Is Jesus advocating pacifism and denouncing capital punishment in this passage? MATTHEW 26:52

MATTHEW 26:52—Is Jesus advocating pacifism and denouncing capital punishment in this passage?

PROBLEM: When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, Peter took out his sword and cut off the ear of the high priest’s servant. Jesus told Peter to put back the sword because those who take up the sword will die by the sword. Some use this verse to support pacifism and to oppose capital punishment, which the Bible affirms elsewhere (Gen. 9:6).

SOLUTION: Total pacifism is not taught in this Scripture. Indeed, Abraham was blessed by the Most High God (Gen 14:19) after engaging in a war against the unjust aggression of the kings who had captured his nephew Lot. In Luke 3:14, soldiers come to inquire of John the Baptist about what they should do. John never told them to leave the army. Likewise, Cornelius, in Acts 10, was a centurion. He was called a devout man (v. 2), and the Scriptures say that the Lord heard the prayers of Cornelius (v. 4). When Cornelius becomes a Christian, Peter does not tell him to leave the army. Also, in Luke 22:36–38, Christ says that the one who has no sword should sell his robe and buy one. The apostles responded saying that they had two swords. Jesus responded saying that “it was enough.” In other words, they did not need to get rid of their swords. The Apostle Paul accepted the protection of the Roman army to save his life from unjust aggressors (Acts 23). Indeed, he reminded the Roman Christians that God had given the sword to the king who did not bear it in vain (Rom. 13:1–4). When Jesus returns to earth, He will come with the armies of heaven and will war against the kings of the earth (Rev. 19:11–19). So, from the beginning to the end, the Bible is filled with examples of the justification of war against evil aggressors.

What, then, did Jesus mean when He commanded Peter to put away his sword? Peter was making two mistakes in using his sword. First, while the Bible permits the sword by the government for civil purposes (Rom. 13:1–4), it does not endorse its use for spiritual ends. It is to be used by the state, not by the church. Second, Peter’s use was aggressive, not purely defensive. His life was not being unjustly threatened. That is, it was not clearly an act of self-defense (Ex. 22:2). Jesus appears to have endorsed the use of the sword in civil self-defense (Luke 22:36), as did the Apostle Paul (Acts 23).

Likewise, capital punishment is not forbidden in Scripture, but rather was established by God. Genesis 9:6 affirms that whoever sheds man’s blood, the blood of the killer will also be shed. Numbers 35:31 makes a similar statement. In the NT, Jesus recognized that Rome had capital authority and submitted to it (John 19:11). The Apostle Paul informed the Romans that governing authorities are ministers of God and that they still possessed the God-given sword of capital authority (13:1, 4). So Jesus in no way did away with the just use of the sword by civil authorities. He simply noted that those who live lives of aggression often die by the same means.

[1]

 

[1]Geisler, N. L., & Howe, T. A. (1992). When critics ask : A popular handbook on Bible difficulties (360). Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books.

Did Jesus make a mistake in referring to Zechariah the son of Jehoiada rather than to Zechariah the son of Berechiah? MATTHEW 23:34–35

MATTHEW 23:34–35—Did Jesus make a mistake in referring to Zechariah the son of Jehoiada rather than to Zechariah the son of Berechiah?

[button color=”red” size=”big” link=”https://www.facebook.com/difa3iat” target=”blank” ]إضغط هنا[/button]

PROBLEM: Jesus said to the scribes and Pharisees that the guilt of all the righteous blood from Abel to Zechariah will fall on them. Concerning Zechariah, Jesus said he was killed between the sanctuary and the altar. Some conclude that the Zechariah referred to by Christ is the son of Jehoiada (2 Chron. 24:20–22).

SOLUTION: The Zechariah referred to has to be the son of Berechiah. This Zechariah is one of the minor prophets, and his father is listed as Berechiah (Zech. 1:1). He would be the most likely candidate because the other Zechariah (son of Jehoiada) died about 800 b.c. If one thinks Christ referred to this Zechariah, then the time span from Abel to this Zechariah would not cover the OT period, which extended to 400 b.c. Abel to Zechariah the son of Berechiah would make a much better sweep of the OT period than would the period from Abel to Zechariah the son of Jehoiada. Since many Zechariahs are mentioned in the OT, it would not be too difficult to imagine two Zechariahs dying from similar circumstances.

[1]

 

[1]Geisler, N. L., & Howe, T. A. (1992). When critics ask : A popular handbook on Bible difficulties (357). Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books.

Who came to talk with Jesus, the mother of James and John or James and John? MATTHEW 20:20 (cf. Mark 10:35)

MATTHEW 20:20 (cf. Mark 10:35)—Who came to talk with Jesus, the mother of James and John or James and John?

PROBLEM: In Matthew, the mother of James and John made a request of Jesus. However, Mark states that it was James and John who came to Jesus to make their request.

SOLUTION: It is clear that both the mother and her sons came to Jesus to make the request, since the text declares “the mother … came to Him with her sons” (v. 20). It is possible that the mother spoke first with the two sons closely following to reiterate the request. This is supported by Matthew’s account because when Jesus responds “are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink?” the Bible says “they said to Him, `we are able’ ” (v.22). So, there is no unsolvable conflict here. The two accounts are harmonious.

[1]

 

[1]Geisler, N. L., & Howe, T. A. (1992). When critics ask : A popular handbook on Bible difficulties (352). Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books.

Is Peter the rock on which the church is built? MATTHEW 16:18

MATTHEW 16:18—Is Peter the rock on which the church is built?

PROBLEM: Roman Catholics use this passage to support their belief in the primacy of Peter, that is, that he is the rock on which the church is built. But Paul said the church is built on Christ, not Peter (1 Cor. 3:11). Is Peter the “rock” in this passage?

SOLUTION: There are different ways to understand this passage, but none of them support the Roman Catholic view that the church is built on St. Peter, who became the first Pope—infallible in all his official pronouncements on faith and doctrine. This is evident for many reasons.

First of all, Peter was married (Matt. 8:14), and Popes do not marry. If the first Pope could marry, why later pronounce that no priest (or Pope) can marry.

Second, Peter was not infallible in his views on the Christian life. Even Paul had to rebuke him for his hypocrisy, because he was not “straightforward about the truth of the Gospel” (Gal. 2:14).

Third, the Bible clearly declares that Christ is the foundation of the Christian church, insisting that “no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 3:11).

Fourth, the only sense in which Peter had a foundational role in the church, all the other apostles shared in the same way. Peter was not unique in this respect. For Paul declared that in this sense the church is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone” (Eph. 2:20). Indeed, the early church continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine [not just Peter’s]” (Acts 2:42). Even “keys of the kingdom” given to Peter (Matt. 16:19) were also given to all the apostles (cf. Matt. 18:18).

Fifth, there is no indication that Peter was the head of the early church. When the first council was held at Jerusalem, Peter played only an introductory role (Acts 15:6–11). James seems to have a more significant position, summing up the conference and making the final pronouncement (cf. Acts 15:13–21). In any event, Peter is never referred to as the “pillar” in the church. Rather, Paul speaks of “pillars” (plural), such as, “James, Cephas, and John” (Gal. 2:9). Peter (Cephas) is not even listed first among the pillars.

