Post by Mark on Sept 27, 2008 6:10:02 GMT -8
In John, chapter 3, Messiah Yeshua never identifies Himself directly as the Messiah. He consistently describes the Messiah in the "third person". Yet, what He speaks about Himself are things that Nicodemus is going to need to know to make his own personal decision about Yeshua as the Messiah.
Israel was actively posed to receive the Messiah. The timeline given by Daniel was not outside of their understanding. The Star over Bethlehem and the visitors from afar was not so distant in the past. Nicodemus may have seen the camel bands coming through Jerusalem with his own eyes. He may well have sat under the tutorage of the sages who advised King Herod on this event. The Roman occupation was more than an inconvenience to Israel. It was an affront to their theology, that they were the people chosen by the Almighty. Every exposure to Roman dominance was a reminder that they were waiting for the Messiah.
In Jewish theology there are two Messiahs that are described. There is Messiah ben Joseph who is the suffering Messiah and there is Messiah ben David who will conquer an d reign.
Messiah ben Joseph will later be defined more clearly in the Jewish writings of the Talmud:
"Messiah, Son of Joseph was slain, as it is written, "They shall look upon Me whom they have pierced; and they shall mourn for Him as one mourneth for his only son." (Sukkot 52 A, quoting Zechariah 12:10).
Rabbi Dosa taught, "They will mourn over the Messiah who will be slain," in reference to the text of Zecharian 12:10-12. (Babylonian Sukkot 52A)
"The Messiah: what is His Name? Those of the house of Rabbi Yudah the Saint say, "the sick One, as it is said, ‘Surely He has borne our sicknesses.’" (Sanhedrin 98B)
Rabbi Elijah de Vidas wrote, "But He was wounded… meaning that since the Messiah bears our iniquities which would produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whoever will not admit that Messiah must suffer for our iniquities, must endure and suffer for themself."
Yet, national Israel of the early 1st Century was not looking for Messiah ben Joseph. The idea of a martyr for a Savior did not fit the definition for which they hoped. They were waiting for another Judah Macabbee, who had routed the Syrian armies a hundred and fifty (or so) years before. They were waiting or Messiah ben David, who would come and deliver Israel from her oppressors.
Messiah Yeshua confirmed to Nicodemus that the Messiah to come first was Messiah ben Joseph.
This idiom "Son of Man" was familiar to the Jewish people as the one who must suffer on behalf of his people. Most commonly, it is associated with the prophet Ezeliel who endured personal tragedy after tragedy only to demonstrate the suffering Israel must endure because of her sin. My sub-title for the book of Ezekiel is, "the guy that God dumped on". While he did nothing worthy of suffering and was alone the pillar of righteousness in his community, he suffered at the hand of God on Israel’s behalf.
Yet, in contrast, the Son of Man is also described in the book of Daniel as the mighty conquerer of the world.
I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
(Dan 7:13-14 KJV)
Messiah confirms that, just as the serpent was lifted up, so Messiah ben Joseph must first be lifted up and sacrificed for all the dying to look upon and be saved.
While the suffering Messiah doctrine was not a popular one, it was still a Jewish doctrine of the day that Nicodemus would have been familiar with. Messiah Yeshua was not teaching anything new. He was confirming one position within Jewish theology and discrediting another. As these things would unfold in days and months to come, Nicodemus would have little choice but to be absolutely converted. That Messiah must suffer and die is as much a truth of biblical prophecy and Jewish theology is as that He must live and reign forever.
In recent theology (by recent, I mean within the last five hundred years) the suffering Messiah doctrine has been taught to represent the nation of Israel as a whole: that the nation must suffer and die on behalf of her people. Nicodemus would have known better. He was there. He saw the Messiah lifted up on the cross, just as He had said He would be. "And whoever places his trust upon Him, shall not perish but have eternal life."
Israel was actively posed to receive the Messiah. The timeline given by Daniel was not outside of their understanding. The Star over Bethlehem and the visitors from afar was not so distant in the past. Nicodemus may have seen the camel bands coming through Jerusalem with his own eyes. He may well have sat under the tutorage of the sages who advised King Herod on this event. The Roman occupation was more than an inconvenience to Israel. It was an affront to their theology, that they were the people chosen by the Almighty. Every exposure to Roman dominance was a reminder that they were waiting for the Messiah.
In Jewish theology there are two Messiahs that are described. There is Messiah ben Joseph who is the suffering Messiah and there is Messiah ben David who will conquer an d reign.
Messiah ben Joseph will later be defined more clearly in the Jewish writings of the Talmud:
"Messiah, Son of Joseph was slain, as it is written, "They shall look upon Me whom they have pierced; and they shall mourn for Him as one mourneth for his only son." (Sukkot 52 A, quoting Zechariah 12:10).
Rabbi Dosa taught, "They will mourn over the Messiah who will be slain," in reference to the text of Zecharian 12:10-12. (Babylonian Sukkot 52A)
"The Messiah: what is His Name? Those of the house of Rabbi Yudah the Saint say, "the sick One, as it is said, ‘Surely He has borne our sicknesses.’" (Sanhedrin 98B)
Rabbi Elijah de Vidas wrote, "But He was wounded… meaning that since the Messiah bears our iniquities which would produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whoever will not admit that Messiah must suffer for our iniquities, must endure and suffer for themself."
Yet, national Israel of the early 1st Century was not looking for Messiah ben Joseph. The idea of a martyr for a Savior did not fit the definition for which they hoped. They were waiting for another Judah Macabbee, who had routed the Syrian armies a hundred and fifty (or so) years before. They were waiting or Messiah ben David, who would come and deliver Israel from her oppressors.
Messiah Yeshua confirmed to Nicodemus that the Messiah to come first was Messiah ben Joseph.
This idiom "Son of Man" was familiar to the Jewish people as the one who must suffer on behalf of his people. Most commonly, it is associated with the prophet Ezeliel who endured personal tragedy after tragedy only to demonstrate the suffering Israel must endure because of her sin. My sub-title for the book of Ezekiel is, "the guy that God dumped on". While he did nothing worthy of suffering and was alone the pillar of righteousness in his community, he suffered at the hand of God on Israel’s behalf.
Yet, in contrast, the Son of Man is also described in the book of Daniel as the mighty conquerer of the world.
I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
(Dan 7:13-14 KJV)
Messiah confirms that, just as the serpent was lifted up, so Messiah ben Joseph must first be lifted up and sacrificed for all the dying to look upon and be saved.
While the suffering Messiah doctrine was not a popular one, it was still a Jewish doctrine of the day that Nicodemus would have been familiar with. Messiah Yeshua was not teaching anything new. He was confirming one position within Jewish theology and discrediting another. As these things would unfold in days and months to come, Nicodemus would have little choice but to be absolutely converted. That Messiah must suffer and die is as much a truth of biblical prophecy and Jewish theology is as that He must live and reign forever.
In recent theology (by recent, I mean within the last five hundred years) the suffering Messiah doctrine has been taught to represent the nation of Israel as a whole: that the nation must suffer and die on behalf of her people. Nicodemus would have known better. He was there. He saw the Messiah lifted up on the cross, just as He had said He would be. "And whoever places his trust upon Him, shall not perish but have eternal life."
