• 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!

Jesus as an antithesis to Passover

1213

Well-Known Member
....He sure took his time - this contradicts the hurrying part of Passover.

Ok, thanks for clarification and sorry, I don't think he should have been faster. Also, the whole idea is difficult, because how could we know did he hurry, if he would not have hurried, it could have taken more than 3 days?
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Do you know who the speaker is in that section, then? Who the first person pronouns represent?

I may make a difference who the speaker is in the early section.
The variation in translations is quite large in places especially between a Jewish Tanakh and Christian OT translations.
The end of Isa 52 looks like God talking and then it seems to be a matter of opinion. It could be the Kings of chapter 52 or Isaiah and the Kings of ch 52.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
For you will not depart in haste, ***** God speaks to the Jews through the prophet

Nor will you leave in flight; ***** same “you” – the nation of Jews

For the LORD is marching before you, ***** The prophet describes God’s relationship to Jews

The God of Israel is your rear guard.*****

“Indeed, My servant shall prosper, ***** God describes that same relationship as the Jews

Be exalted and raised to great heights. ***** Are his servant

Just as the many were appalled at him -- ***** the servant/him is described by God. The many (the

So marred was his appearance, unlike that of man, ***** other people of the world) looked at the Jews this way

His form, beyond human semblance—׃*****

Just so he shall startle many nations. ***** Also entire other nations will see him/servant this way

Kings shall be silenced because of him, *****

For they shall see what has not been told them, ***** Other kings will see what they can’t believe

Shall behold what they never have heard.”*****

“Who can believe what we have heard? ***** The kings speak, wondering about the unbelieveable

Upon whom has the arm of the LORD--a been revealed? ***** Asking about the state of the Jews

For he has grown, by His favor, like a tree crown, ***** the same subject – him/servant/Jews is described by

Like a tree trunk out of arid ground. ***** The same foreign kings who marvel at the situation

He had no form or beauty, that we should look at him: ***** the “we” is the kings who are being quoted

No charm, that we should find him pleasing. ***** The “him” is still the nation, the Jews, God’s servant

He was despised, shunned by men, ***** The kings realize how the Jews were shunned

A man of suffering, familiar with disease. ***** And how they suffered

As one who hid his face from us, ***** Like someone so ashamed he hid himself

He was despised, we held him of no account. ***** “we” (the foreign nations) considered him lowly

Yet it was our sickness that he was bearing, ***** But the whole time, say the kings, he was suffering

Our suffering that he endured. ***** As a replacement for what we deserved to suffer

We accounted him plagued, ***** We just thought God was being mean to him

Smitten and afflicted by God;*****

But he was wounded because of our sins, ***** but it wasn’t mean-ness. It was God making him pay

Crushed because of our iniquities. ***** For what WE (foreign nations) did

He bore the chastisement that made us whole, ***** we stayed whole while and BECAUSE the Jews paid for it

And by his bruises we were healed. ***** And through the Jews’ suffering, the nations stayed well

We all went astray like sheep, ***** We (foreign nations) did bad things

Each going his own way;*****

And the LORD visited upon him ***** and God punished the Jews

The guilt of all of us.”*****

He was maltreated, yet he was submissive, ***** And yet the Jews didn’t complain

He did not open his mouth;*****

Like a sheep being led to slaughter,*****

Like a ewe, dumb before those who shear her,*****

He did not open his mouth.*****

By oppressive judgment he was taken away, ***** He was exiled, taken from his homeland

Who could describe his abode?*****

For he was cut off from the land of the living*****

Through the sin of my people, who deserved the punishment. ***** Because of us.

And his grave was set among the wicked, ***** even in death he was punished

And with the rich, in his death-*****

Though he had done no injustice ***** though he didn’t do wrong

And had spoken no falsehood.*****

But the LORD chose to crush him by disease, ***** God wanted to punish him in this world

That, if he made himself an offering for guilt, ***** so that if he bore it patiently

He might see offspring and have long life, ***** he would see his descendants flourish

And that through him the LORD’s purpose might prosper. ***** And his children carry out God’s plan

Out of his anguish he shall see it; ***** By being willing to suffer, the Jews will see

He shall enjoy it to the full through his devotion. ***** The fruits of devotion later


“My righteous servant makes the many righteous, ***** God, in 1st person, now describes the situation

It is their punishment that he bears; ***** the servant nation bears the foreign nations’ punishment

Assuredly, I will give him the many as his portion, ***** so he will earn a heck of a great reward

