John's christology and the Dead Sea Scrolls

[Vouthon]

If possible, do you have translations of these texts? Or is this coming from commentary of others?

Much further upstream, I provided you with a direct translation of the Sefer Hekhalot.

It was from Charlesworth's Pseudepigrapha:


The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha


The Melchizedek scroll (11q13) from Qumran. Here are two different English translations:

1 […] your God … […] 2 […] And as for what he said: Lev 25:13 <<In this year of jubilee, you shall return, each one, to his respective property>>, as is written: Deut15:2 <<This is 3 the manner (of effecting) the [release: every creditor shall release what he lent [to his neighbour. He shall coerce his neighbour or his brother when] the release for God [has been proclaimed]>>. 4 [Its inter]pretation for the last days refers to the captives, about whom he said: Isa 61:1 <<To proclaim liberty to the captives.>> And he will make 5 their rebels prisoners […] and of the inheritance of Melchizedek, for […] and they are the inheri[tance of Melchi]zedek, who 6 will make them return. He will proclaim liberty for them from the [debt] of all their iniquities. And this will [happen] 7 in the first week of the jubilee which follows the n[ine] jubilees.

And the day [of atone]ment is the end of the tenth jubilee 8 in which atonement will be made for all the sons of [God], and for the men of the lot of Melchizedek. [And on the heights] he will decal[re in their] favour according to their lots; for 9 it is the time of the <<year of graces>> for Melchizedek, to exa[lt in the tri]al the holy ones of God through the rule of judgement, as it is written 10 about him in the songs of David, who said: Ps 82:1 <<Elohim will stand up in the assem[bly of God,] in the midst of the gods he judges>>.

And about him it says: Ps 7:7-8 <<Above it 11 return to the heights, God will judge the peoples>>. As for what he sa[id: Ps 82:2: <<How long will yo]u judge unjustly, and show partiality to the wicked? Selah.>> 12 Its interpretation concerns Belial and the spirits of his lot, who were rebels [all of them] turning aside from the commandments of God [to commit evil]. 13 But, Melchizedek will carry out the vengeance of God's judgements [on this day, and they shall be freed from the hands] of Belial and from the hands of all the sp[irits of his lot.] 14 To his aid (shall come) all <<the gods of [justice>>; he] is the one [who will prevail on this day over] all the sons of God, and he will pre[side over] this [assembly].

15 This is the day of peace about which God spoken of old through the words of Isaiah the prophet who said: Isa 52:7 <<How beautiful 16 upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger, who announces peace, of the mess[enger of good who announces salvation,] saying to Zion: ‘Your God [reigns>>.] 17 Its interpretation: the mountains are the prophets … 18 And the messenger is [the ano]inted of the spirit, whom Dan[iel] spoke … and the messenger of good who announces salv[ation is the one about whom it is written that [he will send him Isa 61:2-3 <<to comfo[rt the afflicted, to watch over the afflicted ones of Zion>>.] 20 To com[fort the afflicted, its interpretation:] to instruct them in all the ages of the world… 21 in truth […] 22 […] it has been turned away from Belial and it […] 23 […] in the judgements of God, as it is written about him: Isa 52:7 Saying to Zion" "Your God rules". Zion is the congregation of all the sons of justice, those] who establish the covenant, those who avoid walking [on the pa]th of the people. Your God is Melchizedek, who will free them from the hand of Belial. And as for what he said: Lev 25:9 You shall blow the horn in every lands. (Florentino Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English [William B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids MI 1996], pp. 139-140)
​

And here is the alternate translation:

II … And concerning that which He said, In [this] year of Jubilee [each of you shall return to his property (Lev. xxv, 13); and likewise, And this is the manner of release:] every creditor shall release that which he has lent [to his neighbour. He shall exact it of his neighbour and his brother], for God’s release [has been proclaimed] (Deut. xv, 2). [And it will be proclaimed at] the end of days concerning the captives as [He said, To proclaim liberty in the captives (Isa. lxi, I). Its interpretation is that He] will assign them to the Sons of Heaven and to the inheritance of Melchizedek f[or He will cast] their [lot] amid the po[rtions of Melchize]dek, who will return them there and will proclaim to them liberty, forgiving them [the wrong-doings] of all their iniquities.

