Evidence for God from Science

In "Gabriel's Vision Stone Tablet: Prophecy of the Coming Messiah Jesus?," (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... stone.html) Rich Deem writes that the Gabriel Stone mentions a command by the Archangel Gabriel that the Messiah should resurrect in 3 days.

He is right that the Dead Sea Scrolls confirm the Suffering Servant passage of Isaiah 53. What do you think of the translation of Isaiah 53 from the Dead Sea Scrolls at: http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/dead ... olls-2.htm , and is there a better translation?

It doesn't say the servant was "pierced through." It says he was "like a lamb that is led to slaughter" and that he "bore the sin of many." It doesn't explicitly say that he was like a lamb led to slaughter "because" he bore their sins. But it doesn't make much sense to separate the two ideas in this passage, does it?

If the Gabriel Stone "appears to EXTEND the ancient prophecies of the "suffering servant" to include his death and resurrection," does that mean the prophecies, unless extended, do not include his resurrection?

Does the Gabriel Stone help us to understand whether scripture propheciesthe Messuah's resurrection?

It said that line 80 gives a command for someone to "live" or "resurrect." If the word "live" fits better, how do we know that this means live after the person's death? And how do we know that the term prince of princes in the next line is connected?

In Prophecies of Jesus Christ as Messiah, (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prophchr.html), David Reem wrote that Psalms 16:10, 30:3, 49:15, and 118:17 prophesied that the Messiah would be resurrected. Why do you think that the Psalms of David are not David's poetic protrayal of himself?

When King David refers to God's Holy One in Psalm 16:10, does he mean the Messiah or does he mean each one who is holy? For example, John 14 says: "He who has seen me has seen the Father." "He" refers to each person who has seen Jesus. And Psalm 89 says: "Let the heavens praise thy wonders, O LORD, thy faithfulness in the assembly of the holy ones!"

When King David says in Psalm 118:17, "I shall not die, but live, And tell of the works of the LORD," does he mean that he won't die at that time, but will live, or does he mean he will never die? Could you say "he is very sick, but he's not going to die?" How can Psalm 118:17-18 be about a dying and resurrected Messiah if it ends: "The LORD has chastened me severely, but he has not given me over to death."

In "How the Passover Reveals Jesus Christ", (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/passover.html), he described how Jesus was buried or planted on the feast of first fruits, in which Jews sacrificed their grain. He wrote: "As such, Jesus represents the fulfillment of God's promise to provide the rest of the harvest - resurrection of those who follow the Messiah." Did the Old Testament compare resurrection with a harvest? Is there a mismatch in the analogy because the first fruits were sacrificed and destroyed in the temple, instead of being planted, "resurrected," and harvested?

It gave an interesting analogy between the middle matzoh that is broken, hidden, and then uncovered, and the Messiah's resurrection. Do the scriptures tell us to do this procedure, and do they explain why?

In "A MESSIANIC PASSOVER HAGGADAH, (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/haggadah.html), David Sargent gave an interesting analogy between the middle matzoh that is broken, hidden, and then uncovered, and the Messiah's resurrection. Do the scriptures tell us to do this procedure, and do they explain why?

If it is an analogy for the Messiah, what does the bigger piece of the Middle Matzoh represent, and what does the smaller piece that is not hidden, found, or uncovered represent?

He wrote: "Some rabbis say it represents the HIGH PRIEST, LEVITES and PEOPLE of ISRAEL. The three forms of worship in temple times. But why is the middle broken?" Could it be because Israel was broken by Egypt, then hidden as slaves, and then reappeared after they found the reward of the promised land? After all, the Matzoh is broken right after you say "Now we are here; next year may we be in the Land of Israel. Now we are slaves; next year may we be free men." It's true that not each person was a slave in Egypt, but doesn't the Bible say Israel as a nation was in bondage? Even those who were free probably had Egyptian employers and served them in that sense.

He wrote about the lamb and Afikoman Maztoh sandwich: "Also the lamb was not eaten outside of Jerusalem, so the afikoman took on much of the significance of the Passover lamb for them." I see how without the lamb in the sandwich, the Afikoman becomes more important. But why should it take on the lamb's meaning? Where does it say that the Jews interpreted it that way?