He shall receive the multitude as his spoil.*****

For he exposed himself to death*****

And was numbered among the sinners,*****

Whereas he bore the guilt of the many*****

And made intercession for sinners.” ***** The Jews suffered on behalf of others and saved them.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
I may make a difference who the speaker is in the early section.
The variation in translations is quite large in places especially between a Jewish Tanakh and Christian OT translations.
The end of Isa 52 looks like God talking and then it seems to be a matter of opinion. It could be the Kings of chapter 52 or Isaiah and the Kings of ch 52.
I tried to lay out the speakers and pronouns -- I had columns in the Word document, but I couldn't cut and paste the formatting here so I used ***** to split up the left side (the translated text) and the right side, the explanation of pronouns and references. If you need me to show the Hebrew to clarify, let me know. I can do that as well.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Well, even if so, I don't assume that we have the actual recording.;)

I don't assume that such parallels would have to be exact because if that were the case, they wouldn't any longer be symbolic but would actually be the original. IOW, the symbols are not the exact thing that they symbolize.

As you know, even though Torah is linear in time, there's sorta like flashbacks whereas somethings may be repeated but not precisely the same, such as the two creation accounts [Gen. 1:1 and 2:4-- the order is slightly different].

The 2nd one seems to be what happened when God created man. It is not the story of the whole of creation. That story is in Gen 1.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
The 2nd one seems to be what happened when God created man. It is not the story of the whole of creation. That story is in Gen 1.
Possibly, but now we are quite certain that they are different because they were written at different times and by different authors, especially since it's likely they were carried as part of an oral tradition prior to being written.

Either way, we should never assume that "variations" match, imo.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
But he himself did not hurry to get up. Bizarre.

Come again?

He rose during First Fruits. Two loaves held aloft and waived, a priest crossing arms, "Look God, Jew and Gentile, two convenants!"

Yeshua WAS in a hurry to leave the grave--he preached to the disobedient spirits in Sheol--SAT in Heaven because His work was finished (no chairs in the Jerusalem Temple), presented His blood in Heaven as our great high priest, etc.

THE reasons to believe: 1) All the NT is Mishnah that aligns with Temple practice 2) Both testaments are prescient concerning modern Israel and Yeshua's ministry.

..

Or we can return to your contention. That we left Egypt in a hurry millennia ago. Do we NOW leave our place in a hurry on Pesach? So did the people leave their place in a hurry in 30 CE when Jesus died and rose? No.

"When Israel was a child I loved HIM, and out of Egypt I called MY SON."
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
A number of recent posts related to Jesus rising on Easter or the like made me realize that this would make Jesus kind of the opposite of one of the main ideas of Passover, which is ironic because Christians consider him to be the ultimate Passover lamb.

Let me explain: During Passover, Jews eat unleavened bread, called "matzah" in Hebrew. This is in memory of the bread that the Israelites took with them out of Egypt which didn't rise because they left hurriedly. You can probably already tell where I'm going with this...

The Israelites were hurriedly taken out of Egypt. This seems kind of strange because as they were in Egypt for so long, God couldn't wait a few hours more for them to make proper bread? There are many answers to this question, but the general idea is that it was necessary for the Israelites to leave in a hurry, and it was likewise necessary for the bread not to have had enough time to rise.

Jesus, on the other hand, is said to have risen after three days. In other words, he was in no real hurry, and he rose, just like the sort of bread that is not consumed on Passover.

So it seems to me difficult to suggest that Jesus somehow fulfilled Passover or something like that. Quite the opposite, actually.

I believe I am not seeing an opposite.

I believe the true meaning of deliverer (Messiah) only becomes true at Armageddon. Mat. 24:16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let the one who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house, 18 and let the one who is in the field not turn back to take his cloak.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Isaiah 53:7 - the lamb goes silent to the slaughter
He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he would not open his mouth; like a lamb to the slaughter he would be brought, and like a ewe that is mute before her shearers, and he would not open his mouth.
is contradicted by:

Matthew 27:46 - Jesus cries out in a loud voice on the cross
About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).​

I believe I fail to see a contradiction. Perhaps you could show logic for that but I doubt it.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Jesus called Himself the bread from heaven and the unleavened bread at Passover symbolises Jesus in that way and also in the fact that it is unleavened, leaven being symbolic of sin or evil, and Jesus being without sin.

Maybe the theory was half baked.
 

Triumph

FREEDOM OF SPEECH
A number of recent posts related to Jesus rising on Easter or the like made me realize that this would make Jesus kind of the opposite of one of the main ideas of Passover, which is ironic because Christians consider him to be the ultimate Passover lamb.