And this thing will [occur] in the first week of the Jubilee that follows the nine Jubilees. And the Day of Atonement is the e[nd of the] tenth [Ju]bilee, when all the Sons of Light and the men of the lot of Mel[chi]zedek will be atoned for, [And] a statue concerns them to provide them with their rewards. For this is the moment of the Year of Grace, for Melchizedek. And he will, by his strength, judge the holy ones of God, executing judgement as it is written concerning him in the Songs of David, who said, ELOHIM has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgement (Psalms lxxxii, I). And it was concerning him that he said, (Let the assembly of the peoples) (Psalms vii, 7-8). As for that which he s[aid, How long will judge] judge unjustly and show partiality to the wicked? Selah (Psalms lxxxii, 2), its interpretation concerns Belial and the spirits of his lot [who] rebelled by turning away from the precepts of God to … And Melchizedek will avenge the vengeance of the judgements of God … and he will drag [them from the hand of Belial and from the hand of all the spirits of his lot. And all the ‘gods of Justice’ will come to his aid to attend to the de[struction] of Belial. And the height is … all the sons of God … this … This is the day of [Peace/Salvation] concerning which God spoke through Isaiah the prophet, who said, [How] beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger who proclaims peace, who brings good news, who proclaims salvation, who says to Zion: Your ELOHIM reigns (Isa. lii, 7). Its interpretation; the mountains are prophets … and the messenger is the Anointed one of the spirit, concerning whom Dan[iel] said, Until an anointed, a prince (Dan. ix, 25)] … And he who brings good [news], who proclaims salvation; it is concerning him that it is written … To comfort all who mourn, to grant to those who mourn in Zion (Isa. lxi, 2-3). To comfort [those who mourn: its interpretation, to make them understand all the ages of time … In truth … will turn away from Belial … by the judgement of God, as it is written concerning him, who says to Zion; your ELOHIM reigns. Zion is… , those who uphold the Covenant, who turn from walking in the way of the people. And your ELOHIM is Melchizedek, who will save them from the hand of Belial.

As for which He said, Then you shall send abroad the trump[et in] all the land (Lev. xxv, 9) … (The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, translated by Geza Vermes [Penguin Books, Revised edition 2004], pp. 532-534)

​

 

[dybmh]

This is the day of [Peace/Salvation] concerning which [God] spoke through Isaiah the prophet, who said, [How] beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger who proclaims peace, who brings good news, who proclaims salvation, who says to Zion: Your ELOHIM [reigns] (Isa. lii, 7).

This is wrong, Vouthon, where did this come from?

The word above in blue is not. NOT correct. And the word reigns is specifically literally in the verse. It shouldn't be in brackets.

 

[Vouthon]

It's all spooky mystical and far-fetched.

I wouldn't say that either text was 'spooky'. They are both conforming to literary genres and contain heavily symbolic, esoteric wisdom that takes time to properly 'contemplate' and understand. (In the Gospel of John, Jesus actually states that he is speaking 'figuratively': "Jesus used this figure of speech, but the Pharisees did not understand what he was telling them" (John 10:6-9) and you will note the reiteration of the word "signs").

Mystical texts often present their 'truths' in veiled and complex imagery.

 

[Clear]

@Rival, said : "The sacrifice is only half the story, though. The person for whom it was made also has to repent and have a true intention, otherwise the sacrifice is null. We also see at the time after the first temple was destroyed, the Israelites (as today) used prayer. Solomon says this will be the case at the dedication of the first temple. Repentance needs no mediator; such as David when he repented of his sin with Bathsheba, he offered no sacrifice. I understand where you are coming from, but I don't think it is the whole picture."

Regarding "short cuts" and a simple "one step" salvation
I very much agree with Rival, that this is NOT the whole picture. This is the point I was attempting to make.

Regarding the Priest as a mediator for another
While the root meaning of Priest/Cohen is a type of mediator, there are personal expectations which are required of an individual.

For examples:
.Personal repentance is required and there is no way around this.
.Personal sacrifice is required and there is no way around this. While the ancient Jew made the sacrifice of procuring the animal and presented it to the priest.
.The priest then officiated in his office and no private person could do what the priest did in his role as an authorized mediator between that person and God. Judaism had a mediator in the priest. The high priest was the head of the priests and the congregation.
.In the type of Judaism known as Christianity, the Messiah was their great high priest, who was the head of the congregation.
.The Jew known as a "Christian", offers a contrite spirit and a broken (humble) heart to their high priest. There is no way around this

The point regards a mediator is present in both forms of Judaism. I also agree that there are certain sins for which no sacrifice to God was needed.