Sixth, many Protestant interpreters believe that Jesus’ reference to “this rock” (Matt. 16:18) upon which His church would be built was to Peter’s solid (rock-like) testimony that Jesus was “the Christ, the son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16). But even if this rock has reference to Peter (Petros, rock), which is certainly a possible interpretation, he was only a rock in the apostolic foundation of the church (Matt. 16:18), not the rock. Nor is he the only apostolic rock. Even Peter himself admitted that Christ is the chief rock (“cornerstone,” 1 Peter 2:7). And Paul notes that the other apostles are all part of the “foundation” (Eph. 2:20).

[1]

 

[1]Geisler, N. L., & Howe, T. A. (1992). When critics ask : A popular handbook on Bible difficulties (347). Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books.

Why does the Bible commend the Magi for following the star, when it condemns astrology? MATTHEW 2:2

MATTHEW 2:2—Why does the Bible commend the Magi for following the star, when it condemns astrology?

PROBLEM: The Bible condemns the use of astrology (see Lev. 19:26; Deut. 18:10; Isa. 8:19), yet God blessed the wise men (Magi) for using a star to indicate the birth of Christ.

SOLUTION: First, we need to ask what astrology is. Astrology is a belief that the study of the arrangement and movement of the stars can enable one to foretell events—whether they will be good or bad.

Second, the star used in the biblical account was to announce the birth of Christ, not to foretell this event. God gave the star to the Magi to proclaim to them that the child had already been born. We know the child was already born, because in Matthew 2:16, Herod gives a command to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and vicinity that are two years old or younger in accordance with “the time which he had ascertained from the Magi” (nasb).

Third, there are other cases in the Bible in which the stars and planets are used by God to reveal His desires. Psalm 19:1–6 affirms that the heavens declare God’s glory, and Romans 1:18–20 teaches that creation reveals God’s existence. Christ refers to what will happen to the sun, moon, and stars in connection with His second coming (Matt 24:29–30), as did the prophet Joel (2:31–32). The star guiding the Magi was not used to predict, but to proclaim the birth of Christ.

[1]

 

[1]Geisler, N. L., & Howe, T. A. (1992). When critics ask : A popular handbook on Bible difficulties (326). Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books.

I can find prophecies in the Bible that point to Muhammad just as easily as you can find prophecies that point to Jesus..

I can find prophecies in the Bible that point to Muhammad just as easily as you can find prophecies that point to Jesus. That’s because all of your so-called proofs are either distortions, make-believe creations, or Jewish midrash—free, homiletical interpretations—of the worst kind.

Really? Then why didn’t the Muslims find Muhammad everywhere in the Hebrew Bible? Why did they have to completely rewrite their own version of the Scriptures (i.e., the Koran) instead of referring back to the Hebrew Bible—the Word of God accepted by both Christians and Jews? And where does the Tanakh point to Muhammad’s place of birth, or the time of his coming, or the manner of his death, or his alleged ascension to heaven? (Remember, the Hebrew Scriptures point to the place of Yeshua’s birth, the time of his coming, the manner of his death, and his resurrection!) I also remind you that modern scholars—both Jewish and Christian—recognize that the authors of the New Testament were highly sophisticated in their interpretive techniques (see vol. 4, 5.1). Sorry, but you’ll have to do better. Objections like this are hardly worthy of the name.

I want to appeal to you, Jewish reader, in the words of the Lord as spoken through the prophet Isaiah: “Come now, let us reason together” (Isa. 1:18a). Can I ask you to hear me out?

Maybe you’ve had many objections to the Messiahship of Jesus, believing that he really didn’t fulfill the Messianic prophecies. But now you’ve seen each of these objections answered, systematically and comprehensively. Still, you’re hesitant to believe. After all, generations of our people have rejected Jesus as Messiah, and it has only been a small Jewish minority that has acknowledged him as our promised Redeemer and King. But what if the minority is right? This would not be the first time such a thing has happened in our history! And what if God has not given us eyes to see and ears to understand until this day? What if now, in this day, the light is beginning to dawn, and little by little, more and more of our people are putting their faith in Yeshua as God’s anointed one? What if this very thing was prophesied in the new covenant Scriptures? Well, it is!

The Jewish teacher Saul of Tarsus (known to most of the world as the apostle Paul) explained to Gentile followers of Jesus who were living in Rome that “Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in” (Rom. 11:25). In other words, for the better part of two thousand years, most of our Jewish people have experienced a degree of spiritual blindness when it comes to recognizing the Messiah. This is similar to what happened to our people when the nation of Israel came out of Egypt: We saw God’s miracles, we heard God’s voice, but we really didn’t understand. As Moses said to that generation, “But to this day the Lord has not given you a mind that understands or eyes that see or ears that hear” (Deut. 29:4). And then the light went on, and God opened the eyes of a nation. At last they saw and understood!

This will happen again to the people of Israel before the Messiah returns. As Paul explained to the Roman believers, “the full number of Gentiles [will] come in” (meaning that a vast number of Gentiles from every tribe and language and people will turn to God and put their faith in Yeshua), and then “all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ‘The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins’ ” (Rom. 11:26–27, citing Isa. 59:20–21). There will be a mass turning of the Jewish people to Yeshua the Messiah, and just as there has been a national, Jewish rejection of Jesus, there will be a national, Jewish acceptance of Jesus.

You see, many of our forefathers were guilty of rejecting Yeshua the Messiah when he came—despite his miracles, despite his sinless character, despite his atoning death, despite his glorious resurrection. And this set the pattern for the generations to come, as the children followed in the footsteps of their fathers, rejecting Yeshua because “Jews don’t believe in Jesus.” To make matters even worse, many hypocritical Gentiles who claimed to be Messianic believers (= Christians) were terrible examples, living compromised lifestyles and even persecuting Jews who didn’t believe in Jesus. This only confirmed to our Jewish people that this Jesus was not for them.

Yet in spite of all this, there has always been a remnant of our people who have rightly recognized our Messiah, sometimes numbering more than one hundred thousand Jews in a generation. That is the case today, and the number of Jews who believe in Jesus is rising every year, even among the Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox. And in direct parallel to this is the ever-increasing number of Gentiles who are genuinely turning to Jesus—and I mean genuinely. (One of the clearest signs that these Gentiles are becoming true followers of Jesus is the fact that many of them are deeply devoted to the people of Israel, praying for them, fasting for them, supporting them in the Land, and standing with them when much of the world stands against them.)

Now the time has come for us to stop and think. Could it be that this Jesus Christ is really Yeshua our Messiah? Could it be that we have been wrong in rejecting him as our anointed leader? Could it be that now, in our generation, that great turning back will begin to take place, and our eyes will be opened en masse? I close this volume with A PLEA TO THE JEWISH COMMUNITY TO RECONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY THAT YESHUA (JESUS) OF NAZARETH IS OUR PROMISED MESSIAH AND REDEEMER. Consider the facts:

  • No other worthy Messianic candidates have arisen in the last two thousand years. The positive world influence of Yeshua the Jew totally dwarfs the positive world influence of every other alleged Messianic candidate, including the most recent candidate, Menachem Schneerson, the Lubavitcher Rebbe.
  • Yeshua fulfilled the essential prophecies that had a definite time frame and that had to be completed before the Second Temple was destroyed. This is not a matter of speculation. It is a matter of historical fact. And since he fulfilled the past prophecies (coming as our great High Priest, making atonement for our sins), we can be sure that he will fulfill the future prophecies (reigning as the worldwide King and bringing peace to the earth).
  • He identifies with us in our suffering. For most of our history, we have been cast out, despised, rejected, and misunderstood. That is a picture of our Messiah too! Yeshua is the ultimate example of the suffering, persecuted Jew. He is not only one of us; he is one with us.
  • More than one hundred thousand Jews around the world recognize Yeshua as the Messiah, including a rapidly growing underground movement of Orthodox and Hasidic Jews who are convinced by the Scriptures that he is the one. Messianic Jews can no longer be ignored or disregarded, and we are merely the firstfruits of something much larger—the national turning of Israel to our Messiah and King.
  • Every day, thousands of people around the world are coming to the God of Israel through Yeshua. The fullness of the Gentiles is coming in, and on the heels of that, all Israel shall be saved. So it is written, and so it shall be.

