Conference taveng::bagels

There are plenty of other chapters that are not read: Ezra, Chronicles,
and Daniel come to mind. So these can't be the "only" chapters that are
unread.

In general, the entirety of the Torah (5 Books of Moses) is read over the
course of the year. Accompanying each section is a reading from the Prophets
that the rabbis deemed relevant to the weekly portion. (A portion of
Joshua and all of Job is read as readings from the "prophets".) 5 other books
are read on various Jewish holidays: Esther, Ecclesiastes, Ruth, Song of Songs,
and Lamentations. Some of the psalms are read where appropriate.

As to whether, specifically, Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 are not read -- I
don't know offhand. I'll look it up and post my discoveries.

Dave

    .1
    
    Thank you, Dave.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Dave pretty much answered the question, but just to put it in
    perspective, ~53 chapters are read in conjunction with the 
    weekly Torah portion, plus a few more for holidays and special 
    occasions such as fast days and the new moon which falls on
    the Sabbath. The prophetic portions are taken from a variety
    of books, but certainly the sages made no attempt to cover
    the entirety of Tanach. For example, if memory serves, there 
    are a total of 60 chapters in Isaiah itself, and around 50
    chapters in Jeremiah. Only a handful of each are read in the
    synagogue. I suspect that if the "expert" quoted in .0 were
    right (that only two chapters in the whole Tanach were to
    be ommitted from the liturgy), that Jews would either be
    destitute (having no time for any other activity), or synagogue
    attendance would be even worse than the current levels. But
    who are we to argue with people who speak with such authority?
    
    As to Psalms, it is not considered one of the "Prophetic Works"
    per se: it belongs to the "Writings" (Ketuvim), which are not
    part of the Haphtarah liturgy. As Dave mentioned, none of the 
    other books of the Ketuvim are included in the Haphtara framework
    either.
    
    On the other hand, Jews are certainly encouraged, indeed *commanded*
    to learn every word of the Tanach, as well as the Mishna, Gemara
    and various later works of the early Sages and commentators (why
    did .0 not ask why the entire Talmud is not read annually in 
    public?). Only very cynical (not to mention ignorant) missionaries
    would resort to such insinuations. Jews are not "afraid" of any
    of our own holy writings, and they are studied constantly by every
    committed Jew in the world. We continue to await the Messiah's
    arrival, and the era of peace and tranquility promised by the
    prophets of yore. One thing is abundantly clear: whatever he
    will look like or say, he sure isn't here yet, if the six o'clock
    news is any measure.
    
    Yehoshua

I checked the list of annual readings and, in fact, Isaiah 53 is not
there although the chapters both before and after are read. But Isaiah
53 is not the only chapter omitted. About 1/2 of Isaiah is also not read.
I made a list, but unfortunately I forgot to bring it to work. If I
remember correctly, Isaiah chapters 11 to 19 and 30 to 39 are omitted,
among others. I also skimmed through the Artscroll Siddur (prayer book)
looking for Psalm 22. It doesn't seem to be in the liturgy for any service
(but I might have missed it -- the book has over 1000 pages). I DID find
the text (in Hebrew only) of all the Psalms in a section which prescribes a
monthly cycle of readings from the Psalms. I never knew this cycle existed.
Psalm 22 is supposed to be read on the 3rd day of the Hebrew month.
I don't know when or where it's supposed to be read. For our contributers
in Israel, today (Friday) is part of the weekend; maybe one of them can
explain this better than I.

In chapter 52, Isaiah compares the Babylonian exile with the exile in
Egypt saying (in effect) that the Babylonian exile was worse because it
was involuntary whereas we went to Egypt voluntarily. In chapter 53, Isaiah
describes the suffering of G-d's "servant" (the Jewish nation) and predicts
that the redemption of that servant will be an example for the nations of
the world. I can see how a Christian reader could go into free-fall
reinterpreting this chapter as a prophecy concerning Jesus. A Jewish reader
wouldn't see it that way. Isaiah's prophecy came true when the unimaginable
occurred: within the lifespan of a single human being the greatest empire
of its time (Babylonia) fell to the Persians and the Jewish people returned
to their homeland. I can't explain why this particular chapter isn't read;
but with fully 50% of Isaiah not read, it's pretty weak to claim this
chapter was singled out. It is surely false to claim it is the only one
omitted.

