• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A New Priesthood.

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
There I shall cause David's horn to spring up צמיח; there I have set in order a lamp for my anointed.

The Hirsch Tehillim, Psalms 132:17.​

The "there" in Psalms 132:17 is Tzion; in Tzion ציון David's messianic son will "sprout" צמח; there (Tzion), a particular "lamp" is ordained for God's messiah משיח who is translated above as the "anointed." The previous verse, 132:16, says that God will cloth the priests of Tzion with salvation ישע. And earlier, verse 9, these same priests will be clothed not just with salvation, ישע, but also with "righteousness," tsaddik צדק. Rabbi Hirsch comments on this strange clothing:

When the priests of Tziyon (verse 9) will clothe themselves with the צדק [righteousness, tsaddik] taught and demanded by the Law of God, then God will also invest them with ישע [salvation], with the maximum power of perfect human "being" and life. ישע [salvation] is a result of צדק [righteousness], and its relation to צדק is the same as that of the positive garments of the high priest to the more negative garments of the ordinary priests.​

Wearing Yeshua, salvation, is greater than wearing the normal garments of the priesthood. In fact, wearing Yeshua is like wearing the garment only the high priest was allowed to wear, i.e., the Chosen חשן worn around his neck, between his breasts, as the light of salvation and righteousness. Rabbi Hirsch, the Psalms, and Jeremiah, are establishing a relationship between the "Lord our Righteousness (or Tsaddik)", a "sprout" צמח, and a particular lamp.

In those days shall Judah be saved ישע. . . [And so] shall he be called the Lord our Righteousness [and Salvation].

Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16.​

Numerous passages in the Tanakh speak of a new covenant to Israel; most notably Jeremiah 31:31. Presumably this new covenant entails a new priesthood ala the statements above. Psalms 132:16 provides a number of telling signs concerning the new covenant and the new covenant priests. With the help of the exegesis and commentary from Rabbi Samson Hirsch (The Hirsch Tehillim 132:16), we see that the new priesthood will be established in Tzion, rather than Jerusalem. According to multiple sources, Jerusalem is the city where kingship and priesthood are dualistic concepts, while in Tzion, peace is made between the two (Zechariah 6:13) such that a king/priest in the model of Melchizedek (a name meaning "king" melek, and "priest" tzaddik) rises to the throne of king David.

Using the context just established concerning this new priesthood in the order of Melchizedek (king priest מלכ צדק) the statement quoted from Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16 takes on a new patina. The Masoretic pointing and translation implies that "In those days shall Judah be saved." And yet if we take the context in Psalms 132:16 seriously, and why wouldn't we, then the messianic king who "sprouts" from the stump of the Davidic line of kings will himself be the king in the order of Melchizedek. And since this is explicit in Psalms 132:16, we would be inclined to take a second look at the Hebrew of the two passages in Jeremiah being mentioned.

ADDENDUM 8/10/22: based on the statement from Shaul (later in the thread), I want to add that in my understanding the new priesthood being examined doesn't replace or eliminate the Levitical priesthood which is an everlasting priesthood. Because of this, I changed the name of the thread so as not to imply a "replacement theology" that denies the everlasting promises to Israel and the legitimacy and continued existence of the Levitical priesthood.



John
 
Last edited:

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
Melchizedek (a name meaning "king" melek, and "priest" tzaddik)
Nope. The name means righteous king, not priest king. You translated tzaddik as righteous in other threads. Why are you switching the translation now?
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
And yet if we take the context in Psalms 132:16 seriously, and why wouldn't we, then the messianic king who "sprouts" from the stump of the Davidic line of kings will himself be the king in the order of Melchizedek. And since this is explicit in Psalms 132:16, we would be inclined to take a second look at the Hebrew of the two passages in Jeremiah being mentioned.

In those days shall Judah be saved ישע. . . [And so] shall he be called the Lord our Righteousness [and Salvation].

Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16.​

The actual construction of the word "saved" in the text isn't just ישע as noted above. In the text of the two passages in Jeremiah, the word has a tav ת prefix, and the yod that starts the word becomes a vav ו. The word is תושע. Out of the 184 times the consonants ישע are found throughout the Tanakh, only 11 are constructed with the tav prefix: every single time (save here, Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16) they're used for "save" or "will save" rather than to "be saved." Interpreted and translated literally, the text says "Judah will save" such that the king from the line of Judah will save, thus the messianic son of David, Judah, the kingly line, will also "save" Israel. Messiah will be a king, and a savior.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Nope. The name means righteous king, not priest king. You translated tzaddik as righteous in other threads. Why are you switching the translation now?

