|
|
Post by R' Y'hoshua Moshe on Aug 24, 2004 15:14:51 GMT -8
Shalom dear member of HaAhava Elohim Discussion Forums, Here is the Haftarah portion of the Torah Reading Schedule for this week: "Ki Tetze” – “When You Go”Haftarah : Isaiah (Yeshayahu) 54:1-10 May the following be our prayer... "Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy  ." - Psalms 119:18 Please share your thoughts…. Shavua tov b’ Y’shua HaMashiach! (Have a good week in Y’shua The Messiah) |
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 14, 2013 21:57:07 GMT -8
Yeshayahu 54:1 "Sing, barren woman who has never had a child! Burst into song, shout for joy, you who have never been in labor! For the deserted wife will have more children than the woman who is living with her husband," says ADONAI. Contextually, as this comes immediately after ch. 53 in which the "Suffering Servant" is prophesied, it would seem to me that Yeshua is pictured here as the husband. This theme is carried on into the next chapter as well. Yeshayahu 55:1 "All you who are thirsty, come to the water! ... 5 You will summon a nation you do not know, and a nation that doesn't know you will run to you, for the sake of ADONAI your God, the Holy One of Isra'el, who will glorify you."The "nation you do not know" and "that doesn't know you" sounds like the gentile believers who, when added to those of Yis'rael who believed cause her tent (Tzion) to have to be enlarged in ch.54 vs.2. It seems curiouse that references do not make this connection. Matthew Henry comes close: "The death of Christ is the life of the church and of all that truly belong to it; and therefore very fitly, after the prophet had foretold the sufferings of Christ, he foretels the flourishing of the church, which is a part of his glory, and that exaltation of him which was the reward of his humiliation: it was promised him that he should see his seed, and this chapter is an explication of that promise. It may easily be granted that it has a primary reference to the welfare and prosperity of the Jewish church after their return out of Babylon, which (as other things that happened to them) was typical of the glorious liberty of the children of God, which through Christ we are brought into; yet it cannot be denied but that it has a further and principal reference to the gospel church, into which the Gentiles were to be admitted."He makes the connection of the gentiles being admitted (Christians are quick to pick up on that part!  u-bet'cha!), but no allusion to Yeshua being the actual husband. So am I wrong here? Or is this something that has just been overlooked by 'Christians' in our zeal to become part of Yis'rael? (At least the part with the blessings!  ) Dan C
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2013 6:45:03 GMT -8
Yeshayahu 54:1 "Sing, barren woman who has never had a child! Burst into song, shout for joy, you who have never been in labor! For the deserted wife will have more children than the woman who is living with her husband," says ADONAI. Contextually, as this comes immediately after ch. 53 in which the "Suffering Servant" is prophesied, it would seem to me that Yeshua is pictured here as the husband. This theme is carried on into the next chapter as well. Yeshayahu 55:1 "All you who are thirsty, come to the water! ... 5 You will summon a nation you do not know, and a nation that doesn't know you will run to you, for the sake of ADONAI your God, the Holy One of Isra'el, who will glorify you."The "nation you do not know" and "that doesn't know you" sounds like the gentile believers who, when added to those of Yis'rael who believed cause her tent (Tzion) to have to be enlarged in ch.54 vs.2. It seems curiouse that references do not make this connection. Matthew Henry comes close: "The death of Christ is the life of the church and of all that truly belong to it; and therefore very fitly, after the prophet had foretold the sufferings of Christ, he foretels the flourishing of the church, which is a part of his glory, and that exaltation of him which was the reward of his humiliation: it was promised him that he should see his seed, and this chapter is an explication of that promise. It may easily be granted that it has a primary reference to the welfare and prosperity of the Jewish church after their return out of Babylon, which (as other things that happened to them) was typical of the glorious liberty of the children of God, which through Christ we are brought into; yet it cannot be denied but that it has a further and principal reference to the gospel church, into which the Gentiles were to be admitted."He makes the connection of the gentiles being admitted (Christians are quick to pick up on that part! u-bet'cha!), but no allusion to Yeshua being the actual husband. So am I wrong here? Or is this something that has just been overlooked by 'Christians' in our zeal to become part of Yis'rael? (At least the part with the blessings! ) Dan C I would recommend exchanging Mathew Henry for The Jewish Study Bible so that you can read what Jews understand by those words and then, and only then, begin to apply the teaching(s) in the latter part of The Book; to change the words spoken at the tomb (why do you look among the dead for the living): why do you look at Christian books for a Jewish understanding The Isaiah 54 quote G_d is her husband and protector - that is correct, see Hosea. She will not remain barren but will have to enlarge her area to take in all that G_d will give her / restore to her. The quote you give from Is 55 is a known uncertainty except that, a little further in (vs 3-5, 12) it seems to relate clearly to Judeans. Vs 5 seems to be clearly about gentiles coming into the fold, however. |
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 15, 2013 13:30:28 GMT -8