Clear

 

[dybmh]

@ anyone,

Can someone direct me to verses in the Torah that are speaking in the voice of "The Father". I'd like to take a look at the Hebrew names used for this from a Christian perspective.

 

[Vouthon]

This is wrong, Vouthon, where did this come from?

The word above in blue is not. NOT correct. And the word reigns is specifically literally in the verse. It shouldn't be in brackets.

Its a translation of the Melchizedek scroll, which references Isaiah at this point in the text (although not in the Masoretic).

If you have an issue, it should be taken up with the scribe who wrote 11q13 circa. 100 BCE, not me!

 

[dybmh]

I wouldn't say that either text was 'spooky'. They are both conforming to literary genres and contain heavily symbolic, esoteric wisdom that takes time to properly 'contemplate' and understand. (In the Gospel of John, Jesus actually states that he is speaking 'figuratively': "Jesus used this figure of speech, but the Pharisees did not understand what he was telling them" (John 10:6-9) and you will note the reiteration of the word "signs").

Mystical texts often present their 'truths' in veiled and complex imagery.

OK, if your position is that The Book of John includes a mix of symbols and imagery, that's fine. So where do you draw the line. If you wish to consider chapter 10 as symbolic, that's no problem for my position. All I need is John 14:14 to show what Jesus asked his disciples to do in that Book. Was John 14:14 symbolic?

 

[dybmh]

If you have an issue, it should be taken up with the scribe who wrote 11q13 circa. 100 BCE, not me!

No, no, good sir, I expect that person who translated it into english made a mistake. We would need to see the text in its original language to accuse the scribe of an error.

Whomever used the words "Your Elohim [reigns]" in their conclusions/commentary has a weak point in their arguments I imagine... it's a careless mistake not to check the wording of the verse in Isaiah. we'll see if it comes up. Also, if it is an error in the Scroll itself, then it's probably not Jewish at all. The focus on MalchiZedek comes from Hermetic schools, Aleister Crowely and the likes. They don't have credibility in this realm unless the claim is that The Book of John is compatible with Greek mysticism.

Aleister Crowley - Wikipedia
Hermetic Qabalah - Wikipedia
melchizedek hermetic - Google Search
Hermes - Wikipedia

 

[Vouthon]

OK, if your position is that The Book of John includes a mix of symbols and imagery, that's fine. So where do you draw the line. If you wish to consider chapter 10 as symbolic, that's no problem for my position. All I need is John 14:14 to show what Jesus asked his disciples to do in that Book. Was John 14:14 symbolic?

I would ask: is Jesus literally a 'gate', 'way/road', 'shepherd', 'vine'? The text says that these images are 'figures of speech':

"Jesus used this figure of speech with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.

7 So again Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep.""

(John 10:6-7)
​

And again during the Last Supper discourse (long after the verse in 14:14 and the part about Jesus being the "way, truth and life") he clarifies:

"I have said these things to you in figures of speech. The hour is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figures, but will tell you plainly of the Father."

(John 16:25)​

So you can count that 'paragraph' as the part in the narrative where the language of veiled metaphor and symbol effectively 'ends' and he begins speaking plainly.

One needs to read the text in the way that the actual text invites the reader to understand it, after all.

A continual refrain in the Gospel of John, is that the 'crowds' are too carnally / literally-focused to understand the 'spirit' of Jesus's veiled words. This is made explicit in the bemused reactions of listeners whenever he uses one of these startling figures of speech:

"It is the spirit that gives life; the flesh is useless. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." (John 6:63)
​

So, yes, the verse that you are focuing upon is 'figurative' by Jesus's own admission. It means that 'exegizing' it requires more thought and contemplation than a mere surface read (i.e. the literal 'plain' sense, because he wasn't speaking 'plainly').

 

[Vouthon]

No, no, good sir, I expect that person who translated it into english made a mistake

Is it just me, or have we both come full-circle on this 'translation' issue and it now looks like we have swapped places?

 

[dybmh]

I would ask: is Jesus literally a 'gate', 'way/road', 'shepherd', 'vine'? The text says that these images are 'figures of speech':

"Jesus used this figure of speech with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.