In the other thread, I also noted that "righteousness" is related to the priesthood."Righteousness" means one is cleansed from unrighteousness. That cleansing process is a priestly process. Melchizedek is known to be a king and a priest. He's a type of the king/priest, the "righteous" צדק king מלכ. Messiah is a righteous–king after the model of Melchizedek.



John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
In those days shall Judah be saved ישע. . . [And so] shall he be called the Lord our Righteousness [and Salvation].

Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16.​

The actual construction of the word "saved" in the text isn't just ישע as noted above. In the text of the two passages in Jeremiah, the word has a tav ת prefix, and the yod that starts the word becomes a vav ו. The word is תושע. Out of the 184 times the consonants ישע are found throughout the Tanakh, only 11 are constructed with the tav prefix: every single time (save here, Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16) they're used for "save" or "will save" rather than to "be saved." Interpreted and translated literally, the text says "Judah will save" such that the king from the line of Judah will save, thus the messianic son of David, Judah, the kingly line, will also "save" Israel. Messiah will be a king, and a savior.

To say that Messiah is a "savior" isn't itself too problematic for modern Judaism depending on how one is using the word. In interpreting Jeremiah 23:6, Rashi says: "The Lord will vindicate us during this one's day." Mezudath David says: "In the days of the Messiah, Judah shall be saved and Israel shall dwell safely." Both interpretations are based on a textual error found in the Masoretic Text. Rashi and Mezudath David's interpretation assumes the verse says "Judah will be saved," in which case Rashi's and Mezudath David's interpretation could stand. But it can't. And that's a mouthful.

If the text says, "Judah saves," that's fundamentally different from saying "Judah is saved." The latter implies that Messiah will vindicate Israel in the face of their enemies and that in that manner they will be saved/vindicated from the goyim.

On the other hand, if the text says "Judah saves" (and it does) then Judaism has an enormous problem since the "Judah saves" statement is the context for saying that the sprout of David will be called "The Lord is our righteousness."

If it can be shown that the text reads "Judah saves," (rather than "Judah is saved"), then the statement "The Lord is our Righteousness" is saying that Messiah is our king and the high priest through whom Israel will be "saved" (the priesthood of Tzion will come through Judah rather than Levi, righteousness ---being cleansed from unrighteousness --- will come through Judah rather than Levi), and thus that the Passover offering associated with this being saved, this salvation, because it's orders of magnitude greater than the symbolic lamb that saved Israel from Egypt, will cause the Passover and salvation from Egypt to fade into insignificance.

14 Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that it shall no more be said, The LORD liveth, that brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; 15 But, The LORD liveth, that brought up the children of Israel from the land of the north, and from all the lands whither he had driven them: and I will bring them again into their land that I gave unto their fathers. 16 Behold, I will send for many fishers, saith the LORD, and they shall fish them [Matt 4:19] . . ..

Jeremiah 16:14-16.​

The verses above are directly related to in Jeremiah 23:7 implying that "The Lord our Righteousness" found in 23:6, will initiate a salvation so great that the Passover in Egypt will fade into oblivion; it won't be mentioned again. It is a type, and foreshadowing of the events noted in Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16 where the high priest of Tzion initiates a salvific sacrifice of a lamb of God that saves Israel (ala the Passover in Egypt) and thereafter vindicates Israel from their slavery to the nations. Ironically, Jeremiah 16:14-16 says that this Lord of Righteousness ---from the tribe of Judah ----will "fish" the Jews out of slavery to the nations and in that way cause not the redemption itself (that comes from the Pesach offering), but recognition of the redemption such that the Jews will softly and tenderly come home to Tzion.

And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men.

Mark 1:17.​



John
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Numerous passages in the Tanakh speak of a new covenant to Israel; most notably Jeremiah 31:31. Presumably this new covenant entails a new priesthood ala the statements above. Psalms 132:16 provides a number of telling signs concerning the new covenant and the new covenant priests. With the help of the exegesis and commentary from Rabbi Samson Hirsch (The Hirsch Tehillim 132:16), we see that the new priesthood will be established in Tzion, rather than Jerusalem. According to multiple sources, Jerusalem is the city where kingship and priesthood are dualistic concepts, while in Tzion, peace is made between the two (Zechariah 6:13) such that a king/priest in the model of Melchizedek (a name meaning "king" melek, and "priest" tzaddik) rises to the throne of king David.

