The Old Testament NEVER Prophecized The Messiah Would Be Crucified! (scriptures, priest)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll put it this way which will make it clearer. The Jewish Tanakh that the Jews read today is the Masoretic text. And the Masoretic text was produced by the Masoretes during the period between the 7th and 10th centuries A.D. The oldest complete copy of the Masoretic text still extant dates to the tenth century A.D.
When people say that the 'Christian Old Testament' is different from the Jewish Tanakh, they are actually saying that the 'Christian Old Testament' is different from the Masoretic text. When the claim is made by people such as yourself that ''For the NT to flow correctly, the OT had to be re-written so that it flows in the direction of the NT.'' (post 12 of this thread), the claim is being made that the 'Christian Old Testament' rewrote what is said in the Masoretic text. Yet there are much older traditions than the Masoretic text such as the Pe****ta (Pets hitta), the Latin Vulgate, and the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The Masoretic text while agreeing in many places with the much older Dead Sea Scrolls, disagrees with the Dead Sea Scrolls in other places. Both the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint which is a Greek translation of a Hebrew text are much older than the Masoretic text. The Hebrew text from which the Septuagint was translated is much older than the Masoretic text. In some places the Dead Sea Scrolls agree with the Masoretic text while in other places the Dead Sea Scrolls agree more closely with the Septuagint. When the New Testament writers quoted the Old Testament they more often quoted the Septuagint.
The Tanakh which the Jews read today is the Masoretic text. But the Masoretic text is but one Hebrew textual tradition. There are much older textual traditions. The 'Christian Old Testament' did not rewrite the Tanakh. If the 'Christian Old Testament' disagrees with the Masoretic text at some point, it simply means that at that point the 'Christian Old Testament' is based on a different textual tradition.
Isaiah 53 in the 'Christian Old Testament' is nearly identical with the Great Isaiah Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls. If the claim is made by someone that Isaiah 53 in the 'Christian Old Testament' disagrees with the Tanakh, then what is actually being said is that Isaiah 53 of the 'Christian Old Testament' agrees with the Great Isaiah Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls against the Masoretic text. Again, the Dead Sea Scrolls are much older than the Masoretic text which is the textual tradition of the Tanakh that Jews read today.
The question then becomes, How much does the Masoretic text of Isaiah 53 actually disagree with the Dead Sea Scrolls? Reading both provides the answer.
Here is the Great Isaiah Scroll. In the link click on the scroll. A much bigger scroll will come up. Then simply move your cursor over the scroll and then click in order to get the English translation. You must click for each individual verse.
Seeing Isaiah as a two-part book (chapters 1–33 and 34–66) with an overarching theme leads to a summary of its contents like the following:
The book opens by setting out the themes of judgment and subsequent restoration for the righteous. God has a plan which will be realised on the "Day of Yahweh", when Jerusalem will become the centre of his worldwide rule. On that day all the nations of the world will come to Zion (Jerusalem) for instruction, but first the city must be punished and cleansed of evil. Israel is invited to join in this plan.
Chapters 5–12 explain the significance of the Assyrian judgment against Israel: righteous rule by the Davidic king will follow after the arrogant Assyrian monarch is brought down.
Chapters 13–27 announce the preparation of the nations for Yahweh's world rule; chapters 28–33 announce that a royal saviour (a messiah) will emerge in the aftermath of Jerusalem's punishment and the destruction of her oppressor.
The oppressor (now identified as Babylon rather than Assyria) is about to fall. Chapters 34–35 tell how Yahweh will return the redeemed exiles to Jerusalem.
Chapters 36–39 tell of the faithfulness of king Hezekiah to Yahweh during the Assyrian siege as a model for the restored community.
Chapters 40–54 state that the restoration of Zion is taking place because Yahweh, the creator of the universe, has designated the Persian king Cyrus the Great as the promised messiah and temple-builder.
Chapters 55–66 are an exhortation to Israel to keep the covenant. God's eternal promise to David is now made to the people of Israel/Judah at large. The book ends by enjoining righteousness as the final stages of God's plan come to pass, including the pilgrimage of the nations to Zion and the realisation of Yahweh's kingship.
Last edited by Richard1965; 11-03-2015 at 05:32 PM..
As for the Tanakh, it simply follows the Masoretic text which was produced around the 7th century A.D. At times it agrees with the Dead Sea scrolls which are about a thousand years older than the Masoretic text, and at other times it doesn't. The Masoretic text is simply one text. At times the so called 'Christian Old Testament' follows the Masoretic text, and at other times it follows the Septuagint which also precedes the Masoretic text as well as the Christian era. Contrary to the claims of some, the 'Christian Old Testament' doesn't rewrite the Tanakh which again follows the Masoretic text, it simply at times follows a different text.
The Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa) is one of the original seven Dead Sea Scrolls discovered in Qumran in 1947. It is the largest (734 cm) and best preserved of all the biblical scrolls, and the only one that is almost complete. The 54 columns contain all 66 chapters of the Hebrew version of the biblical Book of Isaiah. Dating from ca. 125 BCE, it is also one of the oldest of the Dead Sea Scrolls, some one thousand years older than the oldest manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible known to us before the scrolls' discovery. The version of the text is generally in agreement with the Masoretic or traditional version codified in medieval codices, such as the Aleppo Codex, but it contains many variant readings, alternative spellings, scribal errors, and corrections. - http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/isaiah#53:8
Then why are you telling a Jew that you know more than he does about his religion's sacred books?...
I simply refuted the claim, such as the one made by Pruzhany in post #12 that the Tanakh was rewritten to make it compatible with the New Testament. Readers refer to post #27.
I simply refuted the claim, such as the one made by Pruzhany in post #12 that the Tanakh was rewritten to make it compatible with the New Testament. Readers refer to post #27.
But it was...And you can blow all the smoke that you want...
Hey, Pruzh, notice what I found on the DSS site and what Mike typed, it seems that he made it sound like there were many more disagreements between the MT and the GIS...When in reality the GIS is GENERALLY in agreement with the MT, which Mike says the TaNaKh is based on...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