I couldn't find any Jewish websites that say during their seder ritual: "The AFIKOMAN is our substitute for the Passover Lamb, which in days of old, was the final food of the Seder feast."

He writes: "The Rabbis have rigid codes as to the appearance of the matzah. It must have stripes, be pierced and without leaven. Y'shua was afflicted, striped, pierced and without sin." It makes sense to me that if the last day's bread in Egypt was unleavened, then the Passover bread would be too. Many pictures of Matzoh on the internet have dark brown spots and holes in a checker-board grid pattern. Could you point me to rabbis' rules about stripes and holes?

Do Jews mention the Messiah when they eat Matzoh at Passover?

Sincerely,
Hal Smith

Rakovsky wrote: What do you think of the translation of Isaiah 53 from the Dead Sea Scrolls at: m http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/dead ... olls-2.htm m , and is there a better translation?

It is similar to the translation in one of my Hebrew Bibles: (verse 5)

But he was wounded because of our transgressions,
He was crushed because of our iniquities:
The chastisement of our welfare was upon him,
And with his stripes we were healed.
(Soncino Press, London)

Is there a better translation? I don't care. I am not a Translation Nazi. I know that God can touch people's heart no matter the translation.

Rakovsky wrote:It doesn't say the servant was "pierced through." It says he was "like a lamb that is led to slaughter" and that he "bore the sin of many." It doesn't explicitly say that he was like a lamb led to slaughter "because" he bore their sins. But it doesn't make much sense to separate the two ideas in this passage, does it?

My Hebrew Bible mentions «piercing» in Zechariah 12:10,

But I will pour upon the House of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they whom the nations were piercing shall look upon me, and shall mourn over it, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in biterness over it, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

Psalm 22:16 has the word «pierce» in some Christian versions but my Hebrew Bible says:

My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.

Rakovsky wrote:Why do you think that the Psalms of David are not David's poetic protrayal of himself?

Specifically Ps 16:10,

For thou wilt not abandon my soul to the grave; neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see corruption. (Hebrew Bible)

The part in boldface obviously refers to someone else. David - more than anyone else - knew how unholy he was! ...and remember: psalms are prayers to God.

That's it for now.

FL

Continuing...

Rakovsky wrote:It gave an interesting analogy between the middle matzoh that is broken, hidden, and then uncovered, and the Messiah's resurrection. Do the scriptures tell us to do this procedure, and do they explain why?

This comes from Jewish tradition. The middle of 3 matza is broken in two and half is hidden only to be brought out at the end of the meal. This is the matzoh Jesus would have broken at the Last Supper. Half of this matzoh is eaten by all those at the Seder right after it is broken; this is when Jesus would have divided up the matzoh and said take, eat. This is my body delivered for you...

Rakovsky wrote: But why is the middle broken?"

Jews repeat this symbolism year after year without understanding that it represents the Passover Lamb himself at his first coming, and the Lamb at his second coming. The hidden half-matzoh is brought out at the end of the meal: the dessert. This is the afikomen. Traditionally, this bite is allowed to melt in the mouth in order to delight in its flavour. This recalls the old Catholic injunction against chewing the communion Host.

Do you understand the symbolism of this tradition?

For other questions of a Jewish nature, you can find answers at,

http://www.thesanhedrin.org/en/

There is a Discussion Forum as well. These are Conservative, Hassidim and Orthodox Jews. Be polite and don't make Christians look bad.

FL

Rakovsky wrote:In Prophecies of Jesus Christ as Messiah, (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prophchr.html), David Reem wrote that Psalms 16:10, 30:3, 49:15, and 118:17 prophesied that the Messiah would be resurrected. Why do you think that the Psalms of David are not David's poetic protrayal of himself?

I think that the Psalms give a good portrayal of what Christ would do and accomplish in His first coming. The Old Testament does paint a picture of a risen Messiah. The Pharisees of Jesus' day believed in the resurrection of the dead and I would tend to think that this belief was gleaned from the Old Testament, as well as oral tradition. One example that demonstrates and foreshadows the resurrection of the Messiah can be found in the book of Leviticus.

