Messiah ben Joseph versus Messiah ben David

[Ben_Masada]

The whole chapter 53 of Isaiah is about the dramatic epic of two Messiahs: Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David. The drama that culminated in the “death” of Messiah ben Joseph for the sins of Messiah ben David. Properly speaking, Messiah ben Joseph is Ephraim or Israel, the Ten Tribes of the Northern Kingdom. And Messiah ben David is Judah, the Southern Kingdom.

The sins of Judah had filled the Divine cup, and in God’s judgment, the day had arrived for the removal of Judah. (Isa. 9:8) But according to I Kings 11:36, God had promised David that Judah, whose Tribe he had come from, would stay forever as a Lamp in Jerusalem. Therefore, according to Isaiah 9:8, the final judgment that was supposed to come to Judah fell upon Israel instead, and Messiah ben Joseph had to go instead of Judah. In other words, Israel had to redeem Judah.

But Isaiah says in 53:9 that the Suffering Servant was without guile, and sinless. That’s exactly what Israel was: Pure of the sins he died for, since they were the sins of Judah and not his. Messiah ben Joseph therefore, did not die for his sins but for the sins of Messiah ben David. Therefore, Israel was removed because of the sins of another. He was pierced so to speak, by the sins of Judah. The sacrifice of Israel or Messiah ben Joseph meant the salvation of Judah or Messiah ben David. That’s why Zechariah in 12:10 says that they (Judah) shall look upon him (Israel) whom they (Judah) had pierced with their sins, and mourn for him (Israel) as the one who mourns for his firstborn.

Now, let me explain by way of an analogy how Israel or Messiah ben Joseph who is the Suffering Servant died innocently of the sins of Judah or Messiah ben David: “A” and “B”. “A” has committed a crime punishable with death, and “B”, by mistake was condemned for that crime. It doesn’t matter how evil is “B” in his life or how bad are his sins. The point is that he was condemned to die for the crime of “A”. Therefore “B” was killed innocent and pure of the crimes and sins of “A”. “A” got saved by the death of “B”. So, “B” was the Suffering Servant that brought salvation to “A”. Now matching the analogy to reality, “A” was Judah that pierced “B” with his crimes and sins.

Now, with the removal of Messiah ben Joseph, Messiah be David occupied the place of the Suffering Servant with reference to the rest of Mankind because of God’s promise to Noah that humanity would never be destroyed again in an universal manner. (Gen. 8:21) The People-redeemer was the pledge and on his way in the near future with the choice of Abraham through Isaac. That’s what sustains the world and allows it to keep going.

Ben

 

[Lev23]

I tried to keep an open mind, but…

Your view is not as solid as the Chrisitian belief that the suffering servant is the God’s only Son, Jesus Christ. The final atonement has been made for all our sins. Thr prophesied messiah is Jesus, and the scriptures on the whole speak of Him, whereas your interpretation seems to be engineered to deny Jesus personally. Which in turn keeps Jews listening to Rabbi this, and Rabbi that for the rest of their lives, instead of searching the scriptures to see what God has done for them by His only Son, Jesus Christ.

In Jeremiah 31:31-34, when the New Covenant is announced to the House of Israel and Judah, God states that the covenant will not be like the one that was made when God lead them out of Egypt, and also God will remember their sins no more. How can he remember their sins no more? He gave his one and only Son to be sacrificed(prefigured by Abraham’s son Isaac’s sacrifice) for the final atonement of sins.

Step out of the old covenant, where everyone has broken it, and step into the New Covenant, where it cannot be broken. Where the God of Israel will write the Law on your heart, just believe on his only Son Jesus Christ, who came as the Lamb of God, and will come again as the Lion of the tribe of Judah!

Psalm 2:12
Kiss the Son, lest he be angry
and you be destroyed in your way,
for his wrath can flare up in a moment.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

 

[Ben_Masada]

I tried to keep an open mind, but…

Your view is not as solid as the Chrisitian belief that the suffering servant is the God’s only Son, Jesus Christ.

 

[ralphinal]

Please fill me in on how Isaiah 7:14 fits into this.

And Chapter 9 verse 5

 

[Ben_Masada]

Please fill me in on how. Isaiah 7:14 fits into this.