And so I appeal to my Jewish people to take time to reconsider the Messianic claims of Yeshua of Nazareth. And I appeal to every individual Jew reading this book to seek God, study the Scriptures, put all biases and fears aside, and decide for yourself: Who is this man Jesus? This is a question you can’t avoid.

I leave you with the words of Isaiah. Of whom does the prophet speak?

See, my servant will act wisely;

he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.

Just as there were many who were appalled at him—

his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man

and his form marred beyond human likeness—

so will he sprinkle many nations,

and kings will shut their mouths because of him.

For what they were not told, they will see,

and what they have not heard, they will understand.

Who has believed our message

and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?

He grew up before him like a tender shoot,

and like a root out of dry ground.

He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,

nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

He was despised and rejected by men,

a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.

Like one from whom men hide their faces

he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Surely he took up our infirmities

and carried our sorrows,

yet we considered him stricken by God,

smitten by him, and afflicted.

But he was pierced for our transgressions,

he was crushed for our iniquities;

the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,

and by his wounds we are healed.

We all, like sheep, have gone astray,

each of us has turned to his own way;

and the Lord has laid on him

the iniquity of us all.

He was oppressed and afflicted,

yet he did not open his mouth;

he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,

and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,

so he did not open his mouth.

By oppression and judgment he was taken away.

And who can speak of his descendants?

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

for the transgression of my people he was stricken.

He was assigned a grave with the wicked,

and with the rich in his death,

though he had done no violence,

nor was any deceit in his mouth.

Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,

and though the Lord makes his life a guilt offering,

he will see his offspring and prolong his days,

and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.

After the suffering of his soul,

he will see the light of life and be satisfied;

by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many,

and he will bear their iniquities.

Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,

and he will divide the spoils with the strong,

because he poured out his life unto death,

and was numbered with the transgressors.

For he bore the sin of many,

and made intercession for the transgressors.

Isaiah 52:13–53:12

[1]

 

[1]Brown, M. L. (2003). Answering Jewish objections to Jesus, Volume 3: Messianic prophecy objections (184). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

Jesus cannot be the Messiah because the Messiah had to rebuild the Temple, yet the Temple was standing in Jesus’ day.

Jesus cannot be the Messiah because the Messiah had to rebuild the Temple, yet the Temple was standing in Jesus’ day.

There is a fatal flaw to your objection, since we know for a fact that many religious Jews in Jesus’ day were expecting the coming of the Messiah in their lifetimes. This means they were not expecting the Messiah to rebuild the Temple; the Temple was already standing! As for the prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures associating the rebuilding of the Temple with the work of the Messiah, we should point out that these prophecies were delivered during the time of the Babylonian exile and pointed to the rebuilding of the Second Temple—and that Temple was destroyed more than nineteen hundred years ago. This means that we must reinterpret these passages if we are to apply them to a future rebuilding of the Temple. In that case, it can be argued that these prophecies await the return of the Messiah, when he will establish his kingdom on the earth and build the Third Temple.

It is a widely held principle of traditional Judaism that the Messiah will rebuild the Temple. In fact, according to Maimonides, this is how the Messiah will be recognized:

If a king will arise from the House of David who is learned in Torah and observant of the miztvot [commandments], as prescribed by the written law and the oral law, as David, his ancestor was, and will compel all of Israel to walk in [the way of the Torah] and reinforce the breaches [in its observance]; and fight the wars of God, we may, with assurance, consider him the Messiah.332

If he succeeds in the above, builds the Temple in its place, and gathers the dispersed of Israel, he is definitely the Messiah.333

This scenario, however, is not universally held to by traditional Jews, as explained in the commentary to the above translation, where it is noted that

The Rambam’s [i.e., Maimonides’] source is the Jerusalem Talmud, Megillah 1:11 and Numbers Rabbah 13:2. By contrast, Rashi and Tosafot (Sukkah 41a) and Midrash Tanchuma, Pekudei, maintain that the third Temple is “the sanctuary of God, established by Your hands.” It is already completely built and is waiting in the heavens to be revealed.334

So, both the traditional Jewish sources (the Talmudic and midrashic writings) and the leading Rabbinic authorities (Rashi and Rambam) differ over this question. Nonetheless, it is understandable why the belief that the Messiah will be the one to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem would be psychologically powerful since: (1) The destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. was a devastating national tragedy, deeply affecting the psyche of the Jewish people. Since the Temple was destroyed over nineteen hundred years ago, it would seem that only a figure as great as the Messiah could rebuild it. (2) Traditional Jews pray three times daily for the rebuilding of the Temple, just as they pray for the Messianic era of redemption to come. This great event, then, plays a large role in the hopes of many of our people, and the longer the Temple remains in ruins, the more its restoration will seem to be a cosmic, end-time event associated with the work of the Messiah. Many Christians also believe that there will be a restored Temple in the Messianic era, although it is by no means a central doctrine and there is widespread disagreement on this subject among followers of Jesus (see vol. 2, 3.17).

The questions we must address here are: What does the Tanakh teach about the Messiah’s role in the rebuilding of the Temple? And if the Messiah is to build a literal Temple in Jerusalem, when will this take place?

Given the importance placed on this subject by Maimonides—writing more than one thousand years after the time of Jesus—you might find it surprising to learn that there are very few Messianic prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures that say anything about the rebuilding of the Temple, and those few that speak of it seem to be pointing to the rebuilding of the Second Temple in the sixth century B.C.E. The prophet Isaiah did not say a word about a restored or rebuilt Temple, nor did he link any such concept to the Messianic hope. He did speak of Messianic subjects such as the regathering of the Jewish exiles from the nations (Isa. 11:10–11), the abolition of war from the earth (Isa. 2:1–4; 11:1–9), the atoning death of the Messiah (Isa. 53:4–6), and salvation coming to the Gentile nations, all of whom would come to the house of the Lord in Jerusalem (Isa. 2:1–4; see also 19:16–25; 42:1–7; 49:5–7). But there is nothing at all about part of the Messiah’s mission being the rebuilding of the Temple, let alone it’s being a major part of his mission.335

Jeremiah, who lived to see the Temple’s destruction in 586 B.C.E., has a number of key prophecies about the restoration of Jerusalem, including promises that the sounds of joy will once again be heard there—sounds of the bride and bridegroom, sounds of dancing and celebration—and that sacrifices will again be offered to the Lord (e.g., Jer. 33:10–11; see also vol. 2, 3.17). But there is no mention of the Temple’s restoration, nor is there any explicit connection between the Temple and the Messiah anywhere in the book. Similar statements could be made concerning every one of the remaining prophetic books except Zechariah and Ezekiel. This is true for two reasons: (1) Some of the prophets lived during the days of the First Temple (such as Hosea, Amos, Isaiah, and Micah), while others lived during the days of the Second Temple (Malachi), therefore the rebuilding of the Temple was hardly an issue for any of these prophets. Rather, their issue was God’s visitation at his Temple (see, e.g., Mal. 3:1–5). Thus, in Yeshua’s day many Jewish people were expecting the Messiah to come to the Temple (which had been standing for more than five hundred years) rather than rebuild it. (2) The rebuilding of the Temple was not the primary work of the Messiah. Rather, his role was first to make atonement for his people as a priestly King, offering forgiveness and redemption to Israel and the nations, and then, through his redeemed people, to extend his kingdom throughout the world until he would return to earth and establish a reign of universal peace. At that time, if at all, the issue of a rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem would be a factor. Thus, if part of the Messiah’s mission was to rebuild the Temple, it would be the tail end of his mission rather than the beginning (or even central) part of it.