7 So again Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep.""

(John 10:6-7)
​

And again during the Last Supper discourse (long after the verse in 14:14 and the part about Jesus being the "way, truth and life") he clarifies:

"I have said these things to you in figures of speech. The hour is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figures, but will tell you plainly of the Father."

(John 16:25)​

So you can count that 'paragraph' as the part in the narrative where the language of veiled metaphor and symbol effectively 'ends' and he begins speaking plainly.

One needs to read the text in the way that the actual text invites the reader to understand it, after all.

A continual refrain in the Gospel of John, is that the 'crowds' are too carnally / literally-focused to understand the 'spirit' of Jesus's veiled words. This is made explicit in the bemused reactions of listeners whenever he uses one of these startling figures of speech:

"It is the spirit that gives life; the flesh is useless. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life." (John 6:63)
​

So, yes, the verse that you are focuing upon is 'figurative' by Jesus's own admission. It means that 'exegizing' it requires more thought and contemplation than a mere surface read (i.e. the literal 'plain' sense, because he wasn't speaking 'plainly').

OK. So, if the whole thing is symbolic, including 14:14, then it's certainly not Jewish, because then the prayer would be made in vain. not kosher, still not compatible with Judaism, what say you, good sir?

 

[dybmh]

Is it just me, or have we both come full-circle on this 'translation' issue and it now looks like we have swapped places?

Maybe, maybe... it's a little RF do-si-do...

( for the non-americans... Do-si-do - Wikipedia )

 

[Vouthon]

Here is a discussion by a scholar - referencing other dead sea scrolls scholars, including Martinez and Collins who have each translated the text - which includes some analysis of the specific verse your talking about @dybmh:

 

[Vouthon]

OK. So, if the whole thing is symbolic, including 14:14, then it's certainly not Jewish, because then the prayer would be made in vain. not kosher, still not compatible with Judaism, what say you, good sir?

Could you clarify this point? Are you suggesting that Jewish texts never speak in extended symbolic language? (Ezekiel might want to have a word with you there....)

 

[Terry Sampson]

The Book of John describes JC as sinning while performing miracles, working on Shabbos... this would disqualify him for gathering and lifting his fellows prayers.

???

• Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:14.
  • An analogy: A king decrees that his son not enter his palace with him. He enters the first door and he is met with silence; and so, the second. At the third, he is rebuked and told: It is enough for you until here. Similarly, when Moses conquered the land of the two nations, Sichon and Og, and he gave it to Reuven and Gad and the half tribe of Menasheh, he said: It seems to me that the decree (of the L rd) is conditional, at which he said to the Holy One Blessed be He: Can it be that Your ways are like those of flesh and blood? The apitoropos makes a decree and the kalidikos abrogates it; the kalidikos makes a decree and the dikorion abrogates it; the dikorion makes a decree and the hegmon abrogates it; the hegmon makes a decree and the ipitikos abrogates it; the ipitikos makes a decree and the overlord comes and abrogates all of them? Why so? For all are appointees of his, one above the other; but his decree cannot be abrogated? __ But You are not like this! You decree and a tzaddik can abrogate it.

 

[Clear]

Hi @dybmh

dybmh said : "It's important because the Shliach Tzibur ( a cantor ) must be pure in order to perform their duties. (gathering and lifting the prayers of others). " (#140)

In the early Christian type of Judaism, there was no need for a Shiach Tzibur or “messenger of the congregation” who must be “accepted by the congregation” in order to “gather” or “lift the prayers of others”. An individuals’ prayers could be offered directly to God.


dybmh said : "Further, the prayers are always in the name of G-d and none nothing else."
Similarly in the Christian Judaism, a person need not pray in the name of Jesus for example to simply thank God for all that he’s done “and nothing else”.
The ATONEMENT that is wrought by the Messiah is what is only accessed through the Messiah who accomplished it. If I am asking for forgiveness, then I could certainly pray that I be forgiven "because of the atonement the Messiah wrought", or "because of Jesus", or "in the name of Jesus (as my mediator)" or I can use any other similar request in any type of words I can think of that indicate that I recognize the atonement the Messiah wrought and am asking for help in improving and want access to the benefits of the atonement wrought by the messiah.