And Chapter 9 verse 5

I’ll take that Ralphinal. Let’s start with Isaiah 7:14.
"The virgin shall be with child and bear a son and shall name him Immanuel. If you read Amos 5:2, you will see that the virgin is Israel. And the son that she gave birth is Judah. And as Israel gave birth to Judah, she died at childbirth. How? If you read Psalm 78:67,68. The death of Israel is symbolized by the Divine rejection of Israel for good, when Assyria removed the Ten Tribes from the map of the Land of Israel. And the birth of Judah is symbolized by the reconfirmation or choosing again of Judah with the death of Israel. But let’s go back to Isaiah 7:14.

Now, let’s give Isaiah the chance to indentify the son who was born of the virgin. Read verse 15. “Butter and honey shall he eat…” Now, read verse 22. “For butter and honey shall everyone eat that is left in the Land.” Who was left in the Land after Israel, the Ten Tribes was removed? Judah, right? Right. We could stop here because Isaiah has already identified that son with Judah. But let’s continue.

Now, read Isaiah 8:8. When the Assyrians came to Israel, they meant to get Judah, because at that time they were in good relations with Israel. But because of God’s promise to David that Judah would remain in Jerusalem as a lamp forever, according to I Kings 11:36.

Assyria came to Judah but they could not shoot one single arrow at Jerusalem, although they were camped around Jerusalem. Then, Isaiah puts together two words in 8:8: Judah and Immanuel. The Land was of Judah, and Isaiah says Judah, your Land, Immanuel. Who was in the Land of Judah? The Jews. And Isaiah calls Immanuel the inhabitants of Judah.

Therefore, the virgin was Israel and the son was Judah.

Now, Isaiah 9:5. This prophecy was fulfilled after the 70 years of exile in Babylon, when Judah or the Jews returned from Babylon. “A child is born to us; a son is given us.” The child or son is Judah, the Jewish People. “Us” here are the Gentiles in the Galilee who had been brought there by Assyria in the exchange of pupulation, when they had removed Israel. Therefore, all those titles were attributed to Judah who was back as that great light upon those who lived in the land of gloom. Those titles were not of God but of the People Immanuel who represented God among the Gentiles.

Ben:

 

[ralphinal]

Thanks.

Now, my second question. Were there not other tribes that survived?

 

[Hisalone]

The whole chapter 53 of Isaiah is about the dramatic epic of two Messiahs: Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David. The drama that culminated in the “death” of Messiah ben Joseph for the sins of Messiah ben David. Properly speaking, Messiah ben Joseph is Ephraim or Israel, the Ten Tribes of the Northern Kingdom. And Messiah ben David is Judah, the Southern Kingdom.

The sins of Judah had filled the Divine cup, and in God’s judgment, the day had arrived for the removal of Judah. (Isa. 9:8) But according to I Kings 11:36, God had promised David that Judah, whose Tribe he had come from, would stay forever as a Lamp in Jerusalem. Therefore, according to Isaiah 9:8, the final judgment that was supposed to come to Judah fell upon Israel instead, and Messiah ben Joseph had to go instead of Judah. In other words, Israel had to redeem Judah.

But Isaiah says in 53:9 that the Suffering Servant was without guile, and sinless. That’s exactly what Israel was: Pure of the sins he died for, since they were the sins of Judah and not his. Messiah ben Joseph therefore, did not die for his sins but for the sins of Messiah ben David. Therefore, Israel was removed because of the sins of another. He was pierced so to speak, by the sins of Judah. The sacrifice of Israel or Messiah ben Joseph meant the salvation of Judah or Messiah ben David. That’s why Zechariah in 12:10 says that they (Judah) shall look upon him (Israel) whom they (Judah) had pierced with their sins, and mourn for him (Israel) as the one who mourns for his firstborn.

Now, let me explain by way of an analogy how Israel or Messiah ben Joseph who is the Suffering Servant died innocently of the sins of Judah or Messiah ben David: “A” and “B”. “A” has committed a crime punishable with death, and “B”, by mistake was condemned for that crime. It doesn’t matter how evil is “B” in his life or how bad are his sins. The point is that he was condemned to die for the crime of “A”. Therefore “B” was killed innocent and pure of the crimes and sins of “A”. “A” got saved by the death of “B”. So, “B” was the Suffering Servant that brought salvation to “A”. Now matching the analogy to reality, “A” was Judah that pierced “B” with his crimes and sins.