Psalm 22 begins "My G-d, My G-d, why have you abandoned me?" This is a theme
contrary to the spirit of Shabbat (the world is complete and perfect - a bit
of heaven on Earth). Thus I am not surprised to find this psalm missing
from the liturgy. The first half of the psalm develops the idea of abandoment.
Everything seems to be going wrong, etc etc. In the last half, the poet
praises G-d for saving him and thanks G-d for not abandoning him. King David
had any number of ups and downs in his life that would account for such a
psalm. It's a pretty good Psalm, but most people agree that the next one
is better :-).

Dave

Yehoshua,

Thank you kindly, too, for providing such helpful information.

Let me pose one more question, if I may.  Realizing Isaiah 53 is considered
a messianic text, is not the servant spoken of therein also considered a
metaphorical figure representing the Israelite people?

Please let me know if I've somehow latched onto a false notion.

Shalom,
Richard

Dave (.4)

	It appears you've answered my question regarding the servant even
before I posed it in .5!!

	Thanks so much!

Shalom,
Richard

As I mentioned in that other notesfile, there are those who read the entire
Book of Psalms on a regular basis.  Some read the whole book every day,
or every Shabbos, or every Erev Shabbos.  There's also a weekly cycle and 
a monthly cycle.  Psalm 22 is not included in the regular liturgy, but neither
are many (most?) of the others.

    So it appears that the local rabbi that made the statement in .0 was
    probably speaking on a local level.
    
    Re: servant nation of Israel in Isaiah 53
    
    I have been told this before my the same rabbi mentioned above.  What
    confuses me is verses 5,8-12.  Maybe someone can explain to me when
    Israel was punished for our sins, when Israel died, and who the rich 
    man is that Israel is buried next to.
    
    thanks,
    Mike
    
Isaiah 53:5
But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities:
the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Isaiah 53:8
He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his
generation? For he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the
transgression of my people was he stricken.

Isaiah 53:9
And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because
he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

Isaiah 53:10
Yet it pleased the lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou
shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall
prolong his days, and the pleasure of the lord shall prosper in his hand.

Isaiah 53:11
He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his
knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their
iniquities.

Isaiah 53:12
Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the
spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he
was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made
intercession for the transgressors.

>		... Maybe someone can explain to me when
>   Israel was punished for our sins, when Israel died, and who the rich 
>   man is that Israel is buried next to.
Recall the context of the Babylonian exile. The theological reason the
first Temple was destroyed was that the upper classes of Judean society
were corrupt. The Jews were exiled to Babylon and Nebuchadnezzar expected
the Jewish nation to be dead. I would imagine the "rich man" is a metaphore
for Babylon and "our sins" refers to idol worship.

The Jewish Publication Society (JPS) translation from the Hebrew into modern
English is quite similar to your quotes (I assume from King James). But I
find the differences border on slanting the text towards *you*know*who*.

>Isaiah 53:8
>He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his
>generation? For he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the
>transgression of my people was he stricken.
(JPS)
By oppressive judgment he was taken away, 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.

>Isaiah 53:9
>And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because
>he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
And his grave was set among the wicked, And with the rich, in his death/
Though he had done no injustice/ And had spoken no falsehood.

>Isaiah 53:10
>Yet it pleased the lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou
>shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall
>prolong his days, and the pleasure of the lord shall prosper in his hand.
But the Lord chose to crush him by disease, That, if he made himself an
offering for guilt, He might see offspring and have long life, And that
through him the Lord's purpose might prosper.

>Isaiah 53:11
>He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his
>knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their
>iniquities.
Out of his anguish he shall see it; He shall enjoy it to the full through
his devotion. "My righteous servant makes the many righteous, It is
their punishment he bears;

>Isaiah 53:12
>Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the
>spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he
>was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made
>intercession for the transgressors.
Assuredly, I will give him the many as his portion, 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."

Dave

Allow me yet another couple of questions, if I may, sincerely asked.

Is it commonly believed by Jewish readers that the whole of the text of
Isaiah is of a single hand?  Or it is more accepted that Isaiah was written
by more than one individual over an expanse of time?

Shalom,
Richard

    Dave, thanks for the information, it's much appreciated.
    
    I'd also be interested in the answer to Richard's latest question.  I
    believe that there was only 1 great prophet named Isaiah that wrote
    this book.  There are some Bible critics that claim there were 2 and
    maybe even 3 different great prophets named Isaiah whose work make up
    the book of Isaiah.
    
    thanks,
    Mike

RE: 1, 2, or 3 Isaiahs. I've heard the same thing from Jewish sources.
Sorry, I don't remember exactly where I heard it tho.