Using the context just established concerning this new priesthood in the order of Melchizedek (king priest מלכ צדק) the statement quoted from Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16 takes on a new patina. The Masoretic pointing and translation implies that "In those days shall Judah be saved." And yet if we take the context in Psalms 132:16 seriously, and why wouldn't we, then the messianic king who "sprouts" from the stump of the Davidic line of kings will himself be the king in the order of Melchizedek. And since this is explicit in Psalms 132:16, we would be inclined to take a second look at the Hebrew of the two passages in Jeremiah being mentioned.

John
" new priesthood "

Kindly quote from Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah in this connection, please. Right?

Regards
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Smells like Christian replacement theology.

Normally, I would claim that that could only be the case for an uncircumcised nose. But everyone knows there's no circumcising the nose passage in scripture. :D It's the hearing, the ears, that must listen anew after they've been circumcised.

None of the Christian teachers I've ever associated with teach or believe in a replacement theology. There's just too many promises to Israel for a serious exegete or theologian to take replacement theology seriously. Nothing in this thread is intended to justify a replacement of Israel or to imply that the Church is Israel.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
" new priesthood "

Kindly quote from Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah in this connection, please. Right?

Personally, I believe in the veracity of all scripture. I don't believe it's possible or fruitful to do as Tolstoy did and remove all the miracles from the Gospels, though ironically, it (The Gospels in Brief) led to Wittgenstein's conversion. Nor do I believe it's useful to develop a canon strictly from the red-letters in the red-letter-edition of the Gospels.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Nope. The name means righteous king, not priest king. You translated tzaddik as righteous in other threads. Why are you switching the translation now?

A high priest during the reign of king David was Zadok צדוק. In this sense it's ironic to think of the sprout of David, i.e., the messianic king, as also being צדק: David's greater son as melek-zadok (king David and high priest Zadok in one person forever).



John
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
paarsurrey said:
" new priesthood "

Kindly quote from Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah in this connection, please. Right?
Personally, I believe in the veracity of all scripture. I don't believe it's possible or fruitful to do as Tolstoy did and remove all the miracles from the Gospels, though ironically, it (The Gospels in Brief) led to Wittgenstein's conversion. Nor do I believe it's useful to develop a canon strictly from the red-letters in the red-letter-edition of the Gospels.

John
So, Jesus neither established any new priesthood or clergy nor did he support the old one, right? Please

Regards
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
A high priest during the reign of king David was Zadok צדוק. In this sense it's ironic to think of the sprout of David, i.e., the messianic king, as also being צדק: David's greater son as melek-zadok (king David and high priest Zadok in one person forever).



John
I'm sorry; this went over my head. You'll need to elaborate if you want me to understand.
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
I'm sorry; this went over my head. You'll need to elaborate if you want me to understand.

It's not important. I was just making a semantic note.

What's important to the context of this thread is that Melchizedek is said to be both a king and a priest in Genesis 14, and then in Psalms 110, which, the latter, is generally taken to be speaking of the messianic son of David. Psalm 110 appears to call Messiah a king/priest after the order of Melchizedek. If Psalm 110 is speaking of king Messiah, it states that he will also be priest Messiah. And since Messiah is from the tribe of Judah, we would have a new priesthood since no one from that tribe served at the altar in the Tanakh.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
14 Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that it shall no more be said, The LORD liveth, that brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; 15 But, The LORD liveth, that brought up the children of Israel from the land of the north, and from all the lands whither he had driven them: and I will bring them again into their land that I gave unto their fathers. 16 Behold, I will send for many fishers, saith the LORD, and they shall fish them [Matt 4:19] . . ..