Now, with the removal of Messiah ben Joseph, Messiah be David occupied the place of the Suffering Servant with reference to the rest of Mankind because of God’s promise to Noah that humanity would never be destroyed again in an universal manner. (Gen. 8:21) The People-redeemer was the pledge and on his way in the near future with the choice of Abraham through Isaac. That’s what sustains the world and allows it to keep going.

Ben

Hello Ben,
Can you address how over the years the Rabbinacle Commentary on Isaiah 53 has change, specifically those prior to Rashi.

 

[Hisalone]

Nine Reasons Why Isaiah 53 Refers to the Messiah - Not the Jewish People

1. There is a clear distinction in pronouns. Isaiah the prophet, a Jew, when speaking of himself and his nation Israel, uses the pronouns “we,” “us” and “our.” He describes the Servant as someone other than himself and his people by using the pronouns “he,” “him” and “his.” Since the speakers are clearly Isaiah’s people Israel (“we”), then the Servant whom they describe (“he”) must be Someone other than Israel. They cannot both be Israel.
2. In verse 8, Isaiah declares that the Servant was put to death “for the transgression of my people.” Who are “my people?” Not the Gentiles, but Isaiah’s people, the Jewish people. If the Servant died for Israel, the Servant cannot also be Israel. Therefore the Servant is distinct from the Jewish people.
3. The passage repeatedly claims the innocence of the Servant. Verses 4-6 say that His suffering would not be for His own sin, but for the sin of others. None of the prophets (including Isaiah), ever characterize Israel or any other nation as perfectly innocent (see Isaiah 1:1-31, 64:5). Since Isaiah affirms the Servant’s innocence while at the same time affirming Israel’s guilt, Israel cannot be the Servant.
4. The Servant was to be a voluntary and unresisting sufferer. He willingly accepts His suffering, offering Himself as a guilt offering, and pouring Himself out to death. His suffering are voluntary, His sufferings are intentional, His sufferings are silent. Israel has indeed suffered, but not willingly, intentionally, or silently. The sufferings of the Servant are of a different nature than the sufferings of the Jewish people.
5. In verses 8, 9, 10 and 12 the Servant dies a substitutionary death on behalf of others. He is cut off out of the land of the living, placed in a grave, and sacrificed for the guilt of others. However, the Bible declares that the nation of Israel never has been and never can be killed (see Jeremiah 31:34-36).
6. The Servant is described as an individual person, not as a corporate identity. The things that the Servant does can only be done individually, not corporately.
7. The suffering and death of the Servant brings righteousness and healing to those who accept Him. While Israel has suffered, our suffering have never brought righteousness or healing to the Gentiles. In fact, it brings judgement on the Gentiles for their sin of anti-Semitism. Our suffering has never brought healing to the anti-Semites guilty of these things. The Jewish people have suffered because of the Gentiles, but never on behalf of the Gentiles.
8. The Talmud and other early rabbinic writings, always refer to this passage as speaking of the Messiah. All the ancient rabbis understood this passage to be the individual known as the Messiah. Rashi, who lived around 1050 AD, was the first to interpret Isaiah 53 as referring to the nation of Israel suffering for the Gentiles. That view didn’t become the dominant Jewish view until relatively recent times, in the 1800’s.
9. Other passages in the book of Isaiah dealing with God’s Servant refer to an individual, and not to the nation of Israel (see Isaiah 42:1-7, 49:1-13, especially 49:6).

lightofmessiah.org/resources/articles/isa_53.php

 

[Ben_Masada]

Thanks.

Now, my second question. Were there not other tribes that survived?

No, no other tribes survived as tribes. Individually
yes, many joined back into Judah plus the converts according to Isaiah 56:1-8. Now, what exists is the House of Jacob, called by the new name of Israel from the stock or branch of Judah. (Isa. 48:1)

The two sticks, Israel and Judah have become one only stick. No more two nations. but one which will never be divided again into two kingdoms. (Ezek. 37:15-22)

When you see some groups of people here or there anywhere in the world, claiming to belong to this or that Tribe,it’s wish-thinking and nostalgic utopia. The moratorium to join Judah without conversion was only during those years between the Assyrian exile of Israel and the Babylonian exile of Judah. But since Judah returned from Babylon, any group or individual wishing to join Judah, it has to be through conversion.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

Hello Ben,
Can you address how over the years the Rabbinacle Commentary on Isaiah 53 has change, specifically those prior to Rashi.

