And He Shall Be Called a Nazarene

[Dogknox20]

If I have shown that Matthew has made up a prophecy out of whole cloth, it undermines his spiritual authority.

Hello IndigoChild5559 I hope all is well. I reply.... Jesus’ boyhood home was Nazareth. Scripture acknowledges Jesus came to restore the throne of his ancestor King David, the genealogy of Jesus goes back to David and Jesus sits on the Throne of David in heaven; Jesus is “the King of kings” (Rev. 17:14).
"He Shall Be Called a Nazarene" does fit Jesus! The Prophesy; the kingdom of David that had been destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C. would one day be restored. Also Fits Jesus!

I say you have put together a straw man.
........................................................................................................
Dictionary
straw man
noun

1. 1.
   an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.
   "her familiar procedure of creating a straw man by exaggerating their approach"
   
   
2. 2.
   a person regarded as having no substance or integrity.
   "a photogenic straw man gets inserted into office and advisers dictate policy

....................................................................................................
IndigoChild5559 you build a straw man so you can knock it down!

 

[Dogknox20]

Why would Jesus, who sent out these twelve after instructing them thus, “Do not go into pagan territory or enter a Samaritan town, and instructing them to ' Go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.' Mt 10:5-6, decide to abandon his own faith and start a new religion?
........
I reply: Jesus is the creator of all of humanity! Yes Jesus was sent to the house of Israel, scriptures also tell you we are grafted into the Body of Jesus! Ephesians tells you the Gentiles are also part of the body of Jesus!
At the Great Commission... Jesus gave all of the authority of God to his holy Church to "Teach all Nations" also at the same time he commissioned his Holy Church to make disciples of all nations by baptism!
pearl Scriptures tell you: Jesus is the Brother of all disciples thus disciples are God' children! Logic alone says.. If Jesus is your brother then God would be your father and then Mary would also be your mother!
.......
Yet you seem unwilling to accept the ongoing teaching of the same Church with the same authority, past on this body of apostolic teaching from one generation to the next, a living tradition.

I reply: No you are wrong... I am not upwelling to accept the teaching of my Holy Catholic Church! I KNOW the Catholic Church is the body of Jesus because it was established by Jesus non other!
I was immersed into the Body of Jesus by my baptism; Jesus is IN Me because I consume his living forever flesh!
pearl Jesus is living Manna.. His flesh is real food! The fullness of truth is found in the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Hello IndigoChild5559 I hope all is well. I reply.... Jesus’ boyhood home was Nazareth. Scripture acknowledges Jesus came to restore the throne of his ancestor King David, the genealogy of Jesus goes back to David and Jesus sits on the Throne of David in heaven; Jesus is “the King of kings” (Rev. 17:14).
"He Shall Be Called a Nazarene" does fit Jesus! The Prophesy; the kingdom of David that had been destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C. would one day be restored. Also Fits Jesus!
....IndigoChild5559 you build a straw man so you can knock it down!

Jesus coming from Nazareth has nothing to do with a Davidic lineage. You are confusing prophecies.

So, no straw man here.

As to Jesus' supposed Davidic lineange, although it is an entirely different topic, I'll deal with it briefly.

Davidic lineage must be passed on through the biological father's line. It cannot be passed on through the mother or through a foster or adoptive father. Since Christians claim that Joseph is not Jesus' biological father, both genealogies in your gospels are worthless, whether one is Mary's or not, since neither is the genealogy of a biological father. Thus Jesus can make no claim to Davidic lineage (or even to being of the tribe of Judah). He can only be said to be a Jew (of the kingdom of Judea), as his mother was a Jew, and Jewish identity is passed through the mother. But not tribe of Judah, and not Davidic.

 

[pearl]

I reply: No you are wrong... I am not upwelling to accept the teaching of my Holy Catholic Church! I KNOW the Catholic Church is the body of Jesus because it was established by Jesus non other!
I was immersed into the Body of Jesus by my baptism; Jesus is IN Me because I consume his living forever flesh!
pearl Jesus is living Manna.. His flesh is real food! The fullness of truth is found in the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church

No one is denying what the Church is defined now and you are correct. But this one Church did not yet exist as it does today, there were many individual churches.

"Finally, the exegete will use all the means available to probe more deeply into the nature of Gospel testimony, into the religious life of the early churches, And into the sense and the value of apostolic tradition.
IX. This primitive instruction, which was at first passed on by word of mouth and then in writing--for it soon happened that many tried "to compile a narrative of the things"[21] which concerned the Lord Jesus--was committed to writing by the sacred authors in four Gospels for the benefit of the churches, with a method suited to the peculiar purpose which each (author) set for himself. From the many things handed down they selected some things, reduced others to a synthesis, (still) others they explicated as they kept in mind the situation of the churches."