As for the lengthy Temple prophecies of Ezekiel, studied in vol. 2, 3.17, it is important to observe that the prophet does not give any hint whatsoever that the Messiah will build this Temple, simply mentioning that “the prince” will worship there (see Ezekiel 44–46). In fact, Ezekiel doesn’t say that anyone will build it. Rather, he is shown in a vision the fully built, glorious Temple of the Lord.

Where then are the alleged prophecies that the Messiah will build the Temple? They are found in only one book of the Hebrew Scriptures, and the passages in question are by no means a clear declaration that the Messiah will one day build a literal Third Temple in Jerusalem. In fact, Rashi believes there is nothing Messianic about the verses in question and that the prophecies refer exclusively to events that took place more than twenty-five hundred years ago. Let’s look carefully at the relevant texts in the Book of Zechariah.

In the first half of Zechariah, there are two anointed leaders spoken of by the prophet—Joshua, the high priest, and Zerubbabel, the governor of Judah and a descendant of David (see Zech. 3:8; 4:1–14; 6:9–15). Both of these men serve as prototypes of “the Branch,” a well-known Messianic title (Zech. 3:8; 6:12; Jer. 23:5; 33:15; cf. also Isa. 11:1),336 and both of them were key players in the rebuilding of the Temple (the Second Temple) after the Babylonian exile (see the Books of Haggai and Ezra). But of Zerubbabel it is said, “The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this temple; his hands will also complete it. Then you will know that the Lord Almighty has sent me to you” (Zech. 4:9). This seems to be fairly straightforward in meaning, reiterating the major role that Zerubbabel would play in the Temple’s restoration.

The longer oracle, found in Zechariah 6:9–15, is more open to Messianic interpretation:

The word of the Lord came to me: “Take silver and gold from the exiles Heldai, Tobijah and Jedaiah, who have arrived from Babylon. Go the same day to the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah. Take the silver and gold and make a crown, and set it on the head of the high priest, Joshua son of Jehozadak. Tell him this is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘Here is the man whose name is the Branch, and he will branch out from his place and build the temple of the Lord. It is he who will build the temple of the Lord, and he will be clothed with majesty and will sit and rule on his throne. And he will be a priest on his throne. And there will be harmony between the two.’ The crown will be given to Heldai, Tobijah, Jedaiah and Hen son of Zephaniah as a memorial in the temple of the Lord. Those who are far away will come and help to build the temple of the Lord, and you will know that the Lord Almighty has sent me to you. This will happen if you diligently obey the Lord your God.”

This time, it is not Zerubbabel who is singled out but rather Joshua, seated as a royal priest, a prototype of “the man whose name is the Branch.” What a fitting picture this is of Yeshua, our King and our great High Priest! (See above, 4.1 and 4.29, and more fully, vol. 1, 2.1.) But what exactly does this prophecy mean? How and when will this man called the Branch build the Temple of the Lord, and who are those who will come from “far away” and help build the Temple? I believe there are three possible answers to these questions, none of which exclude Jesus in the least.

The first possibility is on a purely historical level: Both Joshua and Zerubbabel were involved with the building of the Second Temple, and so their historical actions serve as types and shadows of things to come. It is true that Rashi sees no prophetic significance to these passages, stating, “Some interpret this [namely, the reference to “the Branch” in 6:12] as referring to the King Messiah but the entire context deals with the [time of the] Second Temple.” And if that is the case, then that would mean that there is not a single prophecy in the Tanakh predicting that the Messiah would build a future Temple—thereby undermining this entire objection. Nonetheless, the Messianic imagery in the Hebrew Bible associated with the Branch is too clear to be denied, and it is also clear that Joshua and Zerubbabel serve as Messianic prototypes, the former as the (royal) high priest, the latter as the ruling son of David.337 In light of this, I do not believe that Zechariah is speaking only of events that would take place in his lifetime but that he is delivering Messianic prophecies here as well. This would indicate that the literal building of the Second Temple by Joshua and Zerubbabel, the two Messianic prototypes, foreshadows the building of another Temple by the Messiah. But what kind of Temple will he build?

The second possibility is that this passage in Zechariah 6 is foretelling the building of a spiritual Temple, a house of the Lord made up of people, not wood and stones. This is a rich spiritual image that is found frequently in the New Testament writings, and it is an interpretation that makes very good sense when you consider the context. You see, the building of the Second Temple was already well under way when Zechariah delivered his prophecy, and it was the building of that Temple that was in view.338 To think otherwise would be totally illogical, since there would be no way in the world that anyone hearing the prophecy would be thinking about building another Temple somewhere in the distant future. They were expending all their energies on building that Temple, the prophets were encouraging them to build that Temple (see Haggai 1–2; Ezra 5:1–2), and all their hopes and aspirations were caught up with that Temple.339 How strange it would be for a prophet to bring a word of encouragement that “the Branch” (meaning the Messiah) would build a future Temple when the present Temple was not even fully rebuilt, let alone rebuilt, destroyed, and left in ruins for millennia. Hardly! This would be similar to someone standing in Japan during the early stages of the rebuilding of Hiroshima after World War II and prophesying that the city would be restored—but actually meaning that after it was rebuilt in the mid-twentieth century, it would be destroyed again hundreds of years later, then lie in ruins for more than a thousand years, then one day be restored.

Looking back at Zechariah’s prophecy, then, it could be argued that the building of the physical Temple in Jerusalem by Joshua and Zerubbabel, both of whom were Messianic prototypes, foreshadows the building of a spiritual Temple by the Messiah himself. As we noted in vol. 2, 3.17, the new covenant Scriptures do not emphasize a holy building inhabited by God but rather a holy people inhabited by God. Here are two of the key references:

Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you? If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him; for God’s temple is sacred, and you are that temple.

1 Corinthians 3:16–17

As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him—you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus [the Messiah].

1 Peter 2:4–5

What is especially interesting about this “spiritual Temple” concept is that its origins are found in the Tanakh, where the Lord declared that he would dwell in the midst of his people, just as he had promised to dwell in the midst of the Tabernacle/Temple (see vol. 2, 3.1–3.2). And so, when Paul (whose Hebrew name was Saul) exhorted Gentile followers of the Messiah to live as holy temples of the Lord, he backed up his exhortation by weaving together several passages from the Hebrew Bible:

What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people” [see Lev. 26:12; Jer. 32:38; Ezek. 37:27]. “Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you [see Isa. 52:11; Ezek. 20:34, 41]. I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty” [see 2 Sam. 7:14; 7:8]. Since we have these promises, dear friends, let us purify ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting holiness out of reverence for God.