Leviticus 14: 2-7, "This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing. Now he shall be brought to the priest, and the priest shall go out to the outside of the camp. Thus the priest shall look, and if the infection of leprosy has been healed in the leper, then the priest shall give orders to take two live clean birds and cedar wood and a scarlet string and hyssop for the one who is to be cleansed. "The priest shall also give orders to slay the one bird in an earthenware vessel over running water. "As for the live bird, he shall take it together with the cedar wood and the scarlet string and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the live bird in the blood of the bird that was slain over the running water. "He shall then sprinkle seven times the one who is to be cleansed from the leprosy and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the live bird go free over the open field.”

In the above passages we discover the predictive quality of the bible concerning the future death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ (the Messiah), which cleanse us from all sin. The following verse is of particular interest, “Thus the priest shall look, and if the infection of leprosy has been healed in the leper, then the priest shall give orders to take two live clean birds and cedar wood and a scarlet string and hyssop for the one who is to be cleansed.” The clean birds represent the sinless life of Christ, the wood points us to the cross, the scarlet thread reminds of His blood and the hyssop is what was used by the Israelites to mark their door posts with the blood of the lamb, and was also used to offer Jesus wine while He was on the cross. Further on in this passage we have the two birds which represent Jesus' death, burial and resurrection. One bird dying (Jesus' death) in an earthen vessel (burial) and one bird flying away with blood on it (Jesus' resurrection). As it is written in Revelation, “He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God." The bible is all about Jesus, as with all things found within the Old Testament.

Furstentum,

Thanks for writing back and offering ideas. I think that often in everyday life there is a hesitancy to discuss Christian faith. So our discussion here is special to me.

When I asked your opinion of the Dead Sea Scrolls version of Isaiah 53, you replied that
It is similar to the translation in one of my Hebrew Bibles: (verse 5)
However, while the two versions are similar, it is hard to tell how similar they are based on just one close verse, ie. verse 5.

You are right that God can touch people's heart no matter the translation, but I disagree that trying to get the best translation makes one a "Translation Nazi." If one values the scriptures as a tool to touch people's hearts, then the best translation seems like the best tool.

One of my original questions was about the article Gabriel's Vision Stone (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... stone.html), where Rich Deem writes that Isaiah 52-53 "describes "an arm of the Lord" who is "pierced through"." The problem with Mr. Deem's statement is that, like I said, Isaiah 52-53 doesn't specifically say that the Servant was pierced through.

It's true that, as you responded:

My Hebrew Bible mentions «piercing» in Zechariah 12:10,

But I will pour upon the House of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they whom the nations were piercing shall look upon me, and shall mourn over it, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in biterness over it, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

Psalm 22:16 has the word «pierce» in some Christian versions but my Hebrew Bible says:

My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.

But still, the sense of Mr. Deem's statement is that Isaiah 52-53 explicitly refers to, I quote, "an arm of the Lord" who is "pierced through". But in fact it doesn't. Of course, looking back, Zechariah 12 and Psalm 22 do speak of a Messiah being pierced, I think. But still it seems that the article was misleading about Isaiah 52-53, suggesting that the passage specified that the Servant would be pierced. (Now I might be sounding alittle like a literary Nazi, hehe. But still, critical thinking is important.)

To show that Psalm 16 referred to the Messiah, you wrote:

Specifically Ps 16:10,

For thou wilt not abandon my soul to the grave; neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see corruption. (Hebrew Bible)

The part in boldface obviously refers to someone else. David - more than anyone else - knew how unholy he was! ...and remember: psalms are prayers to God.

I think you are making an interesting point, since David was aware that he sinned, like you said.

But at least in Christianity there is the belief that someone can repent and become holy again. Plus, the Old Testament said that God's spirit came upon David, which suggests his holiness. Further, while David knew that he had sinned, I am unaware of anyplace in the Psalms where David describes himself as sinful in such a way that he couldn't become holy. I know that Psalm 69, I think it is, describes David as having sins apparently, but on closer inspection, it looks like what Psalm 69 really means is that sin covered him as a false accusation by his accusers, just as shame also covered him. Yet throughout Psalm 69 David insists that he is being falsely accused and wrongly covered with shame. Also, the Psalms- it may be Psalm 89- refer to God's "holy ones". So it appears that there were more than one. So I am uncertain whether here the fact that David recognized he had committed unholy sins meant that he couldn't refer to himself as God's holy one or one of God's holy ones.