I would recommend exchanging Mathew Henry for The Jewish Study Bible so that you can read what Jews understand by those words and then, and only then, begin to apply the teaching(s) in the latter part of The Book; to change the words spoken at the tomb (why do you look among the dead for the living): why do you look at Christian books for a Jewish understanding Actually, I do have the JPS Study Bible. I was reading from it when this thought occurred to me, however they are obviously not going to say Yeshua is the actual husband of Yis'rael  . I went to the Christian commentaries to see if any of them had said this, but didn't find any. The implications of such a thought are huge for Christianity, if I am correct. If Yeshua is the husband of Yis'rael in the TNK, and we are the "Bride of Christ" in the Ketuvei Shelachim, then they would have to say clearly that the "church" did not start in Acts, but at Sinai and even before that (I say it started with the creation of Adam). Yes, v. 5 clearly relates to the gentile believers to be added to the "family" later, and that the Hebrew woman (Yis'rael) would have to enlarge her tent to hold her "offspring" in 54: 2-3; and that Adonai (actually YHVH in the original) is her "husband." The gentiles as well as the Jewish believers after Yeshua are called many times the "Bride of (the) Christ" as well. Therefore ... in my mind anyhow, Yeshua would also be the Husband of Yis'rael. And the entire body of believers, including Yis'rael (and going back to Adam, though not pictured here) makes up the Bride/Wife/Church! Interesting commentary on 54:9-10 in the JPS Study Bible: "God switches from a marital metaphor to a simile based on the story of Noah (Gen. chs 8-9). The former metaphor implied that the covenant between God and Israel is one of mutual obligation; the allusion to Noah recalls the notion of a covenant of grace, which God unilaterally grants to human beings. Deutero-Isaiah often moves back and forth between portrayals of Israel as God's spouse and God's child, hence insisting that both covenant models are valid;"So we have a picture of both grace and mutual obligation at work in the "Old Testament." What might that imply to the "New Testament Church?" You think God really IS the same yesterday, today and tomorrow? "But, that might mean we still have to keep the "LAW!"  Ya think!?  Dan C |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2013 11:53:54 GMT -8
I would recommend exchanging Mathew Henry for The Jewish Study Bible so that you can read what Jews understand by those words and then, and only then, begin to apply the teaching(s) in the latter part of The Book; to change the words spoken at the tomb (why do you look among the dead for the living): why do you look at Christian books for a Jewish understanding Actually, I do have the JPS Study Bible. I was reading from it when this thought occurred to me, however they are obviously not going to say Yeshua is the actual husband of Yis'rael . I went to the Christian commentaries to see if any of them had said this, but didn't find any. The implications of such a thought are huge for Christianity, if I am correct. If Yeshua is the husband of Yis'rael in the TNK, and we are the "Bride of Christ" in the Ketuvei Shelachim, then they would have to say clearly that the "church" did not start in Acts, but at Sinai and even before that (I say it started with the creation of Adam). Yes, v. 5 clearly relates to the gentile believers to be added to the "family" later, and that the Hebrew woman (Yis'rael) would have to enlarge her tent to hold her "offspring" in 54: 2-3; and that Adonai (actually YHVH in the original) is her "husband." The gentiles as well as the Jewish believers after Yeshua are called many times the "Bride of (the) Christ" as well. Therefore ... in my mind anyhow, Yeshua would also be the Husband of Yis'rael. And the entire body of believers, including Yis'rael (and going back to Adam, though not pictured here) makes up the Bride/Wife/Church! Interesting commentary on 54:9-10 in the JPS Study Bible: "God switches from a marital metaphor to a simile based on the story of Noah (Gen. chs 8-9). The former metaphor implied that the covenant between God and Israel is one of mutual obligation; the allusion to Noah recalls the notion of a covenant of grace, which God unilaterally grants to human beings. Deutero-Isaiah often moves back and forth between portrayals of Israel as God's spouse and God's child, hence insisting that both covenant models are valid;"So we have a picture of both grace and mutual obligation at work in the "Old Testament." What might that imply to the "New Testament Church?" You think God really IS the same yesterday, today and tomorrow? "But, that might mean we still have to keep the "LAW!" Ya think!? Dan C We have a number of texts in the latter part of The Book that speak of Yeshua being the groom and 'the Church' being the bride. I do not see any disconnect between the two parts in this respect - we should be keeping the Laws we can keep if we are believers. G_d being the same yesterday, today and tomorrow means that he treats us the same, - he will never change the way he blesses or loves or punishes etc etc., and he will not change whether it is a Jew or a Gentile in front of him; he is a living, active, loving, creating and judging G_d at all times for all people (if only most of them knew it!). By the same token his Law remains as steadfast as he is - what he determined as the Law 5 millennia ago is still in force today and will be tomorrow, as well. So, yes, it needs to be obeyed to the extent of our ability and understanding, whether Jew or Gentile. |
|
." - Psalms 119:18
)
. I went to the Christian commentaries to see if any of them had said this, but didn't find any.
