Can we discuss Judaism without the politics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rabbi
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It would be a shamed if the moderators would disavow new members from joining.
 
They did it a few years ago, back when I was trying to join. It’s unfortunate, but necessary when things get out of control.
 
I think some Christian apologists would say why can’t Isaiah’s prophecies refer to both the historical present (or past) as well as the future. Somewhat similar to Jewish apologists in that there may be layers of meaning, that is, the plain meaning and other, more profound variations.
 
True, then again, why would Isaiah be in need of that, and could one say it also points to Buddha or Joseph Smith? Where’s the line? And why didn’t Isaiah say it was future explicitly?
 
Isaiah was a mystic and visionary, was he not, as were most of the prophets? Such men are not noted for always speaking clearly.
 
That’s all fine, but don’t you have anything better than that? I mean, like real proof no one can deny? I could easily say he was speaking about Buddha too by that logic. I don’t mean any offense by this, I’m just wondering if there’s more veracity to what you’re saying here.
 
I don’t know, proof that Isaiah was talking about Jesus no one can deny. My mission here anyway wasn’t to debate such matters, but I’m just wondering why Christians believe it was Jesus, it might enlighten me, really, to understand.
 
Just an observation on my part. I think Isaiah, in particular, is hard to pin down and thus Jewish and Christian apologists both claim him as a defender of their beliefs. Eastern religions and philosophies, such as Buddhism, have their own mystics and prophets, I presume, to contend with and attempt to decipher. They don’t need or want ours.
 
The name Emmanuel and Jesus’s claims to divinity also provide an indication.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
I think some Christian apologists would say why can’t Isaiah’s prophecies refer to both the historical present (or past) as well as the future. Somewhat similar to Jewish apologists in that there may be layers of meaning, that is, the plain meaning and other, more profound variations.
Click to expand...
If I can butt in here (and hopefully we can ignore the troll who’s impersonating a moderator), my thought would be that Isaiah (or any prophet, for that matter) wouldn’t have to know all the possible “layers” of the message they’re sending. The prophet’s role isn’t necessarily to understand the message, but to deliver it (and then its meaning for the immediate recipient is either apparently known or becomes known as its events unfold).
 
It’s what the name means and how it relates to what Christians believe about Jesus. He isn’t called by that name anywhere in the New Testament.
 
Last edited:
Oh, their posts are gone now, awesome. Hopefully the real moderator has finally stood up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top