I've been invited to chant a Haftorah (readings from the Prophets) in
August and I'm waivering whether to do it. It's Isaiah 40:1-26. This
discussion may yet push me over the edge. I notice that nearly all the
readings to accompany the portions of Deuteronomy are from Isaiah.

Dave

p.s. I found the list I made. Of the 66 chapters of the book of Isaiah, 36
are not read, even partially. The longest unread stretch is Isaiah 13 to 26.

    .12
    
    Thanks a lot, Dave.  You've been very helpful.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Re: .8 (Mike)
    
    Not much time now, but briefly:
    
    >So it appears that the local rabbi that made the statement in .0 was
    >probably speaking on a local level.
    
    Forgive me, but what difference on earth does "local" or
    "international" make in this context? Whoever made the 
    statements in .0 is either an ignoramous, has ulterior 
    motives or both. "Rabbi?" which candy store was he ordained at?
    
    > What
    > confuses me is verses 5,8-12.  Maybe someone can explain to me when
    > Israel was punished for our sins, when Israel died, and who the
    > rich man is that Israel is buried next to.
    
    See note 1381.67. We would all do well to read a little more broadly
    than just those sentences which suit our purposes.
    
    Yehoshua

    Yehoshua,
    
>    Forgive me, but what difference on earth does "local" or
>    "international" make in this context? Whoever made the 
>    statements in .0 is either an ignoramous, has ulterior 
>    motives or both. "Rabbi?" which candy store was he ordained at?
    
    This is a Reformed Rabbi, not an Orthodox one.  This may not make a
    difference to you, but obviously they don't do things in the
    traditional way.  Your harsh comments about a person you've never met
    do beg for forgiveness.
    
>    See note 1381.67. We would all do well to read a little more broadly
>    than just those sentences which suit our purposes.
    
    I agree context is important.  I also believe G-d's Word is to be taken
    literally not figuratively.  Finally, all believers in the G-d of
    Israel are His servants.
    
    hope this helps,
    Mike

>>    Forgive me, but what difference on earth does "local" or
>>    "international" make in this context? Whoever made the 
>>    statements in .0 is either an ignoramous, has ulterior 
>>    motives or both. "Rabbi?" which candy store was he ordained at?
    
>    This is a Reformed Rabbi, not an Orthodox one.
FYI. The correct term is "Reform". "Reformed" means something else entirely.
There is another possiblity...that this person was misquoted. I hope this
is the case because, otherwise, I must agree with .14.

>						    This may not make a
>    difference to you, but obviously they don't do things in the
>    traditional way.  Your harsh comments about a person you've never met
>    do beg for forgiveness.
Any translation of Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) will have the listing of Haftorah
readings (readings from the Prophets) printed in the front matter. That's
where I got my information. Yes, the Reform congregations depart from
Orthodox tradition, but if the Reform Rabbi is unaware of basic things
such as this, he'd better go back to Hebrew school.

Dave

Typically the Reform liturgy leaves out things that are included in the
traditional liturgy.  If the entire Tenach were read over the course of
a year, Sabbath services would be _very_ long.

I should perhaps explain that this topic arose out of a topic entitled
"The Suffering Servant" (Note 1095) in the CHRISTIAN-PERSPECTIVE
conference.

To add CHRISTIAN-PERSPECTIVE to your notebook type

	ADD ENTRY LGP30::CHRISTIAN-PERSPECTIVE

at the notes prompt or press KP7.

Shalom,
Richard

    re .-1  I think we had all figured out what conference this question,
    given how it was slanted, most likely came up in, anyhow.  That is, the
    thumping noise was audible in the background...
    
    /Charlotte

    Re: .15
    
    >I agree context is important.  I also believe G-d's Word is to be taken
    >literally not figuratively.  Finally, all believers in the G-d of
    >Israel are His servants.
    
    The prophets of Israel often spoke metaphorically, primarily because
    the visions they saw were presented to them as such. For instance,
    how is one to interpret literally Jeremiah's visions of an almond
    branch or a bubbling caldron? And specifically as regards Isaiah's
    pronouncements vis-a-vis G-d's servant, he explicitly states again
    and again that this refers to Israel (or Jacob). I suggest an honest
    reading of the Bible--in context--if one is after a true interpretation
    of G-d's message. If however, one is looking for snippets here and
    there that can appear to support one or another prejudice, this is
    not difficult, but it will only convince the utterly ignorant who
    lack the ability or will to study seriously. And those who truly
    wish to do so will inevitably conclude that there is no substitute
    for study in the Holy Tongue itself. Even according to your stand,
    that each word must be taken literally (in those cases where it's
    possible), how do you expect to do so through translations, which
    are necessarily only approximations of the original, and are often
    slanted according to prejudices?
    