Still, I think you are making a good point.

OK, I will take a break now too. Thanks.

Furstentum,

(cont.)

Regarding the Passover Seder tradition you wrote:

This comes from Jewish tradition. The middle of 3 matza is broken in two and half is hidden only to be brought out at the end of the meal. This is the matzoh Jesus would have broken at the Last Supper. Half of this matzoh is eaten by all those at the Seder right after it is broken; this is when Jesus would have divided up the matzoh and said take, eat. This is my body delivered for you...

I am not sure how widespread the tradition was in Jesus' time, but I highly doubt that Christ had a Passover Seder at the Last Supper. Orthodox Christianity focuses on John's Gospel account, and says that Christ was crucified on Passover Eve as the Passover Lambs would have been slaughtered at the Temple. Likewise, Talmud Sanhedrin 43 says that Jesus was killed on Passover Eve. Instead, I read from one Orthodox Christian theologian that the Last Supper was, I think, a pre-Passover begamoth meal with its traditional bread and wine, rather than a Passover seder with lamb. In this view, Jesus was the Passover lamb.

I see that "The middle of 3 matza is broken in two and half is hidden only to be brought out at the end of the meal. Half of this matzoh is eaten by all those at the Seder right after it is broken."

You write that "Jews repeat this symbolism year after year without understanding that it represents the Passover Lamb himself at his first coming, and the Lamb at his second coming. " I understand your interpretation, and it makes sense. But still, it seems important to consider the interpretation of Rabbinical Judaism and see if it makes as much sense. To understand what is the real symbolism, it seems important to learn about the earliest descriptions of the custom and how the writers viewed its symbolism.

Also, it doesn't seem that you answered my question about why specifically the middle matzoh is the broken one.

Regarding the idea that "The hidden half-matzoh is brought out at the end of the meal: the dessert. This is the afikomen. Traditionally, this bite is allowed to melt in the mouth in order to delight in its flavour. This recalls the old Catholic injunction against chewing the communion Host.", I am not sure that it recalls such a Catholic tradition, which by the way I hadn't heard of before but assume you are right about. The problem is that if the afikomen melts in the mouth because it is a desert and the purpose is to savor it, then it seems to be different from the Catholic idea, which I assume is simply out of respect for what it considers to be Christ's body.

Thanks for sharing the information when you wrote:

For other questions of a Jewish nature, you can find answers at,

http://www.thesanhedrin.org/en/

There is a Discussion Forum as well. These are Conservative, Hassidim and Orthodox Jews.

Wow. The Reconstituted Sanhedrin? As in the Sanhedrin of Caiaphas and Annas?

I read that Bulgaria's Chief Rabbi in WWII, Daniel Zion, became Christian and wanted to have a retrial of Jesus' case to show His rightness. Some Israeli religious leaders I think considered him mentally disturbed for such a proposal, but I I liked the sound of his proposal when I read it and think it showed Daniel Zion's faithfulness.

You wrote: "Be polite and don't make Christians look bad." And I think this is important for religious discussions to achieve understanding. In such a setting I would feel myself an advocate for Him who said that there is no greater love than to lay down one's life for others, and then laid down his own life for our sake.

It is interesting though. While the Sanhedrin held power over the 1st century Judean religious community, in social terms it might not have been the most capable of understanding the scripture prophecies. That is because the prophetic scriptures like Isaiah and Jeremiah were written by prophets who lived away from the center of religious society, in a way like John the Baptist. And also like some early saints, like perhaps like the St John who wrote Revelations and other hermit saints who lived in caves. To understand their psychology the best and their mindset in their writings, someone like St Jerome, who I think lived in a cave for a while as a hermit while translating Hebrew scriptures with the help of Jewish Christians, might actually have a better social perspective than a religious leadership.

So it seems that a site that has some critical thinking like the God and Science site, or even a website from the Judaic perspective that has debated the question more with critical thinking, may have a better source. I can tell you that after reading the God and Science website and articles debating from the Christian and Judaic perspectives, I have come to believe that the scriptures do prophesy the Messiah's resurrection. I felt a need to write about what was for me a strong discovery on my website rakovskii.livejournal.com, and invite you at your convenience and interest, to come and see, brother.

Health, Happiness, and Inspiration to You, Furstentum.