Jeremiah 16:14-16.​

Jeremiah chapter 16 relates a strange chronology that parallels a passage in Isaiah 11:10-12:

And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, Which shall stand for an ensign of the people; To it shall the Gentiles seek: And his rest shall be glorious. 11 And it shall come to pass in that day, That the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. 12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
Here, as in Jeremiah 16:14-18, God extends knowledge of his name and person first to the Gentiles, while this name and person is being hidden from Israel who are in exile from the land, and from knowledge of the name and presence of the Lord. In Isaiah 11:10-12, the exiles of Israel are being regathered prior to the messianic-age. The "root of Jesse" is the son of David, Messiah, spoken of in the earlier part of Isaiah chapter 11. The text is explicitly clear that after revealing himself to the nations, "the Lord shall set his hand again, the second time, to recover the remnant of Israel . . . from the four corners of the earth." From "the four corners of the earth" is key since it relates this regathering to the final regathering prior to the start of the messianic age; it's not a return from the Babylonian captivity, or some other regathering of Israel. This is important, and extremely so, where Isaiah 11:10-12 is recognized as a direct parallel to Jeremiah 16:14-21:

14 Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that it shall no more be said, The LORD liveth, that brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; 15 But, The LORD liveth, that brought up the children of Israel from the land of the north, and from all the lands whither he had driven them: and I will bring them again into their land that I gave unto their fathers.
This is undeniably setting up the final regathering of Israel since, as in Isaiah chapter 11, they're being regathered not from Babylon, or some other exile, but from lands throughout the world. Secondarily, the narrative points out that after this particular return from exile, the salvation from Egypt won't be remembered anymore since it's a historical precursor of this greatest of all redemptions and returns of Israel to the land and the Lord. The statement below comes directly after establishing that this is the final regathering of Israel for the start of the Messianic age:

16 Behold, I will send for many fishers, saith the LORD, and they shall fish them; and after will I send for many hunters, and they shall hunt them from every mountain, and from every hill, and out of the holes of the rocks. 17 For mine eyes are upon all their ways: they are not hid from my face, neither is their iniquity hid from mine eyes. 18 And first I will recompense their iniquity and their sin double; because they have defiled my land, they have filled mine inheritance with the carcases of their detestable and abominable things. 19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. 20 Shall a man make gods unto himself, and they are no gods? 21 Therefore, behold, I will this once cause them to know, I will cause them to know mine hand and my might; and they shall know that my name is The LORD.​

As with most of this examination, the statements in Jeremiah chapter 16 are spit out of the mouths of the Jewish sages as undigestable since they claims that at the final regathering prior to the messianic age, Israel is still an enemy of the Lord, while the Lord has revealed himself, lifted his hand in glorious power, not to Israel (yet), but to the nations (Isaiah 11:10; Jeremiah 16:21).

At the regathering, as narrated in Jeremiah chapter 16 (and Isaiah 11:10), Israel has to be "fished" out of the nations with a hook in their mouths, hunted and gathered from the nations, and brought, kicking and screaming to the holy land. They're not regathered willingly, lovingly, as they suppose in their xenophobic pride and religious legalism; they're regathered under duress, by the nations. Their own revelation of God's presence comes not prior to the regathering, or even prior to the exile (as they suppose) but at the appearance of Messiah in glory. They're in the holy land not because of their love of the Lord, but because of external factors.

Proof of Israel's xenophobic pride and religious legalism comes in the form of the sage's exegesis and commentary on the verses noted in Jeremiah 16:14-21. Although it's explicit that the passage is speaking of the final regathering at the end of the age (and the beginning of the messianic age) Israel's sages refuse to believe that the final regathering is a regathering of stiff-necked rebels, or that they're regathered against their own will. Despite the undeniable fact that Jeremiah is speaking of the final regathering, Israel's sages claim it's an earlier regathering since otherwise Israel's current geographic exile parallels a spiritual exile that they, in their sagely greatness, can't conscience (and are themselves part of and contributing to):

Thus, Rashi, also Redak, explains that the fishers symbolize the killers and the hunters the captors of the survivors. Rabbi Joseph Kara explains that the fishers symbolize Nebuchadnezzar who would capture the Jews in their land and carry them off in captivity, just as the fisher takes the fish out of the water and deposits them on dry land. The hunters are the neighboring peoples who would pursue the Jews wherever they would flee and deliver them to the enemies.

Judaic Press, The Book of the Prophets, Jeremiah 16.​

Whereas Jeremiah chapter 16, like Isaiah chapter 11, speaks of the regathering of Israel from exile that immediately precedes the messianic age, the sages attempt to imply that the fishers and hunters are removing Israel from the holy land. Everything the sages say in their exegesis of the actual passage inverts the explicit narrative both in Isaiah 11 and Jeremiah 16 since it's beyond the ken of the xenophobia and religious pride of these exiled Israelite sages to believe what they read in black and white: that they're "the bad guys" while the nations are, for a time the people of God (" . . . behold, I will this once cause them to know, I will cause them to know mine hand and my might; and they shall know that my name is The LORD") .