    Once again, the Messiah is to accomplish concrete tasks, first and
    foremost to bring everlasting peace to mankind and a knowledge of
    G-d's sovereignty to the world. He will rebuild the Holy Temple 
    in Jerusalem. Anyone who does these things has my vote. Pretenders
    to the title "Messiah" have arisen by the dozens, but none have
    passed the acid test. 
    
    May he arrive speedily in our time!
    
    Yehoshua
    

    
    > ...figured out what conference this question...

    There are actually two conferences which discuss Christian ideas:
    CHRISTIAN and CHRISTIAN-PERSPECTIVES. The latter you might call the
    "Reform" Christian conference, if I can be so bold as to borrow the
    term. There was also a thumping noise in that conference (C-P) when the
    question/assertion was made. 

    Shalom,

    	Eric

>    The prophets of Israel often spoke metaphorically, primarily because
>    the visions they saw were presented to them as such. For instance,
>    how is one to interpret literally Jeremiah's visions of an almond
>    branch or a bubbling caldron? And specifically as regards Isaiah's
    
    Allow me to clarify something.  When I said literally, that includes
    the instances where G-d's prophets, under the inspiration of G-d's
    Spirit, is telling you he's being figurative.  A common clue is the
    catch phrase - "...and I saw a sign..."  This is how G-d is telling you
    when to take things figuratively.  Other than that, I believe the
    interpretation should be literal.
    
    As for the almond branch or cauldron, I haven't studied those
    specifically, but I'm sure there is a parallel between Jeremiah's
    almond branch and Aaron's rod.
    
>    Once again, the Messiah is to accomplish concrete tasks, first and
>    foremost to bring everlasting peace to mankind and a knowledge of
>    G-d's sovereignty to the world. He will rebuild the Holy Temple 
>    in Jerusalem. Anyone who does these things has my vote. Pretenders
>    to the title "Messiah" have arisen by the dozens, but none have
>    passed the acid test. 
    
    This may be another rathole, but where in Scripture has God ordained or
    commissioned the building of a 3rd Temple?  
    
>    May he arrive speedily in our time!
    
    Maranatha and Amen!
    
    Mike

Re: .22

>This may be another rathole, but where in Scripture has God ordained or
>commissioned the building of a 3rd Temple?  

Don't have time for specific pointers, but see Ezekiel chap 37 and from 
chap. 40 on for starters.

Yehoshua
[Posted by WWW Notes gateway]

I initated this topic by asking questions which arose in another conference.
I have yet one more question, which I guess is more a matter of logic than
of faith.  I'd like to know what you think anyway.

If a Jew of the first century CE was inspired to quote in his writing a
portion of Isaiah 53 and a portion of Isaiah 6 as supportive texts and within
a few verses of each other, would it be reasonable to conclude that this
constitutes evidence that the whole of Isaiah was written by a single
individual?

Shalom,
Richard

>If a Jew of the first century CE was inspired to quote in his writing a
>portion of Isaiah 53 and a portion of Isaiah 6 as supportive texts and within
>a few verses of each other, would it be reasonable to conclude that this
>constitutes evidence that the whole of Isaiah was written by a single
>individual?

Not at all. Consider the time lapse. If Isaiah lived in the time of
the Babylonian exile, the first century CE was over 600 years later.
We have arguments today whether Shakespeare was one or two people,
and he lived less than 400 years ago.

Dave

    .25
    
    Thank you, Dave.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Even if the first century CE Jew attributed both quotations to Isaiah?
    
    thanks,
    Mike

Same analogy. If two present day scholars were debating, and one
said all of Shakespeare's plays were written by the same individual
and the other disagreed, who would you believe? Besides, a sermon
is one thing and literary scholarship is another. Where did your
mysterious 1st century Jew set down his opinion?

If this certain "first century Jew" was the individual I suspect you
have in mind, his opinions carry no weight in contemporary Jewish
thinking. If you are referring to Rabbi Akiba or another of his
stature, that's a different story. Any contemporary scholar who offered
a contrary opinion to one of those guys (known collectively as Chazal)
would have to make a very good case.