Do you consider yourself to be more 'catholic' than the teaching authority who authored this official teaching?

 

[Dogknox20]

No one is denying what the Church is defined now and you are correct. But this one Church did not yet exist as it does today, there were many individual churches.

"Finally, the exegete will use all the means available to probe more deeply into the nature of Gospel testimony, into the religious life of the early churches, And into the sense and the value of apostolic tradition.
IX. This primitive instruction, which was at first passed on by word of mouth and then in writing--for it soon happened that many tried "to compile a narrative of the things"[21] which concerned the Lord Jesus--was committed to writing by the sacred authors in four Gospels for the benefit of the churches, with a method suited to the peculiar purpose which each (author) set for himself. From the many things handed down they selected some things, reduced others to a synthesis, (still) others they explicated as they kept in mind the situation of the churches."

Do you consider yourself to be more 'catholic' than the teaching authority who authored this official teaching?

.
Hello pearl... I hope all is well... Of course the church grew and developed over the centuries.. It was still the ONE Holy Catholic Apostolic Church established by Jesus!
Jesus established ONE CHURCH!... "I will build my church" (Singular)
18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

Paul went about the area correcting and teaching! The church sent letters to the many congregations all churches accepted the AUTHORITY of the Apostles!
ONE CHURCH Established by God!
Acts 8:1 On that day a great persecution broke out against the church in Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria.
Acts 9:4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”
ONE CHURCH.. Just ONE Church!

Ignatius was ordained by Paul; He wrote: “Where there is Christ Jesus, there is the Catholic Church.” A.D. 107

ONE Holy Catholic Apostolic Church...
pearl ONE CHURCH!

 

[John D. Brey]

If I have shown that Matthew has made up a prophecy out of whole cloth,it undermines his spiritual authority.

Fair enough. But the "whole cloth" is the naked Hebrew consonants (ketib), and not the Jewish traditional rendering of the naked Hebrew consonants that dress up said prophesy in Jewish garb (keri). If what you, as a Jew, have been reading all your life concerning these things isn't really in the Hebrew text (ketib), but is merely a facade designed for tradition-minded Jews, couldn't we equally say that that sort of dishonesty undermines the spiritual authority of the Masoretic text (keri)?

One of the most trustworthy Jewish exegetes of all time, Ibn Ezra, suspects just such a thing is occurring concerning said prophesy such that he actually points out his discomfort with the dissonance between the keri (the Masoretic reading) versus the ketib (the naked consonants before the Masoretes dress them up for a Jewish audience).

Qere and Ketiv, from the Aramaic qere or q're, קְרֵי ("[what is] read") and ketiv, or ketib, kethib, kethibh, kethiv, כְּתִיב ("[what is] written"), also known as "keri uchesiv" or "keri uchetiv," refers to a system for marking differences between what is written in the consonantal text of the Hebrew Bible, as preserved by scribal tradition, and [or versus] what is read. In such situations, the Qere is the technical orthographic device used to indicate the pronunciation of the words in the Masoretic text of the Hebrew language scriptures (Tanakh), while the Ketiv indicates their written form, as inherited from tradition. The word קרי is often pointed קְרִי and pronounced "kri" or "keri", reflecting the opinion that it is a passive participle rather than an imperative. This is reflected in the Ashkenazi pronunciation "keri uchesiv" mentioned above.

About: Qere and Ketiv​

Jews don't know that messiah, and the virgin of Zion (the shekinah glory of God) come from Nazareth, precisely because the interpreters of the naked Hebrew consonants (ketib) dress them up too look like a Jew wants them, expects them, to look (keri). What's hidden, guarded, by the watchmen, i.e., the naked Hebrew consonants, would quite literally shock an honest god-fearing Jew.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

One of the most trustworthy Jewish exegetes of all time, Ibn Ezra, suspects just such a thing is occurring concerning said prophesy such that he actually points out his discomfort with the dissonance between the keri (the Masoretic reading) versus the ketib (the naked consonants before the Masoretes dress them up for a Jewish audience).

A serious student of the word of God (particularly a Jewish student), who's equally serious about the topic of this thread, "And He Shall Be Called a Nazarene," would be well-advised to look at Ibn Ezra's commentary on Isaiah 65:4, which Ibn Ezra parallels with Isaiah 1:8 (the two passages are nearly parallel). In both scriptures, God is deriding the nation of Israel for their wayward and stiff-necked obstinance, and specifically for their holier-than-thou attitude toward non-Jews. In the unpointed Hebrew of Isaiah 65:1-4, we read:

I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walk in a way that's not good, after their own thoughts; a people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that sacrificeth in gardens and burneth incense upon altars (and who are therefore made to dwell in the land of shrine-wearers, and are made to dwell in exile among the Nazarenes who eat unclean meat and non-kosher foods); you who say, Stay over there . . .Don't come over here; I'm a Jew, I'm too holy for you. But these sorts are smoke in my nostrils, smoke that comes out of a fire that burneth all day.