Dazed and Confused:

Thanks for posting! I agree that:

I think that the Psalms give a good portrayal of what Christ would do and accomplish in His first coming. The Old Testament does paint a picture of a risen Messiah. The Pharisees of Jesus' day believed in the resurrection of the dead and I would tend to think that this belief was gleaned from the Old Testament, as well as oral tradition.

Regarding the passage:

One example that demonstrates and foreshadows the resurrection of the Messiah can be found in the book of Leviticus.

Leviticus 14: 2-7, "This shall be the law of the leper in the day of his cleansing. Now he shall be brought to the priest, and the priest shall go out to the outside of the camp. Thus the priest shall look, and if the infection of leprosy has been healed in the leper, then the priest shall give orders to take two live clean birds and cedar wood and a scarlet string and hyssop for the one who is to be cleansed. "The priest shall also give orders to slay the one bird in an earthenware vessel over running water. "As for the live bird, he shall take it together with the cedar wood and the scarlet string and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the live bird in the blood of the bird that was slain over the running water. "He shall then sprinkle seven times the one who is to be cleansed from the leprosy and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the live bird go free over the open field.”

This passage appears to be related to the Messiah's death insofar as it describes a poetic kind of atonement, and Isaiah 53 also describes the Messiah as undergoing an atonement.

Plus, I think you've enlightened me about the sinless sacrifice aspect of Isaiah 53 when you write: "The clean birds represent the sinless life of Christ". That is, Isaiah 53 was talking about a sinless sacrifice, because the idea of a sacrifice was that the animal was clean, which appears to have a poetic meaning of sinlessness. After all, why would it make a difference if it was just a run of the mill chicken? Yet here it is said that the chicken must be "clean." In Old Testament times, the idea of cleanliness also had an idea of spiritual cleanliness too. It is one more reason why Isaiah 53 doesn't refer to Israel, because elsewhere in Isaiah, in chapters before and after Isaiah 53, the Book describes Israel as sinful and then mentions a redeemer coming.

I understand the poetic similarities when you write:

the wood points us to the cross, the scarlet thread reminds of His blood and the hyssop is what was used by the Israelites to mark their door posts with the blood of the lamb, and was also used to offer Jesus wine while He was on the cross. Further on in this passage we have the two birds which represent Jesus' death, burial and resurrection. One bird dying (Jesus' death) in an earthen vessel (burial) and one bird flying away with blood on it (Jesus' resurrection). As it is written in Revelation, “He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God."

However, my problem with seeing it as specifically referring to the Messiah's resurrection is that it doesn't specifically say so or indicate it beyond the similarities that we see once we know about the New Testament story. So, for example, the passage doesn't seem to explain what the symbolic meaning of the hyssop and cedar and scarlet thread are, so it just looks like we are putting our New Testament concepts into the passage. It's ok if you are certain that Jesus was the prophesied Messiah and accept that "The bible is all about Jesus, as with all things found within the Old Testament", but if you look at the passage by itself, it doesn't seem to specify that it has such poetic meanings, although they do fit. Likewise, the quote from Revelations with a robe dipped in blood is similar to a bird with a strong dipped in blood, but again if you look at the Leviticus passage by itself, it doesn't seem to specify that it refers to the Messiah's robe.

One difference in the Leviticus passage is that it says the bird was slain inside the earthen vessel, which here you connect to Christ's burial. Yet in fact Christ was killed before his burial. Also, I am somewhat confused why the bird dying is Jesus' death but the bird flying away His own resurrection. It seems as, if not more, reasonable that the dead bird is the scapegoat, like a dying Messiah, while the bird that flies away is the people he saved or for whose sake he was killed. Just to give one example, there is an image of Pilate asking the crowd which person to free, and the crowd asked for Barabbas. Jesus in that case was like a scapegoat and Barabbas was freed. It is just one example, but Isaiah 53 does talk about the Servant being killed for the sake of others, such that he takes their punishment.

After reading articles on the God and Science Website and other articles, I have come to believe that the scriptures predict that the Messiah would rise, and I wrote about this on my website rakovskii.livejournal.com, which I invite you to at your convenience.

By the way, I like your saying "For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus."

Thank you for the discussion.

Happy Nativity, brother.