Now that most non-Jewish scholars concede that Isaiah 53
refers to the Jewish people... Some Christians have tried to
find support for their beliefs in Rabbinic writings.
Traditional Judaism NEVER believed that there would be a
supernatural virgin-born Messiah who would be killed as an
atonement for sin. If this had been the traditional Jewish
belief all along, it certainly came as a shock to the Jewish
followers of Jesus. When the Nazerene told his followers
that he must go to Jerusalem to suffer...Peter protests,
"G-D forbid it lord, this shall never happen to you." (Mat.
16:22) Peter didn't joyfully exclaim: Praise G- D, you are
the suffering servant of Isaiah 53! The Disciples never knew
that the Messiah was supposed to suffer - (Mat. 17:23, Lk.
18:34, Jn. 20:9)
Jesus' enemies, such as Herod (Mat. 2) certainly didn't
think that the Messiah was supposed to be killed - otherwise
why help his cause by trying to kill him!?
In reality, the Jewish people expected the Messiah to
rule as king over a restored Israel in an age of universal
peace and belief. (Acts 1:6, Jer. 23:5- 6, Isaiah 11:1-9,
2:1-4, Ezekiel 37:21- 28...) This had always been the Jewish
understanding of Messiah, and Isaiah 53 was understood as
referring to the Jewish people all along. It's not an idea
invented by Rashi in the Middle Ages. The church father
Origen reports that this was the Jewish understanding in his
time, hundreds of years before Rashi. (Contra Celsum)
Actually, there are ancient sources that have explicit
reference to a supernatural, virgin-born savior, who dies by
murder to achieve salvation for believers who can experience
him by eating of his blood and body...You can read all about
it in the mythologies about Mithra, Osiris, Krishna, Tammuz,
Adonis, Dionysus, Bacchus, Isis, etc.
Those Christians who desperately ransacked the Talmud to
find support for their preconceived ideas are not students
of the Talmud with any interest in the actual teachings of
Rabbinic Judaism. They merely usee the Talmud like a drunk
uses a lamp post - not for illumination, but for support.
Most Christians who read the Talmud are not really in the
position to know what it means (although some honest ones
have) much as they would claim that a non-Christian can't
really understand the New Testament. (I Cor. 1:18) They will
claim that non- Christians can't understand such sublime
passages as Mat. 27:46, Lk. 14:26, Mat. 11:34-35, Mat.
15:22-27, Mat. 21:18-19, Mat. 23:35, Mat. 26:7- 11, II Cor.
12:16, etc. etc. ad infinitum.
Most of these Christian Talmudists can't even read the
Talmud, and get their information from collections of
secondary sources put together by other lamp post leaners.
When these collections are checked, the Talmudic passages
are frequently incorrectly cited, usually quoted out of
context, and occasionally completely manufactured.
Would a Christian ever do these things to Jewish sources
to prove a point?! Investigate the following passages:
Gal. 3:16 Mat. 2:18 Mat. 2:23 Mat. 2:15 Mat. 27:9 John
7:38 Acts 7:16 Rom. 10:5-8 Rom. 11:26 Eph. 5:14Heb. 1:5 Heb.
10:5 etc. etc. etc. etc....
Did the Rabbis ever notice that there are two different
pictures of the Messiah in the Bible? Did they resolve this
tension by proposing a theory of 2 Messiahs, a Messiah son
of David and a Messiah son of Joseph? That depends on
whether you read what the Talmud actually teaches, or accept
the propaganda of the so called Christian-Talmudists.
R. Alexandri said: R. Joshua opposed two verses: it is
written, And behold, one like the son of man came with the
clouds of heaven; whilst [elsewhere] it is written, [behold,
thy king cometh unto thee...] lowly, and riding upon an ass!
- If they are meritorious, [he will come] with the clouds of
heaven; if not, lowly and riding upon an ass. - Sanhedrin
The minor figure of a Messiah son of Joseph has nothing
to do with how Talmudic sages perceived contradictory
passages in the Bible. He does figure into Rabbinic
Ask a "Christian-Talmudist" to explain the difference
between "PSHAT" and "DRASH".
Ask a "Christian-Talmudist" about why the Talmud applies
Isaiah 53 to Moses, any pious person who suffers, and sick
men who have had an ejaculation (he will see his seed, he
will prolong his days...)
Ask a "Christian-Talmudist" why most non-Jewish Biblical
scholars, (many of them Christian) accept the real
traditional Jewish understanding of Isaiah 53, Daniel 9, and
Isaiah 7:14; without having a "Jewish" ax to grind. They
have more in common with Rabbi Akiba, Rashi, and Rambam than
Oral Roberts and Martin Luther.
(Larry Levey, Former Hebrew-Christian)