Dave

    Dave, I'm referring to what the Apostle John wrote in his New Testament
    book in John 12:37-41.  John attributes both Isaiah 53:1 and Isaiah
    6:10 to *THE* prophet Isaiah.  In other words, people in this era
    didn't believe there was more than one great prophet named Isaiah. 
    Bible critics today think there was 2 maybe even 3 great prophets of
    G-d named Isaiah.
    
    Mike

    I recently obtained the Dead Sea Scrolls on CD.  The Isaiah scroll
    found was dated around 200 B.C. and the entire book was on 1 scroll. 
    You would think it would be on 2 scrolls if it had 2 different Isaiahs
    writing them.
    
    Mike

    And Isaiah 7 says Almah, not Betulah, correct ? 200 B.C.E. would make
    it final in that context....

Isaiah lived during the Babylonian exile. That's 500-something BCE.
Three hundred years is enough time lapse for uncertainty to creep in
as to the number of individuals named "Isaiah".

Dave

    Several Hebrew traditions are carried out today the way they were
    1000's of years ago (i.e., celebrations in the feasts of Israel), what 
    would be hard about carrying on the identity of Isaiah?  
    
    Aren't there Rabbinic writings/commentaries that address this?
    
    Mike

    The argument in .30 might be a more reasonable one if the scroll was
    the original manuscript, which I don't think any of the Dead Scrolls
    are believed to be.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Richard, what I believe to be more reasonable is the relative closeness
    of the date of the scroll to Isaiah's timeframe, as well as external
    sources that confirm 1 Isaiah.  Other ancient works (i.e., Homer's
    Iliad, Hindu Mahabharata) don't share the same textual integrity or 
    external support.  In analyzing ancient writings that we don't have the
    originals for (which is about all of them), the basic tests are 
    Date Written, Earliest Copies, Time Gap, Number of Copies, and 
    Accuracy % among Copies.  The Book of Isaiah's integrity is excellent. 
    If there were more than 1 Isaiah, you would probably see several
    revisions and editions.
    
    A lot of this debate on more than 1 Isaiah hinges on varying writing
    styles, which isn't very reasonable.  Anyone in here could go back and
    examine their writings over 15 years ago and would see a big
    difference.  People mature both intellectually and spiritually over
    time and I'm sure that was true for Isaiah as well.
    
    Mike

    > Several Hebrew traditions are carried out today the way they were
    > 1000's of years ago (i.e., celebrations in the feasts of Israel)
    
    Certainly not!  Without the Temple, without the blood of the red
    cow, with the tribes mixed, etc. there is no way to celebrate as
    was done then.  And it isn't clear that most Jews would want to go
    back to animal sacrifices, but that's another issue.
    
    Things change over time.  Many (most) of the prayers we say were
    written less than 2,000 years ago.
    
    				Paul
    

    .35
    
    It is fair to say that you do not subscribe to the Documentary
    Hypothesis either?
    
    Richard
    

>    Certainly not!  Without the Temple, without the blood of the red
>    cow, with the tribes mixed, etc. there is no way to celebrate as
>    was done then.  And it isn't clear that most Jews would want to go
>    back to animal sacrifices, but that's another issue.
>    
>    Things change over time.  Many (most) of the prayers we say were
>    written less than 2,000 years ago.
    
    Paul, I was thinking on a smaller level, but since you brought it
    up...  The red heifer has been found and after several tests, is being
    bred again in Israel.  Plans are already in place to rebuild the
    Temple.  The golden instruments and priest's garments have already been
    made (you can see them today) and 200 men are currently being trained
    to be priests.
    
    I said "thousands of years" so the prayers you mention qualify.  
    
    What I had in mind are the micro-level details in the Feasts.  For
    example, in Passover, the eating of bitter herbs, the 4 cups, and the 
    greeting of Elijah at the door has been done for several thousand
    years.  The building of a sukkot on Tabernacles has been done since the
    Exodus as well.  The Counting of the Omer is another example.  
    
    With these details in mind, remembering the author of a sacred book is
    trivial to me.  Textual critics are turning a blind eye to the power of
    G-d.
    
    Mike

    > Plans are already in place to rebuild the Temple.
    
    Before or after world war III?  And what good is a Temple if the
    holy-of-holies is empty?
    
    More on the subject, Talmudic Judiasm changes.  It changes every
    time a Rabbi writes a responsa.
    
