercy חסד is lifted up to bear נשא the sins and iniquities of the many. Which segues into the strange statement that follows; the Branch will by no means go unpunished.

The Masoretic Text, reflecting Jewish tradition/interpretation, implies that the sinner will by no means go unpunished. Moralizing and theologizing, the Jewish exegetes claim it means those who don't repent won't go unpunished. But the text says none of that. Interpreted literally, faithfully, without being bent to serve external traditions, the text implies that the Branch of mercy, lifted up carrying the sins of the multitude, won't go unpunished.

The problem is huge for Jewish tradition since the Jewish interpreters rightly assume the verse is speaking of God's aspect of mercy. If the Branch lifted with the sin of the multitude is God, or the aspect representing God's mercy, then once again the kerygmatic language goes right off the charts: God the Nazar-ene (Branch), is lifted to bear the sins of the many, and in such a manner that he, the one bearing the sins of the many, God, the Branch of God, will not go unpunished.

For he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement that brought us peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. . . The Lord nailed to him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted . . . for the transgressions of my people he was stricken . . . it pleased the Lord to bruise him and put him to grief in order to make his soul an offering for sin.​

​

Isaiah 53:5-10.​

​

נָשָׂא 1 he lifted, raised; 2 he bore, carried; 3 he took, took away, carried off; PBH 4 he married; 5 it contained; 6 he swept away, destroyed; 7 he forgave, pardoned; 8 he suffered, endured.​

​

Klein Dictionary.​

John

 

[John D. Brey]

נצר חסד ל אלפים (Nazar hesed alapim) ----Translated literally, the first three words of Exodus 34:7 say, "Branch of mercy for thousands." The image induced from the literal reading is the reason the next word ---נשא nasa--- is translated different than it is anywhere else in the Tanakh. With the literal meaning of the first Hebrew words in view it's easy to see why the interpreters and codifiers of the Masoretic Text chose to impose a different meaning for the consonants nun-shin-alef (נשא). ----Just imagine the discomfort the interpreters would have had interpreting literally: "Branch of mercy for thousands that's lifted up bearing the sins of this multitude."

The Hebrew idiom for forgiving iniquity is literally "carrying" it away . . . Biblical Hebrew also refers to a sinner "carrying" his sin in the sense of bearing its burden.​

​

Ibn Ezra on Exodus 34:7.​

​

The verb נשא Forgiver, has several interpretations. Ramban takes it to signify carry in the sense of to bear.​

​

Rabbi Elie Munk, The Call of the Torah, Exodus 34:7.​

The Dictionary of Biblical Languages (DBL Hebrew) says:

5951 נָשָׂא (nā·śā(ʾ)): v.; ≡ Str 4984, 5375, 5379, 7721; TWOT 1421—1. LN 15.101–15.106 (qal) lift up, i.e., cause to move up or lift up an object to a higher elevation of any amount (Ge 7:17; Jer 4:6); (qal pass.) be lifted up; (nif) be lifted up, raised, lofty (Ps 24:7; Isa 2:2; Isa 2:13, 14; 30:25; 40:4; 57:7, 15; Jer 51:9; Eze 1:19, 19, 20, 21, 21; 8:3; Mic 4:1; Zec 5:7+); 2. LN 15.187–15.211 (qal) bear, carry, i.e., pick up and move an object in linear movement (Ge 44:1​

​

Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Hebrew.​

The word (נשא) doesn't generally mean to "forgive." That's read into the word. At best it's idiomatic. It means to carry, bear, being lifted up. The Branch נצר of mercy חסד is lifted up to bear נשא the sins and iniquities of the many. Which segues into the strange statement that follows; the Branch will by no means go unpunished.

The Masoretic Text, reflecting Jewish tradition/interpretation, implies that the sinner will by no means go unpunished. Moralizing and theologizing, the Jewish exegetes claim it means those who don't repent won't go unpunished. But the text says none of that. Interpreted literally, faithfully, without being bent to serve external traditions, the text implies that the Branch of mercy, lifted up carrying the sins of the multitude, won't go unpunished.

The problem is huge for Jewish tradition since the Jewish interpreters rightly assume the verse is speaking of God's aspect of mercy. If the Branch lifted with the sin of the multitude is God, or the aspect representing God's mercy, then once again the kerygmatic language goes right off the charts: God the Nazar-ene (Branch), is lifted to bear the sins of the many, and in such a manner that he, the one bearing the sins of the many, God, the Branch of God, will not go unpunished.

