Brian2
Veteran Member
So anyway, why do Jews say that Isa 2:4 is Messianic when it reads as if the LORD will bring peace.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
If Christ wasn't the messiah, what was he?
- Thread starter rubi
- Start date
-
- Tags
- christ christainity debate
So anyway, why do Jews say that Isa 2:4 is Messianic when it reads as if the LORD will bring peace.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Isaiah 2 speaks of the mountain of the LORD, which is Jerusalem. But the "he" who will bring peace is not the LORD, but the messiah.
Colt
Well-Known Member
But David called the “he” Lord?
174:4.5 Two or three other groups of the scribes and Pharisees were present and had intended to ask questions, but they were either disarmed by Jesus’ answer to the lawyer, or they were deterred by the discomfiture of all who had undertaken to ensnare him. After this no man dared to ask him another question in public.
174:4.6 When no more questions were forthcoming, and as the noon hour was near, Jesus did not resume his teaching but was content merely to ask the Pharisees and their associates a question. Said Jesus: “Since you ask no more questions, I would like to ask you one. What do you think of the Deliverer? That is, whose son is he?” After a brief pause one of the scribes answered, “The Messiah is the son of David.” And since Jesus knew that there had been much debate, even among his own disciples, as to whether or not he was the son of David, he asked this further question: “If the Deliverer is indeed the son of David, how is it that, in the Psalmwhich you accredit to David, he himself, speaking in the spirit, says, `The Lord said to my lord, sit on my right hand until I make your enemies the footstool of your feet.’ If David calls him Lord, how then can he be his son?” Although the rulers, the scribes, and the chief priests made no reply to this question, they likewise refrained from asking him any more questions in an effort to entangle him. They never answered this question which Jesus put to them, but after the Master’s death they attempted to escape the difficulty by changing the interpretation of this Psalm so as to make it refer to Abraham instead of the Messiah. Others sought to escape the dilemma by disallowing that David was the author of this so-called Messianic Psalm.
174:4.7 A short time back the Pharisees had enjoyed the manner in which the Sadducees had been silenced by the Master; now the Sadducees were delighted by the failure of the Pharisees; but such rivalry was only momentary; they speedily forgot their time-honored differences in the united effort to stop Jesus’ teachings and doings. But throughout all of these experiences the common people heard him gladly.” UB 1955
Brian2
Veteran Member
How do you know this?
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Not in this particular passage. In this particular passage, David is not spoken of. I suspect you are trying to change the topic to Psalm 110. Please try to stay focused.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Good reading comprehension.
Respectfully, do you accept these written accounts (more than likely, second-hand information) as factual?
Colt
Well-Known Member
Its the same topic but I can see why you would avoid the point.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Are you asking if the accounts are entirely historical? It's completely irrelevant. We accept these laws by common consent.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Sure and aardvarks and the moon are the same topic.
Brian2
Veteran Member
I see nothing about the Messiah, only about "he" and that "he" looks like it is referring to the LORD unless the Messiah is the "word of the LORD".
Isa 2:1 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.
2 It shall come to pass in the latter days
that the mountain of the house of the LORD
shall be established as the highest of the mountains,
and shall be lifted up above the hills;
and all the nations shall flow to it,
3 and many peoples shall come, and say:
“Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,
to the house of the God of Jacob,
that he may teach us his ways
and that we may walk in his paths.”
For out of Zion shall go forth the law,
and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
4 He shall judge between the nations,
and shall decide disputes for many peoples;
and they shall beat their swords into plowshares,
and their spears into pruning hooks;
nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
neither shall they learn war anymore.
5 O house of Jacob,
come, let us walk
in the light of the Lord.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
If you think "he" is the LORD, I can't help you. It's not really my purpose in this forum to teach remedial reading.
Brian2
Veteran Member
I see the passage as being about the Messiah but I don't see a reference to the Messiah in the passage and you are unwilling or unable to help me see a reference to the Messiah. OK.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
The reference in the passage to things like an era of worldwide peace between the nations is a crystal clear reference to the messianic era.
Brian2
Veteran Member
This passage mentions an era of worldwide peace and further mentions that the child will be on the throne of David forever.
Wouldn't that be also crystal clear reference to the Messianic era?
Isa 9:7 Of the increase of his government and of peace
there will be no end,
on the throne of David and over his kingdom,
to establish it and to uphold it
with justice and with righteousness
from this time forth and forevermore.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Actually Isaiah 2, which is what we were discussing as a messianic passage, mentions no child, and does not mention David.
I can't have a rational chat with you if you keep conflating different passages.
I've already explained Isaiah 9:7 to you. I tend not to keep repeating my answers. Please scroll back.
Brian2
Veteran Member
Which obviously hasn't happened, so ....
The question was about why that passage is not considered Messianic by Jews but Isa 2:4 is, when both passages mention similar things and the Isa 9:7 seems even more likely to be Messianic because it speaks of someone ruling on the throne of David.
But yes, the peace obviously has not happened, so..........
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
It means that if you consider the peace passage to be about the messiah, that the messiah has not yet come.But yes, the peace obviously has not happened, so..........
Brian2
Veteran Member
Well of course you do not see Isa 9:7 as Messianic, I know that, however, given the reason you gave for Isa 2 being Messianic, Isa 9:7 is more likely to be Messianic because it has the era of peace PLUS the child in the passage ruling on the throne of David forever.
So why do Jews say that Isa 9:7 is not Messianic?
Is it because Jews have an idea that a double prophecy is just a Christian idea?
Considering the obvious Messianic pointers in Isa 9:7, do you think that the prophecy might be meant to be just Messianic and not about Hezekiah at all?