    We eat bitter herbs, but are they the same bitter herbs as were
    eaten then?  Or has it been modified by an interpretation of what
    plants are and are not bitter herbs?  Was romaine lettuce considered
    a bitter herb 2,000 years ago?  Our matzoh is definitely different
    than the unleavened cakes baked by our ancestors.
    
    The Talmud tells us what the requirements are for a Succah.  The
    allowed size is huge!  What were our ancestors building that caused
    the rabbis to set a maximum size?  It certainly wasn't the simple
    structures we build today.
    
    Polygamy, practiced at least through the time of King Solomon, has
    been banned.  Most Jews use Matrilineal descent to determine who is
    a Jew.  Which of us would our ancestors consider Jewish?  And which
    of them would we consider Jewish?
    
    Hebrew has changed too.
    
    With all of this, and considering the turmoil in the land at the time
    of Isaih, I don't find it surprising that the authorship is in doubt.
    My amazement is that the book still exists and that the text hasn't
    been changed since then.
    
    				Paul
    

>    Before or after world war III?  
    
    I would say before.  Next year should be an interesting turning point
    in this respect.
    
    >  And what good is a Temple if the holy-of-holies is empty?
    
    Probably not much good, but it's not my call anyway.  A growing number
    want it rebuilt.
    
    Paul, are the differences that drastic?  For instance, we know the
    tzitzith/tallit has changed over the years in appearance (as garment
    fashions will) but the basic structure of the windings and the knots 
    haven't.
    
    Mike

Re: .36

A small error in detail is bothering me.

>   ... Without the Temple, without the blood of the red
>   cow, ...

It's the *ashes* of the red heifer that we need (mixed with water),
not the blood.

There! I feel better already :-).

Dave

    Re: .41
    
    Sorry about that.  It has been a long time since I studied any
    of that stuff, and not being a Kohen or Levi I didn't pay too
    much attention anyways.  Blood, ashes, whatever - unless they
    come up with a low cholesterol version...
    
    Re: .40
    
    We're getting too far off the subject, but as far as I can see
    the only way to rebuild the Temple would involve removing the
    mosques from the Temple mount.  Such an act would give new meaning
    to the phrase "holy war".
    
    Israelis may be for or against the current peace process, but I
    don't think many Israelis would go along with a plan that risks
    all-out war with every other country in the region just to satisfy
    the few who want to return to Temple Judiasm with it's priests and
    sacrifices.
    
    Your information sounds like it is coming from very fringe sources.
    
    				Paul
    

>                                                       just to satisfy
>    the few who want to return to Temple Judiasm with it's priests and
>    sacrifices.

Traditional Jews pray three times a day for the rebuilding of the Temple
and the resumption of the offerings.  Those who want to start rebuilding
it before the coming of Moshiach are indeed a fringe group.  Besides the
obvious political problems, there are serious halachic problems with
their plans.

    Re: .43
    
    Traditional Jews do pray for the rebuilding of the Temple.
    
    I wonder how many of them would be comfortable with animal
    sacrifices replacing prayer.  On the other hand, that's not
    relevant - when the Moshiach comes and the Temple is rebuilt
    he can replace Rabbinic Judiasm with whatever is appropriate.
    May it be in our lifetime.
    
    I don't expect to see the Temple rebuilt before the Moshiach
    comes.
    
    				Paul
    

    According to Daniel 9:27, Temple worship and offerings must be
    reinstated sometime for the abomination of desolation to occur in the
    future (assuming you believe this is a prophecy currently unfulfilled).
    
    To try and tie this back into the topic, what would be your
    interpretation of Daniel 9:26?  Obviously this would have to happen
    before Temple worship is reinstated.
    
    Mike

Re: .70
As I recall, Daniel was one of the books written during the Syrian
occupation that ended with the success of the Maccabean (sp?) revolution.
According to our tradition, the holiday of Channukah celebrates the
rededication of the Temple (and by implication, the resumption of animal
sacrifices). Accordingly, this prophecy is fulfilled.

Dave

    Interesting viewpoint.  If you say it was fulfilled, that means the
    Moshiach has already come and was killed according to Daniel 9:26 prior
    to the Maccabean revolt.
    
    Mike

No. I was saying that the prediction that sacrifices would resume was
fulfilled. Nothing more.

Dave

    Dave, that implies that the verses are out of sequence.  Verse 25 was
    clearly fulfilled under Nehemiah.
    