2 Corinthians 6:16–7:1

We should also point out that these quotes deepen the spiritual meaning of the verses cited within them. That is to say, the Lord promised his obedient people that his dwelling place would be in their midst (see, e.g., Lev. 26:12, referred to in the passage cited above), meaning that there would be a literal building, in a real geographical location in the land of Israel, in which God would manifest his glory. This also means that, due to its geographical location in one place in the land, few people would have regular access to this building, and therefore they would rarely, if ever, experience the reality of God’s presence in their midst. With the coming of the Messiah into the world, all of God’s people are indwelt by his Spirit—both individually and corporately—and now communion and fellowship with the Lord can be experienced directly and universally by one and all. This is in keeping with Ezekiel’s prophecy to his Jewish people scattered among the nations:

For I will take you out of the nations; I will gather you from all the countries and bring you back into your own land. I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols. I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. You will live in the land I gave your forefathers; you will be my people, and I will be your God.

Ezekiel 36:24–28

Is the picture becoming more clear? This spiritual Temple is being built every day, as more and more people—both Gentiles and Jews—turn to the God of Israel through Yeshua the Messiah. And this Temple will be complete when Ezekiel’s prophecy comes to pass and the Jewish people en masse are cleansed, renewed, and indwelt by the Spirit.

This spiritual concept also sheds light on the final verse of Zechariah 6, where it is stated, “Those who are far away will come and help to build the temple of the Lord” (v. 15a). In its immediate context, this could refer to men like Heldai, Tobijah and Jedaiah (all mentioned in Zechariah 6) who were exiles who had returned from Babylon. Such an interpretation is common.340 However, if Joshua and Zerubbabel serve as earthly prototypes of coming spiritual realities, could it be that the Jewish exiles returning to Jerusalem are prototypes of the Gentile nations—all of whom are, in a sense, spiritual exiles—turning to the Lord? And could it be that just as the exiles came from far away and helped build the physical Temple in Jerusalem, these converted Gentiles will come from far away (both geographically and spiritually) and help build the worldwide spiritual Temple?341

We know that the prophets declared that the Gentile nations would come streaming to Jerusalem in the Messianic age to learn the ways of the Lord (see esp. Isa. 2:1–5; Mic. 4:1–3; cf. also Isa. 19:18–25), and we also know that Malachi prophesied that the Lord’s name would be revered among the nations. As it is written in Malachi 1:11, “ ‘My name will be great among the nations, from the rising to the setting of the sun. In every place incense and pure offerings will be brought to my name, because my name will be great among the nations,’ says the Lord Almighty.” But what is meant by the promise that “in every place incense and pure offerings will be brought to my name”? Will this be literally fulfilled, with offerings and incense being brought to the Lord from every location on the globe, or will the worshipers from every nation offer praise and prayer and adoration and service to the Lord, part of their spiritual ministry to God, part of their building a Temple fit for his dwelling?

Paul seems to give credence to the latter view, reminding Gentile followers of the Messiah that at one time they were “separate from [Messiah], excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in [Messiah] Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of [Messiah]” (Eph. 2:12–13). He then explains that Jesus “came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit” (Eph. 2:17–18). And this leads to his final statement:

Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.

Ephesians 2:19–22

So then, those who were “far away” did come and help build the Temple of the Lord, with the Branch himself being the cornerstone and chief architect, thus fulfilling the prophecy of Zechariah (cf. also Isa. 57:15–19). Certainly, this interpretation deserves consideration and is a fitting complement to the earthly Temple imagery found in that prophetic book. It also makes sense when you realize that when the Messiah came into the world almost two thousand years ago, the Second Temple was still standing, having been elaborately beautified by Herod. The building of that Temple was obviously not in question. In fact, one of Yeshua’s most unpopular pronouncements was that that glorious, imposing Temple would be totally destroyed! Yet, in the providence of God, before the earthly Temple in Jerusalem was demolished, a worldwide spiritual Temple consisting of redeemed Jews and Gentiles was being built.

Having said all this, there is still the third possibility that our Messiah will rebuild a physical Temple in Jerusalem when he returns to earth to destroy the wicked and establish his Father’s kingdom. As I stated previously, this view is held to by some Christians, who see this as the culmination of God’s promises to the house of Israel. If that is the case, then we can be sure that when Yeshua sets his feet on the Mount of Olives (see Zech. 14:1–5) and brings cleansing to the land (see Zech. 12:10–13:1), he will soon order the building of the final Temple (or else, in keeping with some traditional Jewish thought, that Temple will descend to earth).

Certainly, this is a subject for speculation. But one thing is sure: If there is to be a final glorious Temple to be built by the Messiah himself, we know who that Messiah will be!

What then do we make of the description of the Messiah outlined by Maimonides? There is no doubt but that he missed the mark, painting a picture of the Messiah that (1) would be in agreement with Rabbinic Judaism and (2) would rule out Yeshua as a candidate. And so after stating that all the prophetic books make mention of “this matter” (meaning the matter of the Messiah),342 he immediately downplays the miracles of the Messiah—despite the fact that the prophets explicitly associated miraculous acts with the Messianic age (see, e.g., Isa. 35:5–7)—by stating, “One should not presume that the Messianic King must work miracles and wonders, bring about new creations within the world, resurrect the dead, or perform other similar deeds. This is definitely not true.”343 As explained in the commentary of Rabbi Eliyahu Touger, “The identity of the Messiah will not be determined by miracles and wonders, but rather, as explained in the following Halachah [legal statement], by his ability to lead the Jewish people to a more complete observance of Torah and Miztvot”344—meaning both the written and the oral law, as cited at the beginning of this objection. Maimonides even goes so far as to say that David himself observed both the written and the oral law, whereas the truth is that no one ever heard of such a thing as an authoritative “oral law” until more than one thousand years after the time of David.345

Yet there is more. Not only did Maimonides fashion the Messiah after the image of a great rabbi or Torah sage;346 he also made it clear that anyone claiming to be the Messiah who died could not be the Messiah. Thus, speaking of the false messiah Bar Kochba (who died in the war against Rome in 135 C.E.), he writes that Rabbi Akiva “and all the Sages of his generation considered him to be the Messianic King until he was killed because of sins. Once he was killed, they realized that he was not [the Messiah]. The Sages did not ask him for signs or wonders.”347 This, then, would clearly exclude Jesus, who did work signs and wonders and who did die. The only problem with this exclusion is that Jesus performed signs and wonders in keeping with the prophetic promises and in fulfillment of his liberating Messianic role.348 And he not only died, he rose from the dead—also in keeping with the prophetic Scriptures (see above, 4.13–4.14 and 4.23–4.24). Unfortunately, Maimonides failed to see the priestly role of the Messiah, of making atonement for the sins of Israel and the world, and the prophetic role of the Messiah, of bringing a message from heaven in the power of the Spirit.349 It is also unfortunate to realize that for more than eight hundred years, most observant Jews have been more familiar with the Maimonidean description of the Messiah than with the biblical description, actually believing that his description is the biblical one. It behooves us to set the record straight.

[1]

 

332 It is also correct to render this, “we may presume that he is the Messiah.”

333 As rendered in Touger, Laws of Kings and Their Wars, 232, rendering Laws of Kings 11:4.

334 Ibid., 233.

335 Bear in mind that when Isaiah 2:1–4 was written, the Temple in Jerusalem was standing; thus, this prophecy cannot be pointed to as evidence that the Messiah would build a future Temple to the Lord. (In fact, the Messiah is not even mentioned in this passage.) What is prophesied is the extraordinary exaltation of the house of the Lord.