You have got to be more specific with this question of yours. I cannot compromise myself with a reply without fully understand what you mean.

Ben:

 

[ralphinal]

No, no other tribes survived as tribes. Individually
yes, many joined back into Judah plus the converts according to Isaiah 56:1-8. Now, what exists is the House of Jacob, called by the new name of Israel from the stock or branch of Judah. (Isa. 48:1)

The two sticks, Israel and Judah have become one only stick. No more two nations. but one which will never be divided again into two kingdoms. (Ezek. 37:15-22)

When you see some groups of people here or there anywhere in the world, claiming to belong to this or that Tribe,it’s wish-thinking and nostalgic utopia. The moratorium to join Judah without conversion was only during those years between the Assyrian exile of Israel and the Babylonian exile of Judah. But since Judah returned from Babylon, any group or individual wishing to join Judah, it has to be through conversion.

Ben:

If there were no more Levites, who performed sacrafices in the temple?

I thought Benjamin survived as well.

I do agree about all the “modern” tribes. No dice there.

 

[Ben_Masada]

If there were no more Levites, who performed sacrafices in the temple?

I thought Benjamin survived as well.

I do agree about all the “modern” tribes. No dice there.

Yes, the whole Tribe of Benjamin survived but as I told you, not as a tribe, but together as Judah. The Tribe of Benjamin disappeared within Judah, and became known as such. As for the Tribe of Levy most of them fled South to join Judah when the Northern Tribes were removed from existence in the Land of Israel. But perhaps a third of the Levites followed their sister tribes into eternal exile.

Ben:

 

[ralphinal]

Yes, the whole Tribe of Benjamin survived but as I told you, not as a tribe, but together as Judah. The Tribe of Benjamin disappeared within Judah, and became known as such. As for the Tribe of Levy most of them fled South to join Judah when the Northern Tribes were removed from existence in the Land of Israel. But perhaps a third of the Levites followed their sister tribes into eternal exile.

Ben:

Ok.

So where those who were Levites understood to be such, or was it more of a “I am now a priest” thing?

 

[Ben_Masada]

Nine Reasons Why Isaiah 53 Refers to the Messiah - Not the Jewish People

1. There is a clear distinction in pronouns. Isaiah the prophet, a Jew, when speaking of himself and his nation Israel, uses the pronouns “we,” “us” and “our.” He describes the Servant as someone other than himself and his people by using the pronouns “he,” “him” and “his.” Since the speakers are clearly Isaiah’s people Israel (“we”), then the Servant whom they describe (“he”) must be Someone other than Israel. They cannot both be Israel

 

[Ben_Masada]

Ok.
So where those who were Levites understood to be such, or was it more of a “I am now a priest” thing?

No, it was not a thing of “Now, I am priest,” but a matter of sprituality. About two thirds of the Levites decided to join Judah on religious reasons. The Ten Tribes were going too secular, and the Levites were of a religious nature.

Ben:

 

[ralphinal]

No, it was not a thing of “Now, I am priest,” but a matter of sprituality. About two thirds of the Levites decided to join Judah on religious reasons. The Ten Tribes were going too secular, and the Levites were of a religious nature.

Ben:

No, that is not what I meant. Were they seen as separate from the tribe OF Judah at that time?

 

[Lev23]

There is a huge difference. My view is Jewish. Yours is Greek. Since Jesus was Jewish and not Greek, it means your view is prone to fail from the onset.

My view is hard-core Jewish. Your view seems to be more in line with Greek, since you make a comment that taking the God of Israel’s Word too literally is a problem.

And all based on assumptions. You are putting together Pauline rhetoric with personal assumptions. You know very well that there is nothing in the Prophets about Jesus but only by assumptions. But assumptions butter no bread.

They would be assumptions to a person who has been taught to reject the Gospel message first preached and administered by the remnant of Israel to the lost sheep of Israel.