    Mike

Re .49
That would be counter to my understanding of the historical
sequence. If I remember right, Nehemiah was the political leader
who organized the Judean state immediately following the Babylonian
exile. Also (again, if I remember right), the Maccabean period comes
much later and the Book of Daniel was contemporary with the Maccabees.

Unfortunately, I have never even read the Book of Daniel, much less
study it. It never comes up in Jewish liturgy.

Dave

    >much later and the Book of Daniel was contemporary with the Maccabees.
    
    I thought the Maccabean period was in the latter centuries of B.C.
    (~200 B.C.).  Daniel was inspired to write his book *during* the
    Babylonian exile.  He lived there.
    
    Mike

Maybe Dave holds the view of modern biblical scholars that the book is
named after the protagonist, not the author.

	"The theological outlook of the author, with his
	 interest in angelology, his apocalyptic rather
	 than prophetic vision, and esp. his belief in
	 the resurrection of the dead, points inescapably
	 to a period long after the Babylonian Exile."
				--Hartman/DiLella

Jewish and Christian theologians used to be united in ascribing the authorship
to Daniel; there is no longer any such unanimity.  The question is made even
more complex because parts of the book are in Hebrew, parts in Aramaic, and
parts only available in Greek.

/john

    Only chapters 2-7 are in Aramaic, the rest in Hebrew.  The Aramaic
    section is significant in that it is the only portion of the Tanach
    specifically addressing Gentiles and God inspired him to write in a 
    Gentile language.
    
    Mike

    It is my understanding that parts of Daniel were written during the
    occupation of Antiochus Epiphanes in an attempt to inspire the
    people to remain faithful in the face of tyranny.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Re: .19
    
    The thumping's getting louder...
    
    				Paul
    

    Re: .54
    
    Yeshua the Nazarene referred to Daniel in the singular, not plural. 
    Daniel was long gone by 160 B.C.
    
    Mike

    .55
    
    Agreed.  It's just that a more suitable title presently escapes me.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Something that we're failing to mention here that applies to both
    Isaiah and Daniel is the LXX or Septuagint.  The historic completion 
    of the Tanach is 450 B.C.  The Septuagint, which is the Greek 
    translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, was initiated in the reign of
    Ptolemy Philadelphius (285-246 B.C.).  To initiate the Greek translation 
    in 250 B.C., the Hebrew text had to have been already written, which
    obviously includes Isaiah and Daniel.
    
    Knowing this detail on the Tanach and LXX, it really shortens the 
    window for speculations on multiple authors and date of authorship.
    
    Mike

    Re: .4 (Dave)
    
>was involuntary whereas we went to Egypt voluntarily. In chapter 53, Isaiah
>describes the suffering of G-d's "servant" (the Jewish nation) and predicts
>that the redemption of that servant will be an example for the nations of
    
    I recently studied Isaiah 52 and our conversation in here came to mind. 
    The latter part of this chapter fits within the context of chapter 53. 
    This section also confuses me with relation to Judaism's interpretation
    of this chapter.  
    
Isaiah 52:13-15
Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and
be very high.
As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and
his form more than the sons of men:
So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him:
for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had
not heard shall they consider.
    
    How does Judaism explain this passage, especially verse 14.  It appears 
    to me that the Holy Spirit is revealing to Isaiah something about a man 
    and not a nation.  Especially verse 14, it seems to be speaking of Yeshua.
    
    Mike

    I've been taking a class at ASU this semester on the Tanakh and it is
    taught by Rabbi Plotkin of Temple Beth Israel.  I asked him about .0
    and he said that it sounded like an anti-semitic remark and is not true
    at all.
    
    As for -1, he told me that the passage in Isaiah 52 that I questioned
    was figurative.  This Rabbi also believes in 2 Isaiahs.  
    
    I've also come across a couple books recently that contrast the Dead Sea
    Scrolls with the Masoretic Text as well as ancient rabbinical teaching
    with contemporary rabbinical teaching.  The blatant differences have me
    puzzled.  Are the Dead Sea Scrolls a point of controversy in Judaism
    right now?
    