336 Note, however, that Rashi applies this title to Zerubbabel in Zechariah, finding no Messianic significance to it.

337 In Haggai 2:20–23, God speaks of Zerubbabel in almost Messianic terms for at least two reasons: First, it reaffirms the universal, royal promise to the Davidic line, despite the lack of a Davidic king at that time; second, it clearly reverses the curse that was spoken over Jehoiachin (also called Jeconiah or Coniah), son of Josiah, in Jeremiah 22:18–30. The curse in question is found in 22:30. For the restoring of favor to Jehoiachin’s line—Zerubbabel was his grandson—cf. esp. Hag. 2:23 with Jer. 22:24; see also Jer. 52:31–34. It was recognized by both the Talmud and Rabbinic commentaries (cf. Radak) that the curse on Jehoiachin’s line was, in fact, reversed; for further discussion of this in the context of Messianic polemics, cf. 5.12. For Zerubbabel as a Messianic figure in later Jewish literature (esp. in the medieval Sefer Zerubbabel), cf. Patai, Messiah Texts, 37–38, 110–11, 125–28, 251–52, 254.

338 Cf. Ralph L. Smith, Micah-Malachi, Word Biblical Commentary (Waco: Word, 1984), 218–19.

339 See vol. 2, 3.13, for information about the importance attached to the building of the Second Temple.

340 See the standard contemporary commentaries for details.

341 As noted by Old Testament commentator Joyce G. Baldwin (cited in Smith, Micah-Malachi, 219), “The building of Zerubbabel’s Temple can hardly have been meant because it was already well on the way to completion, and those ‘far off’ are not necessarily confined to Jews of the dispersion (cf. 2:11; 8:22). The ‘Book of Visions’ [of which Zechariah 6 is a part] looked farther afield than the rebuilding in Jerusalem, and embraced all nations. Like many other prophetic passages it was concerned with the focal point of all history, the coming of the Davidic king, who would transform the concepts of Temple and of leadership.”

342 Cf. also b. Sanhedrin 99a, “All the prophets, all of them, did not prophesy except of the days of the Messiah,” quoted in the epigraph of this book along with Acts 3:24, “Indeed, all the prophets from Samuel on, as many as have spoken, have foretold these days.”

343 Touger, Laws of Kings and Their Wars, 230, rendering Laws of Kings 11:3.

344 Ibid.

345 It is not surprising that traditional Jews believe that the Patriarchs, Moses, the prophets, and the kings and leaders of Judah observed the precepts of the oral Torah, since it is common for religious people to project their own beliefs back on their spiritual forefathers. Thus, Christians often see references to the cross in Old Testament passages where such a concept would have been completely unknown. All of these anachronistic retrojections, however, should be rejected. As to the Messiah’s calling to lead all peoples, both Jew and Gentile, into the knowledge of God and observance of his laws (Hebrew, torah), see Isa. 42:1–4; Jer. 31:31–34.

346 For the Rabbinic recreation of the Messiah as a great Torah sage, cf. Jacob Neusner, Messiah in Context: Israel’s History and Destiny in Formative Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984).

347 Touger, Laws of Kings and Their Wars, 230, rendering Laws of Kings 11:3. For debate and discussion concerning the Rambam’s view here, cf. ibid., 231–32.

348 Cf. Brown, Israel’s Divine Healer, 215–222.

349 Interestingly, Touger, Laws of Kings and Their Wars, 233, notes that elsewhere in his Law Code (Hilchot Teshuvah 9:2), Maimonides “relates that the Messiah will possess prophetic powers that approach those of Moses. However, in the present context, the Rambam does not mention these abilities because he desires to emphasize the Messiah’s achievements as a Torah leader and not his greatness as an individual.” Again, this is quite telling. Cf. further the standard commentaries on Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah for discussion of this section of his Law Code.

[1]Brown, M. L. (2003). Answering Jewish objections to Jesus, Volume 3: Messianic prophecy objections (170). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

Jesus cannot be the Messiah because the Messiah was to be a reigning king, whereas Jesus was despised, rejected, and crucified.

Jesus cannot be the Messiah because the Messiah was to be a reigning king, whereas Jesus was despised, rejected, and crucified.

The prophetic Scriptures indicate that first the Messiah would suffer and then he would reign. This is exactly what happened: Jesus-Yeshua—who is one of us and has identified himself totally with us—joined us in our suffering, rejection, and pain. We have suffered torture and death; he too was tortured and killed. We have been mocked, maligned, and misunderstood; to this day, he is the butt of ugly jokes and a common curse on people’s lips. (When people get angry, they don’t yell, “Moses!” or “Buddha!” or “Muhammad!” but “Jesus Christ!”) But whereas we have often suffered because we were guilty, he suffered because he was innocent—and he did it for us. Therefore, Jesus was and is the perfect Messiah for us, the ideal Savior for a despised and rejected people.

We have addressed this objection elsewhere (see vol. 1, 2.1 and vol. 2, 3.23), demonstrating that the Hebrew Bible pointed to a suffering-then-reigning Messiah, while many Jewish traditions also spoke of a suffering Messiah. Recently, some prominent biblical and Semitic scholars, Israel Knohl of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and Michael Wise of the University of Chicago’s Oriental Institute, have argued that even before the time of Jesus, there was a Jewish belief in a suffering Messiah, something which scholars have debated for many decades.331 In all probability, the proposals of Wise and Knohl will stir further scholarly debate and dialogue in the decades to come, and without a doubt, their proposals will be considered correct by some and unsupportable by others.

What is much more clear is the testimony of Scripture, including the following biblical testimony:

  • According to Isaiah 52:13–15, a passage widely recognized as a Messianic prophecy in traditional Jewish circles (see above, 4.6–4.8), the servant of the Lord would suffer terrible humiliation before being highly exalted and raised up. The following chapter in its entirety (53:1–12) spells this out in detail.
  • According to Zechariah 9:9–10, the king whose reign will extend over the entire earth will come meek and lowly, riding on a donkey. (According to Rashi and b. Sanhedrin 98a, this is King Messiah.)
  • According to Zechariah 12:10, cited once as a Messianic prophecy in the Talmud, the Messiah will be pierced and killed. Zechariah 13:7 also prophesies that the shepherd—a highly significant figure—will be smitten, causing the sheep to be scattered (see above, 4.31).
  • According to Psalm 118:22 (a psalm with strong Messianic implications), the stone rejected by the builders will become the capstone. This is in keeping with the biblical pattern in which the Lord himself was a stone of stumbling to his people. See Isaiah 8:12–15, where it is declared that the Lord “will be a sanctuary; but for both houses of Israel he will be a stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall. And for the people of Jerusalem he will be a trap and a snare. Many of them will stumble; they will fall and be broken, they will be snared and captured” (Isa. 8:14–15). Note also Isaiah 28:16–19, where the Lord says, “See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation; the one who trusts will never be dismayed” (v. 16)—yet for the ungodly in Jerusalem, that stone would mean judgment (vv. 17–19). Thus, we see that just as God himself was both the rock of salvation and the rock of offense for his people, being rejected by the majority during biblical times, the same pattern holds true for the Messiah.