Isaiah 65:3-5.​

The key word in the passage, the word that disturbs Ibn Ezra, is the very word the exiled rabbis who codified the Talmud call the Christians among whom they've been exiled: נצורים "the Nazarenes." A passage predicting the long and terrible exile of the Jews, because they **** God off, says that they will be exiled among the "Nazarenes" who eat unclean flesh and devour unkosher food; and who wear around their necks, in their bosom as it were, a particular shrine, for which they're called "Nazarenes": Jesus of Nazareth.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

A serious student of the word of God (particularly a Jewish student), who's equally serious about the topic of this thread, "And He Shall Be Called a Nazarene," would be well-advised to look at Ibn Ezra's commentary on Isaiah 65:4, which Ibn Ezra parallels with Isaiah 1:8 (the two passages are nearly parallel). In both scriptures, God is deriding the nation of Israel for their wayward and stiff-necked obstinance, and specifically for their holier-than-thou attitude toward non-Jews. In the unpointed Hebrew of Isaiah 65:1-4, we read:

I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walk in a way that's not good, after their own thoughts; a people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that sacrificeth in gardens and burneth incense upon altars (and who are therefore made to dwell in the land of shrine-wearers, and are made to dwell in exile among the Nazarenes who eat unclean meat and non-kosher foods); you who say, Stay over there . . .Don't come over here; I'm a Jew, I'm too holy for you. But these sorts are smoke in my nostrils, smoke that comes out of a fire that burneth all day.

Isaiah 65:3-5.​

The key word in the passage, the word that disturbs Ibn Ezra, is the very word the exiled rabbis who codified the Talmud call the Christians among whom they've been exiled: נצורים "the Nazarenes." A passage predicting the long and terrible exile of the Jews, because they **** God off, says that they will be exiled among the "Nazarenes" who eat unclean flesh and devour unkosher food; and who wear around their necks, in their bosom as it were, a particular shrine, for which they're called "Nazarenes": Jesus of Nazareth.

Isaiah 65:4 is pretty remarkable in the naked Hebrew since in one verse it uses two Hebrew words that link the verse with statements throughout the book of Isaiah. For instance, the word קברים speaks of "shrines" --- the Israelites dwell among the shrines, or the shrine-wearers, whom, the next statement tells us, are the Nazarenes נצורים. The Nazarenes are the non-Jews clothed in a corpse they consider a shrine.

Ibn Ezra makes this exegesis even more compelling when he questions why the word "Nazarenes" נצורים is found in a passage of scripture speaking of where Israelites will dwell in exile for their arrogance toward God and fellow man? He then notes something directly related to this very thread when he realizes that the righteous Jews whom God distinguishes from the sinners will be associated with one particular city.

In his exegesis of Isaiah 65:4 he directs us to the place where the righteous Jews, the remnant by grace, are said to dwell in a particular city, or to be associated directly with a particular city. He directs us to Isaiah 1:8, where, in the naked Hebrew, the "daughters of Zion" (that is the righteous Jews) will dwell in the city of -----[drum-roll please] -----"Nazareth" נצורת.

In Isaiah 1:8, the verse says that the whole country, all the cities are a desolate wasteland because of Judaism's wayward ways. Except, that is, one city, which will become the name-sake of the remnant. Almost beyond belief, the naked Hebrew (the ketib, not the keri), give us the very name of the city that will house and become the namesake of the remnant by grace of Israel: נצורת "Nazareth."

Judaism is still the same ole girl she used to be. Not only will she not live in Nazareth, wear a shrine around her neck that's associated with Nazareth, but she will distort the naked Hebrew (ketib) by dressing it up like one of the very persons Isaiah chapter one labels desolate and disgraced (keri). It's only by the wisdom and courage of Ibn Ezra that any of us know these things. He should be thanked for pointing all this out to anyone who's a serious student of the word of God rather than merely a slave to desolation of the text associated with the malfeasance of the Masoretes.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

Judaism is still the same ole girl she used to be. Not only will she not live in Nazareth, wear a shrine around her neck that's associated with Nazareth, but she will distort the naked Hebrew (ketib) by dressing it up like one of the very persons Isaiah chapter one labels desolate and disgraced (keri). It's only by the wisdom and courage of Ibn Ezra that any of us know these things. He should be thanked for pointing all this out to anyone who's a serious student of the word of God rather than merely a slave to desolation of the text associated with the malfeasance of the Masoretes.