    thanks,
    Mike

    {the following is an excerpt from a paper I wrote for my Tanakh class}
    
          3  The Suffering Servant

          The book of Isaiah contain 4 passages known as the "Suffering
          Servant Songs," located in Isaiah 42:1-7, 49:1-6, 50:4-9, and
          52:13-53:12.  The latter passage in Isaiah 53 is believed to be
          a reference to the nation of Israel by many modern rabbis.
          However, ancient rabbis in the Targum, one of the oldest
          manuscripts of the Hebrew Scriptures, positively attributed this
          passage as Messianic.  In the Targum of Isaiah, it states:
          "Behold, My servant   the Messiah  shall prosper; he shall be
          exalted and great and very powerful.  The Righteous One shall
          grow up before him, lo, like sprouting plants; and like a tree
          that sends it roots by the water-courses, so shall the exploits
          of the holy one multiply in the land which was desperate for
          him. His appearance shall not be a profane appearance, nor shall
          the awe of an ignorant person, but his countenance shall radiate
          holiness, so that all who see him shall become wise through him.
          All of us were scattered like sheep... but it is the will of God
          to pardon  the sins of all of us on his account...Then I will
          apportion unto him the spoil of great nations...  because he was
          ready to suffer martyrdom that the rebellious he might subjugate
          to the Torah.  And he might seek pardon for the sins of many."

          Even a reading from a Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah prayer book
          states, "Our righteous anointed is departed from us: horror has
          seized us, and we have none to justify us.  He has borne the
          yoke of our iniquities, and our transgression, and is wounded
          because of our transgression.  He bears our sins on his
          shoulders, that we may find pardon for our iniquities. We shall
          be healed by his wound, at the time that the eternal will create
          the Messiah as a new creature. O bring him up from the circle of
          the earth. Raise him up from Seir, to assemble us the second
          time on mount Lebanon, by the hand of Yinon." (ancient rabbinical
          name for Messiah) 
    
          Similar passages detailing the sacrifice of the Messiah are found 
          in: Talmud, Sanhedrin 93b, 98b; Midrash Haggadah, tractate Pesiqta 
          Rabbati, chapters 36, 37; Midrashim Rabbis Moshe Cohen Crispin, Isaac
          Abrabanel, Elijah De Vidas, and Moshe el Sheikh.
    
          The amazing thing too is that most of these rabbis also draw the
          connection that this same Messiah is the suffering servant in
          Psalm 22 and Zechariah 12.  In Psalm 22:17, the JPS Tanakh and
          the Massoretic text is the only translation where you have  kari
          instead of karv.  The Septuagint and Targum both translate the
          word as pierced.  This is confirmed in Yakult Shimoni (#687), a
          commentary on Psalm 22.  Many modern rabbis also state that the
          one being pierced in Zechariah 12:10-12 is not the Messiah.
          However, in the Talmud, Sukkah 52a this prophecy is positively
          said to be Messianic. The evidence is clear.  The Messiah would
          be despised, rejected, suffer by being pierced and ultimately
          die for the sins of his people.

          10  Bibliography

          � Eastman, Mark, M.D. and Chuck Smith,   The Search for Messiah.
            The Word for Today and Joy Publishing, 1996.

          � Jewish Publication Society.   Tanakh - The Holy Scriptures   .
            Philadelphia: JPS, 1985.
    
          � McDowell, Josh,  Evidence That Demands a Verdict, Volume 2.
            San Bernadino: Here's Life Publishers, 1992.

          � Wise, Michael and James Tabor,   Biblical Archaeology Review.
            November/December 1992.

RE: .61
> Even a reading from a Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah prayer book
> states, "Our righteous anointed is departed from us..."

In a lifetime of attending RH/YK services, I have never noticed
anything like this reference. Can you pinpoint the source more
precisely? The RH/YK prayer book is pretty thick and there is more
than one version.

I find it hard to believe this is in there. The liturgy repeatedly
emphasizes personal responsibilty for our sins. We recall the YK
sacrifices which were intended to cleanse us of our sins but, in the
absence of the Temple, we pray G-d to forgive us even though we may
be undeserving of forgiveness. Nowhere have I noticed any attempt
to lay our sins on any external object (except the "scape goat"
which is no longer done).

Dave

    Dave, the closest I can get to the source is a book that references it,
    but doesn't give the page #.  
    
    "The Search for Messiah" by Dr. Mark Eastman and Chuck Smith is where I
    read the quote from the prayer book.  They didn't list the page number
    but footnote to the prayer book as well as to "The Messianic Hope" by 
    Arthur Kac.
    
    The quotations of the ancient rabbinical writings are more detailed
    though.  There's 48 pages of quotes from the Targum, Talmud, Midrash,
    and Zohar were these rabbis all attribute Isaiah 53 to the Messiah.
    
    Mike