Replies

I honestly can’t take your posts seriously. Considering the sheer amount of confusion you displayed last time you tried to explain Christian theology, I don’t think you even know the basics. But as to ‘reading Christianity back into the Old Testament,’ I tend to think the Jews, prior to Christ, weren’t so averse to Christian interpretations at all.

For example, Joseph Ben Uziel, 30 years before the time of Christ, identifying the servant as the Messiah in Isaiah 43:

“Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant, the Messiah, in whom is my delight, in order that ye may know, and that ye may believe in me, and understand that I am He who was from the beginning ; yea, ages after ages are
mine, and beside me there is no God.” (The Chaldee paraphrase on the prophet Isaiah [by Jonathan b. Uziel] tr. by C.W.H. Pauli)

In Isaiah 9:6, he retains the meaning of ‘The Mighty God,’ as opposed to “mighty man” as well.

I don't know what I did to offend you and make you into an enemy, but whatever it was I'm sorry. Most of my wars on this forum are with Nazis and evolutionists, and as far as I know you are neither (though your objecting to a harmless article defending Hebrew as the original language until the Tower of Babel is a bit disturbing). At any rate, I simply don't understand the anger and hostility in your post. Do you realize I've been defending Fundamentalist Protestants from their critics on this forum for over fourteen years?

Now as to your points: I am most confused as to why someone who believes in sola scriptura to invoke rabbinic commentaries. But then I've noticed this before: some Protestant who believes in sola scriptura starts invoking commentaries, and if I do the same thing they start screaming WHERE IS THAT WRITTEN??? You're not the first person to pull that switcheroo, but it's hypocritical and dishonest no matter who does it.

But to get to the meat of the matter, once again you're invoking Isaiah (honestly, I was expecting "There is none that doeth good, no not one") and ignoring the fact that the Torah is the Ultimate Revelation by which all others are judged. No prophet, no Psalm, can predict the replacement of the Torah by some other religion. If any of them had, the Men of the Great Assembly would never have canonized the books.

The Torah contains no expiration date, and as a matter of fact, says in several places that its commandments are to be kept "forever." The idea that the Torah is a preliminary and preparatory revelation superseded by the Prophets (and later by the "new testament") is one of those chrstian assumptions.

At any rate, any further discussion we do should be on another thread. This thread is about Rabbi Lapin's article on Hebrew.