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Whereas Jeremiah chapter 16, like Isaiah chapter 11, speaks of the regathering of Israel from exile that immediately precedes the messianic age, the sages attempt to imply that the fishers and hunters are removing Israel from the holy land. Everything the sages say in their exegesis of the actual passage inverts the explicit narrative both in Isaiah 11 and Jeremiah 16 since it's beyond the ken of the xenophobia and religious pride of these exiled Israelite sages to believe what they read in black and white: that they're "the bad guys" while the nations are, for a time (" . . . behold, I will this once cause them to know, I will cause them to know mine hand and my might; and they shall know that my name is The LORD") the people of God.

Isaiah 11:10-12 helps segue back into the meat of the examination in that it speaks of the Israelites regathered just prior to the messianic age as "the outcasts of Israel," and calls those of "Judah" merely "the dispersed."

The Hebrew word for "outcasts" in Isaiah 11:12 is the word נדח from the root נדה. The word is used for "menstrual rags" and relates directly to the uncleanness of a menstruant. Those who call the son of David the son of a menstruant are themselves being labeled that by the Lord in Isaiah 11:12. They call him that, and he returns the favor. The Israelites are the unclean of the exile, while "Judah" are the messianic Jews and Jewish Christians who, as natural sons of the Abrahamic covenant, are nevertheless exiled along with Israel from the holy land.

Contrary to the reading of Shaul (earlier in the thread), none of this implies that the unclean outcasts of Israel are not part of an everlasting covenant. All of the text examined are clear that they are. Their temporary uncleanness is part of their purification process. Though they are not now, nor will they ever be, direct recipients of the new covenant priesthood come through the tribe of Judah (not Levi) they will, as will all the redeemed of the messianic age (Jew or Gentile), be participants in that new covenant. The Levitical priesthood is never rescinded. It merely functions in conjunction with the new covenant and the new priesthood come through the tribe of Judah by means of the sprout out of the root of that tribe.



John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
. . . none of this implies that the unclean outcasts of Israel are not part of an everlasting covenant. All of the text examined are clear that they are. Their temporary uncleanness is part of their purification process. Though they are not now, nor will they ever be, direct recipients of the new covenant priesthood come through the tribe of Judah (not Levi) they will, as will all the redeemed of the messianic-age (Jew or Gentile), be participants in that new covenant. The Levitical priesthood is never rescinded. It merely functions in conjunction with the new covenant and the new priesthood come through the tribe of Judah by means of the sprout out of the root of that tribe.

All of this, as with the seed thread, The I AM of the Amidah, revolves around a key concept employed by Isaiah and Jeremiah: that knowing the Name of God is a determinant concerning what covenant you participate in, or don't participate in. Knowledge of the Name of God comes from the Spirit of God, to his chosen servants, such that Isaiah and Jeremiah both toy with the revelation of a new name (Isaiah 62:2), and thus new servants (Isaiah 65:15), the knowing of this new Name being the determinant for whether one is a member of the new covenant or the old: the priesthood come through the scion of the tribe of Judah, or the priesthood associated with Levi?

When precisely the resurrection takes place the benediction [the second verse in the Amidah] does not specify. The mention of God's power "to save" and especially the phrase "makes salvation sprout" (masmiah yeshu'a) suggests that the miraculous revival forms part of an eschatological scenario. Later on, following long-standing biblical precedent, the fifteenth benediction of the same prayer will use the language of "sprouting" (semah/tasmiah) to refer to the expected messianic king, "the Branch of David" ---an unmistakable allusion to the end-time restoration of the people Israel after their long degradation.

Jon D. Levenson, Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel, p. 4.​

In his discussion of the Amidah, Professor Levenson is clear that the sages who composed the Amidah weren't unaware of the importance of the language of "sprouting" צמח in relationship not just to the arrival of the messianic seed of David, but the salvation and redemption that follows. As the Apostle Peter noted in his epistle, the Jewish sages, indeed the angels themselves, long to delve into the mystery of the new Name of God associated with the end-time restoration of Israel, and the beginning of the messianic age. The Jewish sages intuit that the depth of the mystery is hidden in the new Name, and that the new Name is hidden in the concept of messiah "sprouting" צמח from the root of a tribe, Judah, that was in one sense never associated with a priesthood, and in another sense was cut off, seemingly requiring the messianic king to sprout not from the dead stump of the tribe of Judah, but from the still living root hidden beneath the soil.