Modern Jews do not pray for forgiveness in relation to the atonement of the Messiah because the modern Jews do not accept the atonement was wrought through the messiah Jesus.

In explaining how the messiah will come and the relationship of the atonement to mankind, God describes the Messiah to Adam thusly : "He shall perform innumerable mighty deeds and wonders, He shall raise the dead, He shall drive out the devils, he shall heal those who are sick of the palsy, he shall make the lame to walk, the deaf He shall make to hear, and the dumb He shall make to speak, He shall cleanse the lepers, and [restore] the arms that are withered, and He shall open the eyes of the blind by the word of His power, In short, there shall be no limit to the miracles which He shall perform, but in spite of all these men will not believe on Him. And at length, after all these things, they shall rise up against Him, and they shall deliver Him over unto death, and they shall give Him into the hand of the Governor, that is to say, Pilate, and he shall judge Him for thy sake. He shall be in the form of a servant for thy sake. They shall smite Him in the face for thy sake. They shall treat Him with contempt and vilify him for thy sake. The shall pass sentence of condemnation upon Him as if He were a sacrilegious person. They shall mount Him upon the wood of the Cross, between two thieves, for thy sake. They shall set a crown of thorns upon His head for thy sake. They shall make Him drink vinegar and gall for thy sake. They shall drive nails into His hands and feet for thy sake. He shall yield up His Spirit on the Cross. They shall pierce his side with a spear so that water and blood shall flow forth therefrom, and it is these which shall cleanse the sins of the world. They shall lay Him in a new tomb. He shall rise from the dead on the third day. He shall go down into Amente, He shall shatter the gate of brass, and break in pieces the bolts of iron, and shall bring thee up therefrom together with all those who shall be held there in captivity with thee. For thy sake, O Adam, the son of God shall suffer all these things until He hath redeemed thee, and restored thee to Paradise, unto the place whence thou didst come, for He made Himself to be thy advocate (or, protector), when thou wast clay, before He put spirit (or, breath) into thee." (D. Abbaton)

It is in the role of advocate that the Messiah is the mediator. Men do not have to access the atonement wrought by the Messiah. They may attempt to approach God directly and they may certainly ask for mercy or for what they deserve from God without any atonement or mediation and without any advocate at all. In this case they will simply be approaching God without the mediation of the atonement wrought by the messiah.

JESUS DESCRIBES WHAT THE MEDIATION OF THE MESSIAH WHO ATONED CAN MEAN FOR THOSE WHO ACCESS IT
Jesus describes "that day [when] everything shall stand in fear and trembling" when they are being judged. God the Father will say : "Let them be separated from each other, even as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, the righteous on the right hand, and the sinners on the left," and not one shall make a sound until he who is chief in his day shall command him.
Jesus the Messiah then described his mediation to the apostles thusly "I shall look upon all My clay, and when I see that he is going to destruction I shall cry out to My Father, saying, "My Father, what profit is there in My Blood if he goeth to destruction?" And straightway the voice of My Father shall come unto Me from the seventh heaven, and none shall hear it except Myself, for I and My Father are one, saying "Power belongeth unto Thee, O My Son, to do whatsoever Thou pleaseth with Thy clay."

The Mediation of the Messiah provides mercy for those who have sacrificed, repented and attempted moral improvement in this life.


dybmh said : If it were comparable to the mediator in the Book of John, then in Jewish tradition, the congregation would offer prayers in the name of the cantor.

As I pointed out, these are NOT comparable. The cantor is “accepted by the congregation” just as the Messiah is accepted by the congregation. However the cantor does not accomplish an atonement for the congregation and the cantor is not serving in the role of the ancient priest as a mediator.


dybmh said : "The Book of John describes JC as sinning while performing miracles, working on Shabbos... this would disqualify him for gathering and lifting his fellows prayers." (#140)
Can you elaborate specifically on what specific sin’s the Book of John said Jesus was guilty of while God wrought miracles through Jesus?