I pointed out when addressing the question of the Holocaust (vol. 1, 2.10), that Yeshua is the Messiah we need, our ideal representative. Would we rather have someone who was only a lofty king who exercised total authority, a royal figure who could not possibly relate to the sting of public rejection and ridicule, who had never tasted the humiliation of being stripped and beaten by taunting soldiers and had never been challenged, never misunderstood, never slandered, never repaid with evil for doing good? Is that the kind of Messiah we want? Or do we want a Messiah who suffers and then reigns, who dies and then lives again, who gives himself for us long before we give ourselves for him? The choice should be obvious.

In this light, the New Testament Letter to the Hebrews explains as follows:

Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity.… For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.

Hebrews 2:14, 16–18

Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin. Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.

Hebrews 4:14–16

Messiah our King is also Messiah our High Priest—just as the Scriptures foretold. It could not be any other way.

And look at the worldwide reign of Jesus the King over the lives of countless tens of millions from every nation under the sun. They give him their total allegiance and loyalty. His reign is far, far greater and more influential than the reign of any Davidic king—including David himself—and this is only the beginning.

[1]

 

331 Michael O. Wise, The First Messiah: Investigating the Savior Before Jesus (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1999); Israel Knohl, The Messiah Before Jesus: The Suffering Servant of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Berkley: Univ. of California Press, 2000); for a summary of research through the mid-1980s, see Emil Schürer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135), rev. ed., ed. Geza Vermes, Fergus Millar, and Matthew Black (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1973–87), 2:547–49.

[1]Brown, M. L. (2003). Answering Jewish objections to Jesus, Volume 3: Messianic prophecy objections (167). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

Isaiah 53 cannot refer to Jesus because it says the servant of the Lord would see seed

Isaiah 53 cannot refer to Jesus because it says the servant of the Lord would see seed, an expression always meaning physical descendants when used in the Hebrew Bible.

Actually, the passage you refer to is the only occurrence of the Hebrew expression “see seed” in the Tanakh, so it is not wise to be so dogmatic about the meaning of the expression, especially since “seed” is sometimes used metaphorically in the Scriptures and since it can sometimes refer simply to a future generation. This much is certain: Through his continued life after his resurrection, we can honestly and fairly say that Jesus the Messiah fulfills the description of “seeing seed.”

It was while debating Rabbi Professor J. Immanuel Schochet on March 30, 1995, that I first heard the argument that the Hebrew expression “see seed” (yireh zeraʿ) always referred to literal offspring in the Hebrew Bible. With all due respect to Rabbi Schochet’s scholarship, I must confess I was surprised to hear this, since this idiom is found only one time in the Tanakh, namely, in Isaiah 53. How then can it be argued that this expression always refers to literal offspring in the Tanakh when it occurs only once? Of course, one could simply argue that the Hebrew word zeraʿ always refers to literal seed (= physical offspring), never to metaphorical seed (such as disciples or spiritual offspring), and therefore the verse would mean that the servant of the Lord had children. If this were true, it would rule out Jesus as a candidate. This argument, however, is not compelling for a number of reasons.

First, zeraʿ, “seed,” is sometimes used metaphorically in the Hebrew Scriptures, including the Book of Isaiah. Thus, Isaiah called Israel “a seed of evildoers,” “a seed of an adulterer,” and “a seed of falsehood” (Isa. 1:4; 14:20; 57:3–4). While some of these phrases could be intended in a literal sense (that is, the Israelites were literally children of evil, adulterous, lying people), more likely they are intended metaphorically (that is, they were wicked, adulterous, dishonest people to the very core of their beings). According to the standard Hebrew lexicon of Brown, Driver, and Briggs, in cases such as these, seed means “as marked by moral quality = persons (or community) of such a quality,”158 thus, “a seed of evildoers” would really mean “a community of evildoers” or “evildoers to the core.” In the context of Isaiah 53:10, this would mean that the servant of the Lord would see godly, spiritual posterity, true disciples transformed by means of his labors on their behalf. As Isaiah 53:10 explains, this is tied in with his “prolong[ing] his days,” referring to his resurrection (see above, 4.13).

Second, zeraʿ is sometimes used with reference to “a future generation” without referring to the specific descendants of one individual in particular. Thus, Psalm 22 declares that as a result of the mighty deliverance experienced by the righteous sufferer (see below, 4.24), “posterity [zeraʿ] will serve him; future generations will be told about the Lord. They will proclaim his righteousness to a people yet unborn—for he has done it” (Ps. 22:30-31[31-32]).159 As rendered in the NJPSV: “Offspring shall serve Him; the Lord’s fame shall be proclaimed to the generation to come; they shall tell of His beneficence to people yet to be born, for He has acted.” In the context of Isaiah 53:10, this would mean that the servant of the Lord would see future generations of his people serving the Lord. Cannot this be rightly applied to the hundreds of thousands of Jews who have followed Yeshua, the servant of the Lord, through the centuries? Certainly, this would be true to the context, especially since the text does not say that he would literally father a seed (= offspring), but rather that he would see offspring.

Third, the weakness of this argument is seen when we realize that no less a traditional Jewish authority than Saʿadiah Gaon applied Isaiah 53 to Jeremiah the prophet, yet God commanded Jeremiah never to marry or have children (Jer. 16:1; see above, 4.6). More recently, Isaiah 53 was applied to the late Lubavitcher Rebbe, yet he and his wife were unable to have children. How then could this be applied to either of these two candidates? Obviously, the text does not explicitly state that the servant of the Lord had to bear children of his own, hence the passage could be applied to these other Jewish leaders, albeit incorrectly. (In other words, many of the other specifics of the text cannot possibly apply to either Jeremiah or the Rebbe, while they apply perfectly to Yeshua.) We can see, then, that this argument has very little, if any, force.

Having concluded our discussion of Isaiah 53, let me once again encourage you to read the entire passage for yourself (beginning in Isaiah 52:13) while asking yourself honestly before the Lord, Of whom does the prophet speak? I trust you will see an amazing prophetic portrait of our Messiah, the righteous Lamb of God, who died that we could live. In fact, the description is so clear that you will understand why the charge has been raised that this section of the Bible was removed from the weekly Scripture portions read in the synagogue. It sounds too much like Yeshua! But is this charge really true?

Oxford professor Geza Vermes has argued that the Ten Commandments were once read every week in the synagogues and then were removed because of Hellenizing Jews who claimed that God gave Israel only the Ten Commandments.160 If true, this would mean there might have been polemical factors that dictated which portions of the Bible would be read aloud in the synagogue—at least in some extreme cases. Similarly, it has been argued that Isaiah 52:13–53:12 was also removed from its place because Christians often pointed to the text as a clear prophecy of Jesus, and it sounded too much like him to be read in the synagogues. More specifically, we see that Isaiah 51:12–52:12 (the section immediately preceding Isaiah 52:13–53:12) was read in conjunction with Deuteronomy 15:18–21:9 (called Parashat Shoftim) from the Torah, while Isaiah 54:1–10 (the section immediately following Isaiah 52:13–53:12) was read in conjunction with the next Torah passage, Deuteronomy 21:10–25:19 (called Parashat Ki Tetzei). What happened to Isaiah 53?