There [the root of the dead stump of Judah] shall I cause David's horn קרן to sprout צמח. There I have established the messianic light/lamp נר [ner tamid].

Psalms 132:17.​

Psalm 132 lends itself to the current exegesis in that it speaks specifically of the sprouting צמח of the messianic seed of David, thereafter speaking of the establishing, at the same time, of a "lamp" נר for Messiah (or perhaps Messiah as a lamp). This paralleling of the "sprout" צמח and the "lamp" נר, segues into the oracular statement in Jeremiah 23:6 and 33:16 where this sprout of David is called "the Lord our Tsaddi צ."

If messiah is indeed the Lord, as the dispersed of Judah claimed in the first century of the current era, then he is the "light of the world," or in the terms of the Levites, the "light of eternity," which is the ner tamid, the eternal light that hangs over the Torah ark in the synagogue.

Psalms 132:17 appear to be relating the "sprout" צמח of David (Messiah) with the ner tamid, the everlasting light, by implying that the sprouting of Messiah from the root of the tribe of Judah establishes the messianic lamp נר (ner) that will burn forever (tamid). It's the interrelationship of these concepts that Isaiah and Jeremiah appear to be presenting as the oracle of Tzion presaging the new name of the tetragrammaton.

In relating the "sprout" צמח to his code-phrase "the tetragrammaton is our tsaddi," Jeremiah, as the oracle of Tzion, appears to be trying to get the hearer to relate his code-phrase to Psalms 132:17 where this same "sprout" is being called the ner tamid, the נר (light) of eternity. Jeremiah no doubt knows on some level of conceptualism that there's another biblical word that speaks of a "sprout," and that all one needs to bring the new word to light (so to say) is to add a tsaddi צ ("our tsaddi") to the word for the messianic "lamp" נר found in Psalms 132:17. The result is another word for "sprout," i.e., nazar נצר, which is the ner נר tamid (messianic light of the world) with a tsaddi צ in the middle: נ–צ–ר.

By claiming the messianic "sprout" (Messiah) is our tsaddi, the messianic light is our Lord, Jeremiah is claiming that the new Name related to the new covenant is directly related to the Hebrew consonants nun-tsaddi-reish, nazar נצר. In the prophets hands, nun-tsaddi-reish, nazar (נצר) is a pictogram, or a hieroglyph (sacred-symbol) of a tsaddi צ (which is a "righteous one") acting, literally, in the pictogram, as the wick, or filament, of the candle, or light, of eternity (נ–צ–ר): this Nazar, or Nazarene נצרות, is the light of the world, or eternity (ner tamid), as well as the messianic-sprout (the word nazar means "sprout") the knowing of which ---and relating of which to the Lord, and Messiah-----separates the new covenant priest from the Israelite or the Levite who will know nothing of these things until this Nazarene finally lights the whole world on fire at the start of His kingdom and priestly reign.



John
 
Last edited:

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Isaiah 11:10-12 helps segue back into the meat of the examination in that it speaks of the Israelites regathered just prior to the messianic age as "the outcasts of Israel," and calls those of "Judah" merely "the dispersed."

In case you are not aware, those passages in Isaiah 11 refer to the Message given by the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

That is all I can really do, just keep planting seeds of thought, All the best, Regards Tony
 

idea

Question Everything
Jeremiah chapter 16 relates a strange chronology that parallels a passage in Isaiah 11:10-12:

And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, Which shall stand for an ensign of the people; To it shall the Gentiles seek: And his rest shall be glorious. 11 And it shall come to pass in that day, That the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. 12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
Here, as in Jeremiah 16:14-18, God extends knowledge of his name and person first to the Gentiles, while this name and person is being hidden from Israel who are in exile from the land, and from knowledge of the name and presence of the Lord. In Isaiah 11:10-12, the exiles of Israel are being regathered prior to the messianic-age. The "root of Jesse" is the son of David, Messiah, spoken of in the earlier part of Isaiah chapter 11. The text is explicitly clear that after revealing himself to the nations, "the Lord shall set his hand again, the second time, to recover the remnant of Israel . . . from the four corners of the earth." From "the four corners of the earth" is key since it relates this regathering to the final regathering prior to the start of the messianic age; it's not a return from the Babylonian captivity, or some other regathering of Israel. This is important, and extremely so, where Isaiah 11:10-12 is recognized as a direct parallel to Jeremiah 16:14-21:

14 Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that it shall no more be said, The LORD liveth, that brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; 15 But, The LORD liveth, that brought up the children of Israel from the land of the north, and from all the lands whither he had driven them: and I will bring them again into their land that I gave unto their fathers.
This is undeniably setting up the final regathering of Israel since, as in Isaiah chapter 11, they're being regathered not from Babylon, or some other exile, but from lands throughout the world. Secondarily, the narrative points out that after this particular return from exile, the salvation from Egypt won't be remembered anymore since it's a historical precursor of this greatest of all redemptions and returns of Israel to the land and the Lord. The statement below comes directly after establishing that this is the final regathering of Israel for the start of the Messianic age:

16 Behold, I will send for many fishers, saith the LORD, and they shall fish them; and after will I send for many hunters, and they shall hunt them from every mountain, and from every hill, and out of the holes of the rocks. 17 For mine eyes are upon all their ways: they are not hid from my face, neither is their iniquity hid from mine eyes. 18 And first I will recompense their iniquity and their sin double; because they have defiled my land, they have filled mine inheritance with the carcases of their detestable and abominable things. 19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. 20 Shall a man make gods unto himself, and they are no gods? 21 Therefore, behold, I will this once cause them to know, I will cause them to know mine hand and my might; and they shall know that my name is The LORD.​

As with most of this examination, the statements in Jeremiah chapter 16 are spit out of the mouths of the Jewish sages as undigestable since they claims that at the final regathering prior to the messianic age, Israel is still an enemy of the Lord, while the Lord has revealed himself, lifted his hand in glorious power, not to Israel (yet), but to the nations (Isaiah 11:10; Jeremiah 16:21).

At the regathering, as narrated in Jeremiah chapter 16 (and Isaiah 11:10), Israel has to be "fished" out of the nations with a hook in their mouths, hunted and gathered from the nations, and brought, kicking and screaming to the holy land. They're not regathered willingly, lovingly, as they suppose in their xenophobic pride and religious legalism; they're regathered under duress, by the nations. Their own revelation of God's presence comes not prior to the regathering, or even prior to the exile (as they suppose) but at the appearance of Messiah in glory. They're in the holy land not because of their love of the Lord, but because of external factors.

Proof of Israel's xenophobic pride and religious legalism comes in the form of the sage's exegesis and commentary on the verses noted in Jeremiah 16:14-21. Although it's explicit that the passage is speaking of the final regathering at the end of the age (and the beginning of the messianic age) Israel's sages refuse to believe that the final regathering is a regathering of stiff-necked rebels, or that they're regathered against their own will. Despite the undeniable fact that Jeremiah is speaking of the final regathering, Israel sages claim its an earlier regathering since otherwise Israel's geographic exile parallels a spiritual exile that they, in their sagely greatness, can't conscience (and are themselves part of and contributing to):

Thus, Rashi, also Redak, explains that the fishers symbolize the killers and the hunters the captors of the survivors. Rabbi Joseph Kara explains that the fishers symbolize Nebuchadnezzar who would capture the Jews in their land and carry them off in captivity, just as the fisher takes the fish out of the water and deposits them on dry land. The hunters are the neighboring peoples who would pursue the Jews wherever they would flee and deliver them to the enemies.

Judaic Press, The Book of the Prophets, Jeremiah 16.​

Whereas Jeremiah chapter 16, like Isaiah chapter 11, speaks of the regathering of Israel from exile that immediately precedes the messianic age, the sages attempt to imply that the fishers and hunters are removing Israel from the holy land. Everything the sages say in their exegesis of the actual passage inverts the explicit narrative both in Isaiah 11 and Jeremiah 16 since it's beyond the ken of the xenophobia and religious pride of these exiled Israelite sages to believe what they read in black and white: that they're "the bad guys" while the nations are, for a time (" . . . behold, I will this once cause them to know, I will cause them to know mine hand and my might; and they shall know that my name is The LORD") the people of God.



John

WW2 was the regathering, no?
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
WW2 was the regathering, no?

. . . And Art Linkletter was on the 100,000 Deutsche Mark bill at the time.

Or if you're being serious, we could note that Israel became a Jewish nation again in 1948, which, technically speaking, could be said to begin the regathering. There are some theological technicalities that argue against that. But that's another thread.



John
 
Last edited:
Top