Clear
ειφινεδρω

 

[Clear]

Vouthon said : “Jesus used this figure of speech with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them. 7 So again Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep." (John 10:6-7) And again during the Last Supper discourse (long after the verse in 14:14 and the part about Jesus being the "way, truth and life") he clarifies: "I have said these things to you in figures of speech. The hour is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figures, but will tell you plainly of the Father." (John 16:25)

Dybmh replied : OK. So, if the whole thing is symbolic, including 14:14, then it's certainly not Jewish, because then the prayer would be made in vain. not kosher, still not compatible with Judaism, what say you, good sir? (post #151)


Hi @dybmh

1) A single figure of speech does not mean “the whole thing” is “symbolic”

If a single figure of speech is used, it is wrong to mischaracterize “the whole thing” as being symbolic.
If you insist on mischaracterizations, your communications with Vouthon will be inefficient and inaccurate.
If you are serious about efficient communication with Vouthon, I think you are going to have to avoid such mischaracterizations.

For example, If I say “I am so hungry I can eat a horse.”, It is simply a single figure of speech. It doesn’t mean that there isn’t a truth, underlying the figure of speech. I am, in truth, hungry.


2) KEEP IN MIND YOUR MODERN JUDAISM IS A DIFFERENT RELIGION THAN ANCIENT JUDAISM

Also, Your constant refrain that many, many things, such as a figure of speech isn’t “Kosher” in your modern Judaism is tiresome and simply another accretion placed on top of your religion. It is irrelevant to ancient Judaism. Keep in mind that Vouthon is describing a Jew who is speaking inside the ancient Jewish religion. Your Jewish religion is NOT the same as the ancient Jewish religion. If it is not “Kosher” to you to use a figure of speech, it is irrelevant to the ancient Jews Vouthon is describing.

Clear
ειφυδρσεω

 

[Harel13]

But You are not like this! You decree and a tzaddik can abrogate it.

Hey Terry,
I think you're the first person I've seen to interpret this to mean that a righteous person can nullify commandments. The wording, however, is decree and not commandment. The idea presented here does not refer to nullifying Godly commandments, such as Shabbat in Jesus's case, but nullifying Godly decrees which are about events in this world (for example, God decreed there would be no rain for a year, comes the holy man and with his powerful prayer or other abilities, brings rain).

 

[dybmh]

@Vouthon, since at this point, The Book of John is claimed to be symbolic. I'm guessing that means that the details I am focusing on are perhaps irrelevant to you.

If so, perhaps a shift in the direction of the discourse would be welcome?

What are the themes, symbolism, imagery from the The Book of John that you would like me to focus on? If these themes are compatible with Judaism, I will certainly say so and my POV on the Book will become perhaps 2-fold. I'll have an opinion of the Book as understood as real and factual, and I may have a completely different view of the Book if read completely symbolically.

In other words, maybe The Book is compatible, symbolically, At this point I have no idea.

Otherwise, thank you very kindly for the screenshots from the scroll of MelchiTzedek. I think I understand what the scholar is saying. So moving forward, Are you able to summarize which elements of the Book of John, in the view of your sources, show signs of influence from 2nd Temple Judaism?

Could you clarify this point? Are you suggesting that Jewish texts never speak in extended symbolic language? (Ezekiel might want to have a word with you there....)

Certainly. The instruction made by Jesus in John 14:14 is being carried out by Christians world wide. "In Jesus name we pray...". This appears to be precisely the instructions given by the Book of John in and around 14:14. Taken literally, it is a sin for a Jewish person to do this. If this is symbolic, then, it's still a sin for a Jewish person to follow the directions given by Jesus in the story. There is no way around it.

Intentionally saying "In Jesus Name we pray", while knowingly meaning something else is a violation of the Ten commandments, bearing false witness. If the verses in 14 are knowingly symbolic, then the prayer would need to be adjusted to accommodate this truth. otherwise. It's a sin. This would be something like, "In the symbolic name of Jesus". Or, "In Jesus' name I symbolically pray". That would be true. The other is false. that's it, and in this specific case, a person is talking to the All-Mighty. It's a good idea to be completely honest.

I don't know Ezekiel well, but, it's not instructive, right? It's not prescriptive? It describes prophetic visions which, by definition, are mix of symbolism and literal-ism. So the two are apples and oranges. Ezekiel can be symbolic no problem as long as it doesn't direct a Jewish person to a transgression. If there is an example of this, it will certainly prove your point.

 

[dybmh]

tzaddik

A Tzaddik fasts on the weekdays... not on shabbos. A Tzaddik would not argue with 3 Judges in public ( that's a big problem ). It's not a good fit, imo.

Edit to add: A Tzaddik is a master of his emotions.