Bible Options Bible Study Software
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Scepter Departed and Messiah came
#21
(12-31-2013, 10:07 PM)benyosef Wrote: Additionally, there is a comment here about all the Jews keeping the Torah. If Jesus did away with G-D's commandments, why are there so many references to Jews keeping the Torah in the Messianic Age (here, Ezekiel 37:24, Jeremiah 31:33, etc.)?
(Part 1 of Long Answer)
The Levitical system of the Torah does not apply during the Millennium. In fact, many aspects of the Torah are changed. Ezekiel says that Zadok will be the keepers of the altar, etc (Ezekiel 40:46); There will be stairs in the Millenial Temple (Ezekiel 43:17), which is not allowed in Exodus 20:26; there is no mention of several of the offerings in Ezekiel, and several are enlarged or reduced (Ezekiel 4-6; cf. Numbers 28:9); only four of the seven annual feasts under Levitical system are mentioned and the Feast of Pentecost, Trumpets and Day of Atonement are omitted. We can go on and on.

Also, how do you explain away Zechariah 6:12-13: 12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD:
13 Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.
In the Torah, the kings and priests were always separate. Here, they are together so it’s Messianic (see also Psalm 110 – during Millennium, it is not a Levitical priesthood, it is one after the order of Melchizedek). (this answers one of your questions in another post re: what shows the Messiah).
#22
(12-31-2013, 10:07 PM)benyosef Wrote: If Jesus did away with G-D's commandments, why are there so many references to Jews keeping the Torah in the Messianic Age (here, Ezekiel 37:24, Jeremiah 31:33, etc.)?
(Part 2 of Long Answer)
The offerings during the Millennium have the same effect that the past offerings did – the offerings before never washed away sin – they were pointers to the Cross before the fact and the Millennial ones are pointers to the Cross after the fact. They are done in remembrance of what Jesus did, like the Lord’s Supper. (Under the Mosaic system- which looked ahead- many times various Temple sacrifices are specifically called " memorials" (Exodus 30:16; Leviticus 2:2, 9; 5:12; 6:15; 24:7; Numbers 5:15, 18, 26)).
Also, animal sacrifices during the Millennium will serve to remove ceremonial uncleanness and prevent defilement from polluting the temple envisioned by Ezekiel, because the glorious presence of Yahweh will once again be dwelling on earth in the midst of a sinful and unclean people.

The purpose for a Temple throughout Scripture has been to establish a location upon earth- which is under the curse of sin- for the presence of God that reveals through its ritual God's great holiness. God's plan for Israel, His earthly people, includes a relation to them through a Temple. Currently the church is God's spiritual Temple made of living stones (1 Corinthians 3:16-17; Ephesians 2:19-22), until the rapture. The Millennium will return history to a focus upon Israel and will continue to be a time in which sin will be present upon the earth. Thus, God will include a new Temple, a new priesthood, a new Law, etc., at this future time because He will be present in Israel and still desires to teach that holiness is required to approach Him. This is contrasted with the fact that no Temple will exist in eternity (Revelation 21:22) because God and the Lamb are its temple and there will be no sin in heaven, thus no need for Temple ritual.
#23
(01-15-2014, 06:50 AM)Tricia73 Wrote:
(01-13-2014, 10:37 AM)Eliyahu Wrote:
(10-22-2013, 07:30 AM)Tricia73 Wrote: Jacob's Final Prophecy States:
Genesis 49:10: The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.

Shiloh means "He whose right it is, that which belongs to him"
The scepter refers to their tribal identity and their right to apply and enforce Mosaic Laws and adjudicate capital offenses. Even during the Babylonian captivity, the tribes retained their own judges, etc. (Ezek 1:5,8); Josh McDowell, Evidence that Demands a Verdict, pp. 108-168.

Bs'd

The scepter had been lost before, during the Babylonian exile. Where was the messiah then?
The answer to this question is in my original post:
Even during the Babylonian captivity, the tribes retained their own judges, etc. (Ezek 1:5,8); Josh McDowell, Evidence that Demands a Verdict, pp. 108-168.
So, scepter not lost before.

Bs'd

You mean they still were and independant nation while being exiled in Babylonia?

I think it is a terrible stretch of the imagination to say that the sceptre was still not removed from them when they were conquered, exiled. en ruled over by a strange nation.

I don't think that there will be anybody who'll say that "still having the sceptre" means that when you are conquered, in exile, and ruled over by a strange nation, you will be allowed to have your own judges for internal disputes.

Another reason why that verse: "Then Jacob called for his sons and said: “Gather around so I can tell you what will happen to you in days to come." cannot point to JC is simple. It's the last part of the verse, so skilfully mistranslated here in the NIV. It says there that Jacob is going to tell his sons what will befall them IN THE END OF DAYS.

And since 2000 years ago we were not in the end of days, of course this verse has no bearing on JC whatsoever.