In the same verse where the name of the city associated with the remnant of righteous Israel will dwell, or be known/named ----נצורת "Nazareth" -----the preceding statement says that this "remnant" נותרה of believing Israel will be housed in a "sukkah" סכה, that is, a dwelling made of branches נצורים, nazarim, and leaves. In Isaiah 4:6, the prophet calls this "sukkah" a tabernacle and a "hiding place" מסתור from the storm of desolation born of, and to be born by, unbelieving Israel.

The "sukkah" (and thus the "feast of the tabernacles") is a ritualization of the fact that the righteous Jew, the virgins of Zion, will "hide" from the storm of desolation and disbelief of their neighbors and even family members, by dwelling in nazarim, branches, or, and, being called, not necessarily "sukkah," but the city associated with hiding the remnant according to grace from the storm of desolation brought on by godless traditions and the malfeasance of the Masoretes and their ilk: נצורת "Nazareth."

In the very verse (Isaiah 1:8), discussing the remnant set apart from the desolation of Judaism, and her godless traditions, we read that the virgins of Zion, the righteous Jews, will be protected from the storm of disbelief and the evil of false religious tradition by being housed in branches, nazarim, later known to be the very tabernacles (sukkot) of the holy spirit (Ezekiel 47:14; 1 Corinthians 6:19). In the same verse that the sukkot are said to be where the righteous will find shelter from the storm, we're also told that this shelter, these shelters, are miniature emblems of their namesake Nazareth; they're associated with a particular city in Palestine whose name will forever be know as the place of salvation for all believing members of the human race, the true shelter from the storm of sin and death, the city of נצורת "Nazareth."



John

 

[John D. Brey]

In the very verse (Isaiah 1:8), discussing the remnant set apart from the desolation of Judaism, and her godless traditions, we read that the virgins of Zion, the righteous Jews, will be protected from the storm of disbelief and the evil of false religious tradition by being housed in branches, nazarim, later known to be the very tabernacles (sukkot) of the holy spirit (Ezekiel 47:14; 1 Corinthians 6:19). In the same verse that the sukkot are said to be where the righteous will find shelter from the storm, we're also told that this shelter, these shelters, are miniature emblems of their namesake Nazareth; they're associated with a particular city in Palestine whose name will forever be know as the place of salvation for all believing members of the human race, the true shelter from the storm of sin and death, the city of נצורת "Nazareth."

In the Targums, Jonathan interprets Isaiah 65:4 by claiming that the persons in the cross hairs of the verse are they that dwell among those, "who live in houses built from the earth of graves, and with corpses." Rashi adds, the body, or bodies of the dead. Which segues too perfectly with what Ibn Ezra says about Isaiah 53:9 (you know, the death of messiah chapter and verse) where he (Ibn Ezra) says:

Some refer this verse to those Israelites that die in exile; others derive במתיו from במה “high places;” comp. במתיו "their high places” (Deut. Xxxiii. 29), and refer it to the building erected over the grave; so that קבדו=במתיו “his tomb."​

The messianic-verse in the cross hairs -----Isaiah 53:9 -----would thus read, using Ibn Ezra's interpretation of the word במת׳ו, "his grave, among the wicked and the rich, became a shrine." This parallels the idea of unbelieving Israel being exiled among, dwelling among, those who live in houses made from dead branches (the Nazarim, or Nazarenes) and who wear a messianic-corpse nailed to a nazar, a branch (making him the "Nazarene"), around their necks as a shrine (the crucifix).

Redak says the "ruins" (his translation of the dead branches made into a sukkah or tabernacle) are where demons dwell; that those who dwell there consult demons.

Those familiar with the Talmud, and Jewish midrashim, and history, might know that in days past, if they've fully passed, a Jew would board up, or cover up, a window, as an apotropaic trope, if through it a crucifix on a nearby church or cathedral shown through.

The cross, and the Nazarim, or Nazarenes, are associated, in that Judaism that's in the cross hairs of this study, with demonism and the consultation of demons, such that the fearful juxtaposition between what Jews have come to believe by reading the Masoretic text, i.e., that it's the Nazarim who are led by demons, versus what the naked consonants, the ketib, say about the matter (those not associated with Nazareth are the rightful residents of Sodom and Gomorrah), presents a truly disturbing duality that cuts through to the naked consequences of this truth:

Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah.

Isaiah 1:10.​

John

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Fair enough. But the "whole cloth" is the naked Hebrew consonants (ketib), and not the Jewish traditional rendering of the naked Hebrew consonants that dress up said prophesy in Jewish garb (keri). If what you, as a Jew, have been reading all your life concerning these things isn't really in the Hebrew text (ketib), but is merely a facade designed for tradition-minded Jews, couldn't we equally say that that sort of dishonesty undermines the spiritual authority of the Masoretic text (keri)?