Let me explain: During Passover, Jews eat unleavened bread, called "matzah" in Hebrew. This is in memory of the bread that the Israelites took with them out of Egypt which didn't rise because they left hurriedly. You can probably already tell where I'm going with this...

The Israelites were hurriedly taken out of Egypt. This seems kind of strange because as they were in Egypt for so long, God couldn't wait a few hours more for them to make proper bread? There are many answers to this question, but the general idea is that it was necessary for the Israelites to leave in a hurry, and it was likewise necessary for the bread not to have had enough time to rise.

Jesus, on the other hand, is said to have risen after three days. In other words, he was in no real hurry, and he rose, just like the sort of bread that is not consumed on Passover.

So it seems to me difficult to suggest that Jesus somehow fulfilled Passover or something like that. Quite the opposite, actually.
Yes, Jews left Egypt in a hurry because they had killed people in their sleep and stolen their gold.
People think of the FIRST born child of a family as an infant or young child but that is the last born child of a family except for the newly married.
The first born child of a family are men of military age, the fighters.
Moses had his men break into their houses at night, kill them in their sleep and steal their gold. What Egyptian military men that were left chased Moses for vengeance of his merciless murders of their people and retrieval of their gold. The command of God is do not kill, so Moses lied saying it was by the hand of God that Egyptian children were killed.
Then later Moses claims that gold was given to the Jews freely as "borrowed" gold but of course the unrepentant murderer Moses hiding from justice, never had any intention of returning that gold and has not to this day so it was nothing but theft.
Jesus said all that came before him were "robbers and thieves".
 

Triumph

FREEDOM OF SPEECH
When he died on the high Sabbath, they hurriedly buried him.

Quite frankly, from the inception, I really don't see the point here. I feel like we are trying to create a mountain out of a hill--like we are trying to force a square peg in a round hole.
The Jews by their laws had to bury Jesus quickly and assure he died quickly because their laws state if a condemned by Jews man dies or is buried on the Sabbath then a "curse" is on the heads of the Hebrew/Jews. Because of their hocus pocus beliefs of divine curses associated with men they demand die for offenses they claim is an offense, Jews wanted Jesus in his tomb before their Sabbath to avoid a "curse" upon themselves.
Jews also have a traditional written law that a Jew can beat his slave to death, male or female for any reason and not be punished as long as the slave dies the following day from the brutal wounds. If the slave dies the same day of the beating, the Jew can pay the temple money to be called righteous for his trespass of the law. A rich Jew could kill as many of his slaves as he wanted and still be considered an upstanding member of their society as long as he paid money to the temple for the enjoyment of their murders. Most Jews owned household slaves and approved of slavery. They did not like being slaves themselves but Jews would even sell their own family members into slavery including their children according to scripture.
Both the Egyptians and the Jews believed in owning slaves but there is a belief that the Jews never were actual slaves in Egypt but were paid workers living there to earn money. That idea is supported by the Pharisees telling Jesus they had never been a slave to any man.
 

Triumph

FREEDOM OF SPEECH
I guess!

But it seems that, in general, this is just a Christian reading using a Christian exegetical method. Jews are naturally not seeing thigs the way Christians do; so they're not seeing anything metaphorical about the matzah to begin with, where for Christians, who do not eat matzah or celebrate Pesach the way Jews do, they have to give it another meaning. So the matzah becomes a wafer - unleavened bread - that in Catholic liturgy at the Eucharist, and the whole of Christendom, is called Jesus' body, and Jesus called himself the 'bread of life'. So hopefully you can see how these things are purposefully conflated. The Orthodox Church specifically uses leavened bread, as leaven is not always seen as bad in their theology, and more or less represents rising and the fullness of time etc.

Not sure if this is what you are looking for, but it's what I can offer.
The bread of Jesus is his doctrine and it is not the Jewish doctrine, bread. They have completely different doctrine. Jesus was leading people away from being a Jew supporting Jewish beliefs not turning people into being a Jew. Jews kept trying to stone Jesus to death because Jesus was breaking their laws and not supporting their beliefs.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Possibly, but now we are quite certain that they are different because they were written at different times and by different authors, especially since it's likely they were carried as part of an oral tradition prior to being written.

Either way, we should never assume that "variations" match, imo.

You might be quite certain that they were written at different times and by different authors. I'm not certain at all. But I do believe the whole things is inspired by God.
It is also plain that Gen 2 is not about the creation of the universe and is just about the creation of man and what God did then, including planting Eden and creating some (more) animals for Adam to name.
 
Top