The exact same Hebrew expression, "achariet hayamiem" is also used in for instance Isaiah 2:2, and there the NIV says: "In the last days the mountain of the Lord’s temple will be established"

Also in Hosea 3:5 they know what it means: "They will come trembling to the Lord and to his blessings in the last days."

So it speaks about the end of days, and not about 2000 years ago.
#24
Tricia73, I do not understand: the fact that the third Temple differs in construction from the portable Tabernacle and first two Temples means what? The third Temple is still not yet standing, lending credence to the claim that there is no Messiah who presently reigns. What does it help Jesus’ case if “only four fasts” are mentioned In Ezekiel?

How do I explain Zechariah 6:12-13? First, by considering that the word “כֹהֵן” does not necessarily mean “priest,” but means “one who holds office," and so, for example, Jethro could be called a כֹהֵן (Exodus 18:1) even though he was not a descendant of Aaron. Thus, the “branch” in Zec 6 would simply be a king holding office, not a special king-son-of-Aaron. Second, by noting that Jesus did not build any Temple (it’s clear Ezekiel speaks of a literal Temple, especially since you mention it has stairs), and his name has not been a source of peace to the world, rather one of the biggest sources of bloodshed historically.

On what basis do you think that “the offerings before never washed away sin?” When G-D speaks of the sin-offering, He says that following the sacrificial process will result in “atonement” and the unwitting sinner will be “forgiven” (e.g. Lev 4:20), clearly showing a washing away of sin. G-D even says this is accomplished with flour alone (Lev. 5:13), so we don’t even need blood.

Will sacrifices during the third Temple work to remove “ritual impurity?” Probably. What the prophet also says is that sin sacrifices are coming back (Ezekiel 44:29). Clearly there is not one sin sacrifice to end all sin sacrifices, and clearly stated also is that there will be a Temple which exists for eternity (Ezekiel 37:26-28).
#25
(01-30-2014, 11:01 PM)benyosef Wrote: How do I explain Zechariah 6:12-13? First, by considering that the word “כֹהֵן” does not necessarily mean “priest,” but means “one who holds office," and so, for example, Jethro could be called a כֹהֵן (Exodus 18:1) even though he was not a descendant of Aaron. Thus, the “branch” in Zec 6 would simply be a king holding office, not a special king-son-of-Aaron. Second, by noting that Jesus did not build any Temple (it’s clear Ezekiel speaks of a literal Temple, especially since you mention it has stairs), and his name has not been a source of peace to the world, rather one of the biggest sources of bloodshed historically.
I liked your explanation regarding the word usage of "cohen". We see another example of "cohen" being used not to demonstrate an Aaronic priest, but a ruler or minister of sorts in 2 Sam 8:18. Here David's sons are referred to as "cohens". So, based on this, we know David was a "cohen/minister/ruler" as well.

This fits in well with Psalms 110:4. This follows the pattern of previous Davidic kings ministering in the temples.

1 Kings 8:5 shows Solomon helping to dedicate the temple by bringing his offerings. 2 Chronicles 29:1-36 shows Hezekiah did the same thing. 2 Chronicles 24:1-19, 2 Chronicles 35:1-19, shows Josiah did the same thing. This is the pattern for righteous kings. This will continue on into the 3rd temple. They were all ministers of peace (offerings). They were definitely "kings of righteousness", Melkitzedek.

What is interesting about the last name ”sar shalom”/prince of peace in Isa 9:6(5), is that the prince in Ezekiel 45:17 brings peace offerings. The Hebrew word for peace offerings is “shlomim”, the plural for peace ”shalom”. We see that the future prince/anointed one will be a minister/prince of peace by bringing peace offerings, in the temple, as well as other offerings for himself (see Ezekiel 45:17-25).
#26
[/quote]

Bs'd

You mean they still were and independant nation while being exiled in Babylonia?

I think it is a terrible stretch of the imagination to say that the sceptre was still not removed from them when they were conquered, exiled. en ruled over by a strange nation.

I don't think that there will be anybody who'll say that "still having the sceptre" means that when you are conquered, in exile, and ruled over by a strange nation, you will be allowed to have your own judges for internal disputes.

[/quote]
There is no stretch of the imagination:
Even during the 70-year Babylonian captivity, although they had lost its national sovereignty, they nonetheless retained their own lawgivers and judges (Ezra 1:5,8). During the next five centuries they suffered in turn under the rulership of the Medo-Persian, Greek, and Roman empires, yet retained the scepter until the first quarter of the first century C.E. The Talmud records that:
"A little more than forty years before the destruction of the Temple, the power of pronouncing capital sentences was taken away from the Jews." (Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin, folio 24)

The word "scepter" has been understood by the Rabbis to mean the "tribal staff" or "tribal identity" of the twelve tribes of Israel. This "tribal identity" was linked, in the minds of the Jews, to their right to apply and enforce Mosaic law upon the people, including the right to adjudicate capital cases and administer capital punishment, or jus gladii(The jus gladii is a legal term which refers to the legal authority to adjudicate capital cases and impose capital punishment.)
#27
Tricia73 Wrote:The word "scepter" has been understood by the Rabbis to mean the "tribal staff" or "tribal identity" of the twelve tribes of Israel.