One of the most trustworthy Jewish exegetes of all time, Ibn Ezra, suspects just such a thing is occurring concerning said prophesy such that he actually points out his discomfort with the dissonance between the keri (the Masoretic reading) versus the ketib (the naked consonants before the Masoretes dress them up for a Jewish audience).

Qere and Ketiv, from the Aramaic qere or q're, קְרֵי ("[what is] read") and ketiv, or ketib, kethib, kethibh, kethiv, כְּתִיב ("[what is] written"), also known as "keri uchesiv" or "keri uchetiv," refers to a system for marking differences between what is written in the consonantal text of the Hebrew Bible, as preserved by scribal tradition, and [or versus] what is read. In such situations, the Qere is the technical orthographic device used to indicate the pronunciation of the words in the Masoretic text of the Hebrew language scriptures (Tanakh), while the Ketiv indicates their written form, as inherited from tradition. The word קרי is often pointed קְרִי and pronounced "kri" or "keri", reflecting the opinion that it is a passive participle rather than an imperative. This is reflected in the Ashkenazi pronunciation "keri uchesiv" mentioned above.

About: Qere and Ketiv​

Jews don't know that messiah, and the virgin of Zion (the shekinah glory of God) come from Nazareth, precisely because the interpreters of the naked Hebrew consonants (ketib) dress them up too look like a Jew wants them, expects them, to look (keri). What's hidden, guarded, by the watchmen, i.e., the naked Hebrew consonants, would quite literally shock an honest god-fearing Jew.



John

The consonants for nazarite and branch are different than for nazarene,

 

[John D. Brey]

The consonants for nazarite and branch are different than for nazarene,

As far as I know a Nazarite has nothing to do with a Nazarene. I haven't mentioned a Nazarite, nor even the word, in the thousand or so words I've contributed to this thread.



John

 

[dybmh]

Ibn Ezra makes this exegesis even more compelling when he questions why the word "Nazarenes" נצורים is found in a passage of scripture speaking of where Israelites will dwell in exile for their arrogance toward God and fellow man?

As usual, Ibn Ezra doesn't question the word; he clarifies it. You're name dropping again.

Here's what Ibn Ezra says:

"ובנצורים And in ruins.4A. V., In the monuments. Besieged.. Comp. נצורה waste (1:8)."

That's it. The notzrim are a ruined/wasted branch.

Once I saw that you had again misquoted and misinterpretted, I ignored the rest of your analysis.

 

[John D. Brey]

The notzrim are a ruined/wasted branch.

. . . To outward appearances, yes. You're statement could hardly better describe the crucifix. Which is the paradox found throughout Isaiah: how can a ruined, wasted, branch, or branches, provide the ultimate shelter from the storm? How can a dead, broken, branch, or branches, be made into a sukkah, a tabernacle, where all righteous men will shelter from the storm of this veil of tears, sin, and death?

Of course there's this oracular story (canonical mind you) of a dead, broken, branch, that blossomed anyway; and was therefore set betwixt the cherubim in the most holy place of the tabernacle.

I would place the desires of my soul in the open gates of Your death. . . I, a poor creature, taken captive by Thine anger, can do nothing before Thee; only I would bury myself in Your wounds and death. Oh great mercy of God, release me from the chains of the devil.

Jacob Boehme.​

John

 

[IndigoChild5559]

As far as I know a Nazarite has nothing to do with a Nazarene. I haven't mentioned a Nazarite, nor even the word, in the thousand or so words I've contributed to this thread.



John

I'm just covering all my bases. The same two excuses keep coming up over and over.

 

[John D. Brey]

Ibn Ezra makes this exegesis even more compelling when he questions why the word "Nazarenes" נצורים is found in a passage of scripture speaking of where Israelites will dwell in exile for their arrogance toward God and fellow man?​

As usual, Ibn Ezra doesn't question the word; he clarifies it. . . Here's what Ibn Ezra says:

"ובנצורים And in ruins.4A. V., In the monuments. Besieged.. Comp. נצורה waste (1:8)."

In fairness, we might say he would only need to "clarify" if he doesn't necessarily agree with what everyone thinks is already clear. If everyone is clear on what the word means then there's no need to clarify it. As fate would have it, few of the great sages agree on precisely what the word in the cross hairs means in context. So I think it's fair to say Ibn Ezra's "clarification" rests on his own questioning of why, and for what purpose, this particular word exists in this particular context. His exegesis reveals that he doesn't necessarily agree with other sages opinion on this word in this context.