For he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement that brought us peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. . . The Lord nailed to him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted . . . for the transgressions of my people he was stricken . . . it pleased the Lord to bruise him and put him to grief in order to make his soul an offering for sin.​

​

Isaiah 53:5-10.​

​

נָשָׂא 1 he lifted, raised; 2 he bore, carried; 3 he took, took away, carried off; PBH 4 he married; 5 it contained; 6 he swept away, destroyed; 7 he forgave, pardoned; 8 he suffered, endured.​

​

Klein Dictionary.​

ּBranch of mercy for thousands lifted up for their iniquity, transgression and sin.​

וחטאה ופשע עון נשא לאלפים חסד נצר​

The Hebrew of Exodus 34:7 speaks of a Branch of mercy (the capitalization is in the Hebrew text) for thousands that's raised up for the iniquities, transgressions, and sins, of the multitude. The last part of the verse states that the Branch won't go unpunished for the transgressions and sins of the people. And it didn't:

He removed the high places and broke the images, and cut down the Asherah poles, and beat with hammers the brazen serpent Moses made for in those days the children of Israel burned incense to it and called it Nehushtan.​

​

2 Kings 18:4.​

Nehushtan was a Branch of mercy for the thousands of Israelites who were dying of serpent bites in the desert. When they looked up at Nehushtan, perhaps burning incense to it, the sins and iniquities for which they were dying were put to Nehushtan so that the sinners were spared by God's mercy mediated through, and by means of, the Branch of God's mercy. As noted in 2 Kings 18:4, Nehushtan didn't go unpunished for the mercy made possible to thousands of Israelites. Notwithstanding the fact that thousands witnessed the healing of the multitudes, nevertheless, Nehushtan was dragged outside the gates of Jerusalem and hammered into oblivion near an outcrop of rocks that looked like a skull. The prophet Isaiah's psyche was so marred by his witness to the destruction of the salvific Branch of the Lord that the stigma, or even stigmata, of the event haunts most of the latter chapters of his prophetic writing. He went so far as to label many of his prophesies a report concerning this destruction of the merciful arm of the Lord; a report he claims no one in Israel took to heart in a thoughtful way. Though it saved them, they knew it not.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

ּBranch of mercy for thousands lifted up for their iniquity, transgression and sin.​

וחטאה ופשע עון נשא לאלפים חסד נצר​

Nehushtan was a Branch of mercy for the thousands of Israelites who were dying of serpent bites in the desert. When they looked up at Nehushtan, perhaps burning incense to it, the sins and iniquities for which they were dying were put to Nehushtan so that the sinners were spared by God's mercy mediated through, and by means of, the Branch of God's mercy. As noted in 2 Kings 18:4, Nehushtan didn't go unpunished for the mercy made possible to thousands of Israelites. Notwithstanding the fact that thousands witnessed the healing of the multitudes, nevertheless, Nehushtan was dragged outside the gates of Jerusalem and hammered into oblivion near an outcrop of rocks that looked like a skull. The prophet Isaiah's psyche was so marred by his witness to the destruction of the salvific Branch of the Lord that the stigma, or even stigmata, of the event haunts most of the latter chapters of his prophetic writing. He went so far as to label many of his prophesies a report concerning this destruction of the merciful arm of the Lord; a report he claims no one in Israel took to heart in a thoughtful way. Though it saved them, they knew it not.

And speak to him, saying: Thus has the God of the hosts of creation said: Behold, a man, Tzemach (a shoot, a growth) is his name, and from his place he will shoot up [tzemach], and will build the Temple of God.​

​

Zechariah 6:12 (Rabbi Mendel Hirsch translation and interpretation. Bracket added to reflect that the Hebrew word for "place" is the same as the name of the personage in the crosshairs).​

The interpretation of Zechariah 6:12 given by Rabbi Mendel Hirsch presents a curious chiastic structure linking Exodus 34:7's image of Nehushtan the "Branch of mercy" with a messianic Nazarene. Zechariah 6:12 is generally considered messianic. So to say the name of Messiah is "Tzemach" (which is a Hebrew word for a basal-shoot springing from a root) is utterly remarkable. It's remarkable since a parallel Hebrew word for a "shoot, or a growth," springing from the root, is nazar נצר. Futhermore, and more to the point, a place in Israel was named after a nazar: (Nazareth). Which leads to the curious, or amazing, chiastic structure of Zechariah 6:12, since in the chiasmus the prophet says the messianic man is named "shoot, or growth," because he will "shoot up" from his place. The prophet links the messianic personage's name with the name of the place he will shoot up from and be associated with. Zechariah links the name of Messiah with the "place" he's associated with.

A biblically-minded person immediately thinks of a would-be messianic-figure come down to us through history as "Jesus of Nazareth"; that is, a would-be Messiah who's known by a place called "sprout, a growth," (Nazareth). The "Branch (or Nazar) from Nazareth" fits the prophet Zechariah's chiastic structure perfectly. When we add that this Nazar in Exodus 34:7 is capitalized in the Hebrew text (something extremely rare and designed to make the reader sit up and take note), and when the sentence that begins Exodus 34:7 speaks of a, Branch (Nazar from Nazareth) of mercy for thousands who will be lifted up for their sins, perhaps we're beginning to perceive the vertiginous and paradoxical unity in the person of God that Moses so fervently desired to see and perceive.

Concerning this Yeshua, the prophets, who spoke of the mercy that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstance to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things.​

​

1 Peter 1:10-12.​

​

Exactly what Moses saw is not made known to us, but we do have here a record of the words, the "Names" by which the vision he beheld was explained to him, and of these we can try to attain some understanding.​

The Hirsch Chumash, Exodus 34:7.​

​

Branch [Nazar] of mercy for thousands lifted up for their iniquity, transgression and sin.​

וחטאה ופשע עון נשא לאלפים חסד נצר​

Exodus 34:7.​

John