I am glad you reminded me of the New Covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah. Therefore, nothing to do with Christians. Right, the New Covenant would be different from the Sinaitic Covenant in the sense that before, one would obey by compulsion, and the commandments were written in tables of stone. Now, the Law was written in the heart, meaning
that obedience became voluntary.

The remnant that first received the Gospel only later learned not to call unclean, what the God of Israel made clean, that is the gentile nations who believe in his only Son, Jesus Christ.

So what happens if one does not want obedience to be voluntary? What about the sin issue?

You are too literal in your interpretation of the Scriptures. And with regards to Jesus being God’s son, that’s Greek Mythology. There is no such a thing in Judaism, which was the Faith of Jesus. Isaac prefigured the People of Israel who would be descended from him.
Isaac was also prefigured for all Israel to show them what God will have to do for his only son to deal with Israel’s and the world’s sin issue, once and for all. Final atonement must be met, and it has. He is reconciling all his creation to him now through his only Son!

How could I quit Hebrew Monotheism for Greek Mythology? Not that likely. What you are preaching is Replacement Theology, when you try to replace the People by the individual.

In no way am I preaching replacement theology, for Jesus is the Jews Jew.

You could never prove to me in the Scriptures that Jesus used to handle, that Jesus is referred to as the son of God. But I can prove to you the name of the son of God. And by name, so that you don’t have to assume. Read Exodus 4:22,23 and Hosea 11:1. The sacred writer mentions the name of the son of God. Why don’t you take a look at these two quotations? You will be surprised. I could write the verses here; but I want you to catch it with your own eyes. So that you will never forget the name
of the Son of God.

Ben:

Al I have to say to you on the scripture references is, just keep reading! Yes, God calls Israel his firstborn son, but look at what God says about the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31, it will not be like the one when he led them out of Egypt, because they broke it!!! Even dispersed throughout the whole earth, God still tells Israel to be ashamed of their conduct in dispersion, in which they defiled his name among the nations. Read Ezekiel 36. Out of Israel, one came from the House of David that was worthy to be called Son of God, Jesus Christ. Only the remnant of Israel God always saves believes in this and has accepted the testimony of those who walked and saw the ministry of Jesus.

Be thankful for and come to believe in the one who the God of Israel is well pleased with, the very Jewish Jesus Christ.

 

[John7]

1 John 2:22
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?
He is antichrist,
that denieth the Father and the Son.

 

[Ben_Masada]

1 John 2:22
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?
He is antichrist,
that denieth the Father and the Son.

Hey John7, if you had read verses 18 and 19, you would not have to go to verse 22. You would know immediately that the antichrists are supposed to come out of Christianity itself. The author of this Letter says that they come out from the ranks of the Church. Read them carefully.

Then, regarding denying the Father and the son, you can read Exodus 4:22,23 for the name of the son of God. It says in there very clear who is he. Whoever denies him yes, is antichrist.

Ben:

 

[Ben_Masada]

Al I have to say to you on the scripture references is, just keep reading! Yes, God calls Israel his firstborn son, but look at what God says about the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31, it will not be like the one when he led them out of Egypt, because they broke it!!! Even dispersed throughout the whole earth, God still tells Israel to be ashamed of their conduct in dispersion, in which they defiled his name among the nations. Read Ezekiel 36. Out of Israel, one came from the House of David that was worthy to be called Son of God, Jesus Christ. Only the remnant of Israel God always saves believes in this and has accepted the testimony of those who walked and saw the ministry of Jesus.

Be thankful for and come to believe in the one who the God of Israel is well pleased with, the very Jewish Jesus Christ.

I read again about the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31. It is a Covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah. Nothing to do with Gentiles. And you are right, it is different from the Sinaitic Covenant. The Law is written in the heart and obedience is voluntary and not compulsive.

Commandments can be broken all the time that we are still on the flesh. It doesn’t mean the Covenant is broken. The Covenant gets broken when we reject it. And we have never rejected it. I mean, there was a time when Judah rejected the Covenant with God as we have from Isaiah 8:6, but because of God’s promise to David in I Kings 11:36, Israel was used to redeem Judah, and we got restored back in the favors of the Almighty. Since then, we have never rejected God’s Covenant which has become eternal with us. (Jer. 31:35-37)