In his clarification, Ibn Ezra refers his faithful reader to another place where the word exists. And this other place where the word exists is foundational to the title of this thread since in the naked-Hebrew text of the verse (Isaiah 1:8), we find something pretty remarkable. In the actual Hebrew text, before it's Masoreticized, we find these words, in this order:

כעיר נצורת

The first word is "city." And the second word is "Nazareth."

So, in the context of the verse Ibn Ezra refers us to, who is it who's going to dwell in the city of Nazareth? ------The righteous ones who belong to the Daughter of Zion. And they're going to dwell there, or be associated with the כעיר נצורת "city of Nazareth," because they're hated by their fellow Israelites, who are hated by God, and are about to see their nation become desolate and overthrown by strangers (v. 7). Maybe even Romans. Stranger things have happened you know.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

I'm just covering all my bases. The same two excuses keep coming up over and over.

Well I agree with you that a Nazarite has nothing to do with a Nazarene or Nazareth. Nevertheless the direct answer to your question, as is clear from all the directions this thread has gone, takes all kinds of circuitous routes. Nevertheless, the verse that most directly answers your question is actually Isaiah 55:13, so long as it's properly linked with Isaiah 1:8:

Beneath תחת the briar סרפד shall come up the myrtle tree הדס: and it shall be the name of the Lord as an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off.​

How does this verse claiming the name of the Lord will be related to a myrtle tree relate to Isaiah 1:8, or vice versa?

In Jewish liturgy, the myrtle is one of the four sacred plants (Four Species) of Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles . . .The three branches are lashed or braided together by the worshipers; a palm leaf, a willow bough, and a myrtle branch. . .In Jewish mysticism, the myrtle represents the phallic[citation needed], masculine force at work in the universe. For this reason myrtle branches were sometimes given the bridegroom as he entered the nuptial chamber after a wedding (Tos. Sotah 15:8; Ketubot 17a).

Wikipedia, Myrtus.​

In Isaiah 1:8, we read that the righteous of Israel (associated with the Daughter of Zion, the bride of the Lord), i.e., the remnant according to grace, will, when strangers desolate the land (AD 70), be guarded in a sukkah סכה. -----A "sukkah" is a tabernacle משכן, and a tabernacle is a place of dwelling. When God allows the great desolation of the land because of Israel turning her face from the face of God, he will tabernacle the remnant according to grace נותרה, in a sukkah. They will dwell, or lodge, not in a "garden of cucumbers," as the MT suggests, but in a "beaten" or "twisted work" מקשה: a sukkah or mishkan.

Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles . . .The three branches are lashed or braided together by the worshipers; a palm leaf, a willow bough, and a myrtle branch.

Wikipedia, Myrtus.​

Isaiah 1:8, before it's Masoreticized:

And the daughter of Zion is the remnant in a tabernacle made of twisted dead branches as a highly prized vineyard, and will dwell in this twisted workmanship מקשה to become known as the city of Nazareth.

Isaiah 1:8.

And he came and tabernacled in a city come to be known as Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled what was spoken by the prophets . . ..

Matthew 2:23.​

The city of Nazareth is the macrocosmic sukkah where the righteous are guarded from the wickedness of this world. The city of Nazareth comes from a Hebrew word associated with being guarded, hidden, or as Isaiah says, in 4:6, as a refuge from the storm. The place the righteous are hidden is constructed of a dead branch, a dead Jew, twisted together to form a "beaten work" מקשה, that the high priests of Israel lodged in their bosom as the so-called "chosen" חשן.

Nazareth is, ironically perhaps, the chosen חשן city. The city that Jewish high priests wore betwixt their bosom, and in which the righteous remnant lodge: a broken branch and a broken Jew twisted together to form an everlasting sign of righteousness fashioned in God's construction of the ultimate shelter from the storm.

Kabbalists link myrtle to the sefirah of Tiferet and use sprigs in their Shabbat (especially Havdalah) rites to draw down its harmonizing power as the week is initiated (Shab. 33a; Zohar Chadash, SoS, 64d; Sha’ar ha-Kavvanot, 2, pp. 73–76).[20] Myrtle leaves were added to the water in the last (7th) rinsing of the head in the traditional Sephardic tahara manual (teaching the ritual for washing the dead).

Wikipedia, Myrtus.​

The sefirotic tree is made up of the bodily limbs of Adam Kadmon, the primordial man. All, that is, except one of the sefirot. The sefirah of "Tiferet" is the only sefirot that's not a bodily limb of Adam Kadmon; it's an ornament. And it's worn betwixt his bosom; in the same place the kohen gadol wore his chosen ornament, and the same place the remnant of grace wear their own twisted, besieged, ornament of glory.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

In Isaiah 1:8, we read that the righteous of Israel (associated with the Daughter of Zion, the bride of the Lord), i.e., the remnant according to grace, will, when strangers desolate the land (AD 70), be guarded in a sukkah סכה. -----A "sukkah" is a tabernacle משכן, and a tabernacle is a place of dwelling. When God allows the great desolation of the land because of Israel turning her face from the face of God, he will tabernacle the remnant according to grace נותרה, in a sukkah. They will dwell, or lodge, not in a "garden of cucumbers," as the MT suggests, but in a "beaten" or "twisted work" מקשה: a sukkah or mishkan.

Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles . . .The three branches are lashed or braided together by the worshipers; a palm leaf, a willow bough, and a myrtle branch.

Wikipedia, Myrtus.​

Isaiah 1:8, before it's Masoreticized:

And the daughter of Zion is the remnant in a tabernacle made of twisted dead branches as a highly prized vineyard, and will dwell in this twisted workmanship מקשה to become known as the city of Nazareth.

Isaiah 1:8.

And he came and tabernacled in a city come to be known as Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled what was spoken by the prophets . . ..

Matthew 2:23.​

The city of Nazareth is the macrocosmic sukkah where the righteous are guarded from the wickedness of this world. The city of Nazareth comes from a Hebrew word associated with being guarded, hidden, or as Isaiah says, in 4:6, as a refuge from the storm. The place the righteous are hidden is constructed of a dead branch, a dead Jew, twisted together to form a "beaten work" מקשה, that the high priests of Israel lodged in their bosom as the so-called "chosen" חשן.

Someone might consider the exegesis above at best imaginative, i.e., reading things in where they don't belong. But they would be sorely mistaken since everything in the segment above is authorized, justified, codified, and canonized, in Isaiah 49:6:

It is a slight thing, in mine eyes that thou shouldest be a servant to bring Israel back to their land by thy word. ונצורי And the ruins of. Comp. נצורה "desolate" (i. 8.). ----Not alone wilt though bring Israel back, "but I will give thee for a light of the nations." להיות ישועתי That my salvation [ישועה] may be, That is, that my salvation may be published before it comes, unto the end of the earth.

The Commentary of Ibn Ezra, Isaiah 49:6.​

Ibn Ezra implies that the remnant will be returned from the exile by "thy word." And it's a well-known trope of Jewish thought that the Lord's word is his name, and his name is his word, so that Ibn Ezra is claiming that God's name will "be published before it comes." And the name that bookends Ibn Ezra's claim that the Lord's name will be published before it comes is the name "salvation," which in Hebrew is ישועה and in English is Yeshua. The word/name ---Yeshua ----- is one of the hidden נצורת names of the Lord that Ibn Ezra implies will be published throughout the world, to the ends of the earth, before the regathering takes place.

Luther published his world-renown 95 theses on a doorpost. The nation of Israel's first ---world renown salvation ----was published on a doorpost and a lintel. Ironically, ישועה gets published ----so that it might be circulated to the ends of the earth ----when the Roman's nail a lintel across a doorpost forming the ancient letter tav (ktav ivri) --- † ---- upon which, presaging Luther's publication of his theses, the Roman's publish the name Yeshua such that it becomes known unto the ends of the earth.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

Someone might consider the exegesis above at best imaginative, i.e., reading things in where they don't belong. But they would be sorely mistaken since everything in the segment above is authorized, justified, codified, and canonized, in Isaiah 49:6:

It is a slight thing, in mine eyes that thou shouldest be a servant to bring Israel back to their land by thy word. ונצורי And the ruins of. Comp. נצורה "desolate" (i. 8.). ----Not alone wilt though bring Israel back, "but I will give thee for a light of the nations." להיות ישועתי That my salvation [ישועה] may be, That is, that my salvation may be published before it comes, unto the end of the earth.

The Commentary of Ibn Ezra, Isaiah 49:6.​

Ibn Ezra implies that the remnant will be returned from the exile by "thy word." And it's a well-known trope of Jewish thought that the Lord's word is his name, and his name is his word, so that Ibn Ezra is claiming that God's name will "be published before it comes." And the name that bookends Ibn Ezra's claim that the Lord's name will be published before it comes is the name "salvation," which in Hebrew is ישועה and in English is Yeshua. The word/name ---Yeshua ----- is one of the hidden נצורת names of the Lord that Ibn Ezra implies will be published throughout the world, to the ends of the earth, before the regathering takes place.

Luther published his world-renown 95 theses on a doorpost. The nation of Israel's first ---world renown salvation ----was published on a doorpost and a lintel. Ironically, ישועה gets published ----so that it might be circulated to the ends of the earth ----when the Roman's nail a lintel across a doorpost forming the ancient letter tav (ktav ivri) --- † ---- upon which, presaging Luther's publication of his theses, the Roman's publish the name Yeshua such that it becomes known unto the ends of the earth.

