Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] OT: a link about Modern Hebrew

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] OT: a link about Modern Hebrew
  • Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 12:30:05 -0500

Dear Vadim,

There is not much left regarding the messiah aside from Isaiah: a doubt
reference or two, depending how you read it, in Psalms (I'm sure you know
that other references are mistranslations), Micha, Zahariah, perhaps. These
opuses weren't taken seriously by Jews before the Pharisees, and even long
after they invented a new meaning. Sure you cannot base a religion on this
more than on Beowulf (not sure about the spelling, sorry).

HH: Once you add Micah and Zechariah, you have added something significant. The Jews themselves find other Messianic texts. How do you know texts like Micah and Zechariah weren't taken seriously before the Pharisees? They are God's word. And what is this "new meaning"? The Jewish Messianic hope is ancient. I believe it is also found in intertestamental literature like Enoch. There are also messianic texts in Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Daniel, Haggai, Psalms, and Malachi. There may be references in Job and Proverbs. We should not forget the original setting for the Davidic promises in 2 Samuel, matched by Chronicles, as well as earlier texts in Genesis and Numbers that have messianic implications.

>But I believe the Servant is the Messiah, even though the word "anointed"
is not used of the Servant by Isaiah.<

But on what basis, then?

HH: Isaiah has a lot of Messianic texts in the first part of his book, and the Davidic promise is not forgotten in the last half of the book, since 55:3-5 clearly suggests that Israel's glory will involve a Davidic king. Liz actually thinks that 55:5 addresses the king in another of the short, unmarked Servant passages. The second half of Isaiah speaks of a glory for Israel that the return from Babylon never brought. Thus it is future. The Servant is clearly associated with that glory (e.g., 42:1-7; 49:6-7; 52:13-15). There is a switching back and forth between Cyrus and the Servant that suggests a comparison between the two. Israel's time of glory is associated with a return of exile (49:8-13; 60:1-9). So it is proper to think that Cyrus, who allowed the Jews to return from exile in 536 B.C to rebuild Jerusalem and the temple, is a picture of this future Servant who will be instrumental in returning Israel from yet another exile in the distant future.

HH: The messianic texts in the first part of Isaiah (e.g., chapters 9 and 11) have never been fulfilled in history and are also eschatological. There is considerable sharing of imagery from these early messianic passages with the later part of the book. Compare 11:1-5 with 42:1-3 and 61:1-3; 11:6-9 with 65:25; and 11:10-16 with 40:9-11, 43:5-7, and 49:9-26 (the comparison in 11:10-16 is in the idea of a Second Exodus). The language of Isaiah 11 does not point to an historical Davidic king. Rather it matches the setting of the Servant in Isaiah 40--66 (again, see 11:2-5 with 42:11-4). The Davidic king has the same esteem among the nations as the Servant (cf. Isa 11:4, 10 with 49:6). So it is not farfetched to conclude that the Servant in Isaiah 40-66 corresponds to the eschatological Davidic king described in Isaiah 1-39.

HH: The New Testament, interpreting the Jesus as the Servant, also describes Him as the "root of Jesse" (Isa 11:10; Rom 15:12; cf. Rev 22:16). So the early church identified the Servant with the Davidic Messiah.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page