It is possible the text was simply skipped because it did not fit properly with the Torah portion in question, since the reading from the Prophets coincided in some way with the reading from the Torah. In keeping with this, the Jewish scholar Raphael Loewe has pointed to ancient synagogal traditions from Palestine that seem to indicate that Isaiah 53 was never read as part of the weekly portion. On the other hand, Loewe pointed to equally ancient synagogal traditions from Egypt that seem to indicate the opposite, namely, that Isaiah 53 was originally read one week out of every year, but it was subsequently removed, apparently for polemical reasons.161 How interesting! Of course, we may never know which tradition is accurate (or if both traditions are accurate, reflecting different customs in different parts of the world). Yet we do know this: Isaiah 53 has not been read aloud in the synagogues for many centuries, but there is nothing stopping you from carefully and prayerfully reading the text for yourself. I urge you to follow the truth wherever it may lead.

Having examined all the major objections that have been raised against the Messianic Jewish/Christian interpretation of Isaiah 53, it is clear that none of them have any substance. It is equally clear that the passage describes Jesus the Messiah with striking accuracy. What do you say?

[1]

 

 

158 Francis Brown, S. Driver, and C. Briggs, The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (repr., New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1959), 283.

159 The KJV renders Psalm 22:30a[31a] as, “A seed shall serve him,” bringing out clearly the Hebrew usage and indicating that it does not refer to specific offspring, but posterity in general.

160 Geza Vermes, “The Decalogue and the Minim,” in his Post-Biblical Jewish Studies, Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity, vol. 8 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975), 169–77.

161 Loewe, prolegomenon to Driver and Neubauer, Fifty-Third Chapter of Isaiah, 20–22.

[1]Brown, M. L. (2003). Answering Jewish objections to Jesus, Volume 3: Messianic prophecy objections (83). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

Isaiah 53 cannot refer to Jesus because it says the servant of the Lord would not lift up his voice or cry out, yet Jesus cried out several times on the cross, once in near blasphemy (Psalm 22:1).

Isaiah 53 cannot refer to Jesus because it says the servant of the Lord would not lift up his voice or cry out, yet Jesus cried out several times on the cross, once in near blasphemy (Psalm 22:1).

One of the most striking aspects of the suffering and death of Jesus was that he went as a lamb to the slaughter, not resisting those who arrested him, not defending himself before his accusers, and even forgiving those who crucified him. In this, he has become the worldwide symbol of a man who truly “turned the other cheek.” As for his quoting Psalm 22:1 on the cross—a beloved passage of Scripture—how is this “near blasphemy”?

Isaiah 53:7 says of the servant of the Lord: “He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.” This quite accurately describes the actions and attitudes of Yeshua the Messiah when he “was oppressed and afflicted.” In fact, his followers pointed to this very text to indicate that he, quite clearly, was the one of whom the prophet Isaiah spoke (see Acts 8:26–39). That’s why Peter, an eyewitness of the Messiah’s suffering and death, could write of him, “When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly” (1 Peter 2:23).

Let’s look for a moment at the specific details of Jesus’ arrest, trials, beatings, mockings, flogging, and crucifixion:

•     When Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane, he did not allow his disciples to fight on his behalf, saying to Peter, “Put your sword back in its place, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword” (see Matt. 26:52). Thus, he went as a lamb to the slaughter.

•     When all kinds of false charges were brought against him at his bogus trial before the high priest, the Scriptures record, “The high priest stood up and said to Jesus, ‘Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?’ But Jesus remained silent” (Matt. 26:62–63a). Here is a man being falsely accused, with the death penalty hanging over his head, and he refuses to defend himself! It is only when the high priest orders him to state whether he is the Messiah, the Son of God, that he says, “Yes, it is as you say.… But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matt. 26:64, pointing his accusers to the prophetic picture of the Son of man in Daniel 7:13–14). When some of those at the trial then began to spit on him and punch him, he did not say a word (Matt. 26:67). His trial before Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, was conducted along similar lines:

Early in the morning, all the chief priests and the elders of the people came to the decision to put Jesus to death. They bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate, the governor.

Matthew 27:1–2

Meanwhile Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, “Are you the king of the Jews?”

“Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied.

When he was accused by the chief priests and the elders, he gave no answer. Then Pilate asked him, “Don’t you hear the testimony they are bringing against you?” But Jesus made no reply, not even to a single charge—to the great amazement of the governor.

Matthew 27:11–14

Once again, we see Yeshua going as a lamb to the slaughter—without resistance of any kind—and his refusal to defend himself amazes the governor.156

•     After Pilate sentenced him to be crucified, Jesus was flogged and then abused by the Roman soldiers. The Gospels record the picture quite graphically. But note carefully: At no point does Jesus resist; at no point does he respond to his captors; at no point does he raise his voice and revile those attacking him. He suffers silently like a lamb.

Then the governor’s soldiers took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole company of soldiers around him. They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him, and then twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on his head. They put a staff in his right hand and knelt in front of him and mocked him. “Hail, king of the Jews!” they said. They spit on him, and took the staff and struck him on the head again and again. After they had mocked him, they took off the robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him away to crucify him.

Matthew 27:28–31

•     Comparing the verses just cited with some of the other related accounts penned by Yeshua’s followers, we see that in each stage of his suffering, it is stated that he was led away, just as a lamb being led to slaughter: First, he was seized and led away to his trial at the home of the high priest (Luke 22:54); second, he was bound and led away to his trial before Pilate (Matt. 27:2; Mark 15:1); third, he was led away to be crucified after being flogged and abused (Matt. 27:31; Luke 23:26). This is exactly what Isaiah prophesied: “He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth” (Isa. 53:7).

And what does our blessed Messiah say when he is being crucified? He prays that his Father would forgive those nailing him to the cross! (See Luke 23:34.) And when the soldiers and religious leaders mock him as he hangs there naked and humiliated, challenging him to demonstrate that he is the Messiah, the Son of God, he says nothing in defense. He doesn’t utter a word! Nor does he reply to the two criminals crucified on either side of him, both of whom initially mock him as well (see Matt. 27:38, 44). It is only when one of these men comes to his senses and recognizes that there is something different about Jesus, that he is in fact God’s chosen one, that Jesus says, “I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43). So, he only speaks to show mercy, not to retaliate. This goes beyond the noncombative qualities of a lamb!

His only other utterances on the cross are (1) his recitation of Psalm 22:1, pointing those listening to the words of the righteous sufferer who would be delivered from death by God (Matt. 27:46; see also below, 4.24); (2) his committing his mother’s care into the hands of his disciple John (John 19:26–27); (3) the words, “I am thirsty” (John 19:28);157 and (4) his last words, namely, “It is finished” and “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit” (John 19:30; Luke 23:46; see also Matt. 27:50). None of these utterances, in spirit or in letter, violate the words of Isaiah 53. Rather, like a lamb, he did not resist his oppressors nor did he seek to defend himself. Like a sheep silent before his shearers, he did not raise his voice when mocked, ridiculed, beaten, flogged, and crucified. And when he did speak, it was to commune with his Father, to pronounce mercy and forgiveness for the guilty, and to commit his mother to the care of one of his trusted followers. Truly, this was the Lamb of God! (See John 1:29.)

[1]

 

156 The account of Jesus’ trial before Pilate is most fully related in John 18:28–40, and at no time in that account does Jesus seek to defend himself, protest, or resist the sentence of death. Rather, he accepts it as his destiny.

157 As explained in John 19:28a, Jesus uttered these words “… knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled,” with apparent reference to verses such as Psalm 22:15[16], “My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth; you lay me in the dust of death.”

[1]Brown, M. L. (2003). Answering Jewish objections to Jesus, Volume 3: Messianic prophecy objections (80). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

Exit mobile version