It is a slight thing, in mine eyes that thou shouldest be a servant to bring Israel back to their land by thy word. ונצורי And the ruins of. Comp. נצורה "desolate" (i. 8.). ----Not alone wilt though bring Israel back, "but I will give thee for a light of the nations." להיות ישועתי That my salvation [ישועה] may be, That is, that my salvation may be published before it comes, unto the end of the earth.

The Commentary of Ibn Ezra, Isaiah 49:6.​

There's a lot to unpack in Ibn Ezra's comments above. And a lot of it's packed in irony; such as his statement that the quintessential servant of the Lord will bring Israel back to their land "by thy word." And the very next "word" in the commentary is ונצורי, which means the "the nazarenes of" (its the construct form of "nazarenes") ---- "the nazarenes of Israel." But not just the Jewish nazarenes mind you. "I will also give thee for a light to the nations that thou mayest bring my salvation ישועה to the ends of the earth."

This is a remarkable verse of scripture in that it speaks of the singular suffering servant collecting the righteous remnant of Israel for regathering while labeling them "the nazarenes." But more importantly it claims that "the nazarenes" will now be more than just the remnant according to grace from the nation of Israel. Now, "the nazarenes" will be made up of both Jews and Gentiles from every quarter of the earth.

Those Jews who despise Saul of Tarsus for opening up the covenant to the nations, the Gentiles, better direct some of that angst to one of their own: the prophet Isaiah. For not only does he beat Paul to the punch regarding the removal of the veil hiding the face of God (Isaiah 48:6), but now, in chapter 49 (and ironically the same sixth verse), the name revealed in Isaiah 48:6 is repeated in Isaiah 49:6: "Nazarenes." -----Worse, if that were possible, if we go one chapter further, and naturally search out the same verse, 6, we get the reason why this branch, this nazarene, is so often translated "besieged" or "ruined" by the Jewish exegetes:

I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair, I hid not my face from the shame and the spitting.

Isaiah 50:6.

Then did they spit in his face, and buffeted him; and others smote him with the palms of their hands, saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote thee?

Matthew 26:67-68.​

John

 

[John D. Brey]

It is a slight thing, in mine eyes that thou shouldest be a servant to bring Israel back to their land by thy word. ונצורי And the ruins of. Comp. נצורה "desolate" (i. 8.). ----Not alone wilt though bring Israel back, "but I will give thee for a light of the nations." להיות ישועתי That my salvation [ישועה] may be, That is, that my salvation may be published before it comes, unto the end of the earth.

The Commentary of Ibn Ezra, Isaiah 49:6.​

Why does Ibn Ezra speak of salvation being "published"? There's nothing in the verse to speak of "publication," or of something being "published"? Which means we might be justified in assuming Ibn Ezra is interpreting Isaiah sequentially ---that he may be thinking of a verse he exegeted nine or ten verses earlier.

19. Thy seed. The number of thy children. בטנך=מעיך Thy womb. כמעותיו As its bowels. The possessive pronoun refers to the sea, the waves and sand of which have just been mentioned (ver. 18 and 19); by "the bowels of the sea" the roe of the fish is meant. His name. The name of thy seed.
20. Go ye forth etc. Now the prophet addresses those in exile. Utter it, etc. Make it known publicly; not alone that He will redeem His people, He will do wonders to them at their return.

Ibid. Isaiah 49:19-20.​

The sentence Ibn Ezra doesn't mention (in verse 19) is key to everything he says above:

His name should not have been cut off nor destroyed from before me.

Isaiah 48:19.​

Ibn Ezra says that Isaiah 48:19 speaks of "Thy seed," being, ironically, the seed of a fish "the roe [seed] of a fish is meant." The name of his seed, his name, is, get this, "fish," which in Greek is "ichthys." His name should not have been cut off, or destroyed. But it was. So he hides his name in the name of a Fish (Ichthys):

The symbol was adopted by early Christians as a secret symbol. It is now known colloquially as the "sign of the fish" or the "Jesus fish”. . . In early Christian history, the ichthys symbol held "the most sacred significance", and Christians used it to recognize churches and other believers through this symbol because they were persecuted by the Roman Empire.

Wikipedia, Ichthys.​

His name should not have been ruined, besieged, the branch נצרות should not have been broken, or cut off from the tree of life. But it was. And those who recognized the face of God in the branch, the Nazarene, Nehushtan, had to hide the name, hide their worship, from the Romans and the Jews, such that they used the name "Ichthys," the "fish," as a hidden name through which they "published" the name of the Lord. They "published" what was hidden from the Jews and the Romans by hiding it from Israel as a Nazarene, and from Rome as the Fish.



John