Can you provide sources?

And if this is indeed the case, why did Jacob say "The scepter shall not depart from Judah?" You're saying it applies to all tribes, so why single one out?

And did the Jews try capital cases while in Babylon? No. Yes, we had judges who taught and judged according to the Torah during Ezra's days, but we still have that today. If all Jacob was saying was that there would always be Jewish judges until the Messiah came, then you would have to admit Jesus wasn't the guy we're looking for because there are Jewish courts in session around the world, and so Shiloh has not yet arrived.
#28
In my original post I wrote:
The priests officially mourned "Woe unto us for the scepter has departed from Judah and the Messiah has not come!" (Cf. Babylonian Talmud, Chapter 4, folio 37).
So the priests actually mourned because they believed the scepter departed with no Messiah. And I would assume they were intimately familiar with the Scriptures and spent tons of time studying what Jacob’s prophecy meant.

Also, scepter means more than just having Jewish judges, as can be seen from the Scriptures. See, for example:

Esther 4:11. All the king's servants, and the people of the king's provinces, do know, that whosoever, whether man or woman, shall come unto the king into the inner court, who is not called, there is one law of his to put him to death, except such to whom the king shall hold out the golden scepter, that he may live.

Psalm 45:6. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the scepter of thy kingdom is a right scepter.

Isaiah 14:5. The LORD hath broken the staff of the wicked, and the scepter of the rulers.

Also, Judah is singled out because:

The tribe scepter did not leave Judah so long as there was a remnant of the commonwealth of Israel. Long after the other tribes had lost their individuality, Judah lingered in existence and in some measure of independence; and from the return his name supplanted that of Israel or Jacob, as the common designation of the people.

Lawgiver is to be understood as judge, dispenser or administrator of law. Judah had the forerank among the tribes in the wilderness, and never altogether lost it. Nahshon the son of Amminadab, the prince of his tribe, was the ancestor of David, who was anointed as the rightful sovereign of all Israel, and in whom the throne became hereditary. The revolt of the ten tribes curtailed, but did not abolish the actual sovereignty of Rehoboam and his successors, who continued the acknowledged sovereigns until some time after the return from the captivity. From that date the whole nation was virtually absorbed in Judah, and whatever trace of self-government remained belonged to him until the birth of Jesus, who was the lineal descendant of the royal line of David and of Judah, and was the Messiah, the anointed of heaven to be king of Zion and of Israel in a far higher sense than before. "Until Shiloh come."
#29
Tricia73 Wrote:The priests officially mourned "Woe unto us for the scepter has departed from Judah and the Messiah has not come!" (Cf. Babylonian Talmud, Chapter 4, folio 37).

When you first said this, I asked you for a tractate (chapter 4, page 37 is not clear enough), and you said you had no idea. This is significant because many quotes in the Talmud require a good understanding of the context of the discussion, and a text without context is a pretext. Did you actually see this quote inside, or did someone else tell you that this is what it says?

Tricia73 Wrote:scepter means more than just having Jewish judges

You were the one who claimed that “scepter” meant “right to apply and enforce Mosaic law upon the people.” I never said that, I don’t know of a Biblical source that says that, and you have not given a clear source to back your statement.

Then, after saying that “scepter means more than just having Jewish judges,” you say, “Lawgiver is to be understood as judge.” Are we talking about judges, or not? If yes, then we still have judges and so Jesus was not Shiloh. If not, why do you mention them?

Tricia73 Wrote:whatever trace of self-government remained belonged to him until the birth of Jesus

Not really. To cite just a few examples, the Jews in Israel were under foreign rule before Jesus was born (i.e. Herod), they were under Syrian-Greek rule about 200 years before that (the Chanuka story), after which they were ruled by direct descendants of Aaron—the Chashmonaim. Going back even further, the last Jewish king was Zedekiah, whose reign was halted just prior to the fall of the first Temple. No matter how you understand “scepter,” it was at least once halted before the first Christian century, showing quite clearly that Jesus was not the Shiloh of whom Jacob spoke.
#30
[/quote]

You were the one who claimed that “scepter” meant “right to apply and enforce Mosaic law upon the people.” I never said that, I don’t know of a Biblical source that says that, and you have not given a clear source to back your statement.

Then, after saying that “scepter means more than just having Jewish judges,” you say, “Lawgiver is to be understood as judge.” Are we talking about judges, or not? If yes, then we still have judges and so Jesus was not Shiloh. If not, why do you mention them?

[quote=Tricia73]
By more than just judges, I was meaning the power of execution/capital punishment - which was clearly lost (see my prior posts). Part of enforcing Mosaic law included this.

The Talmud records that:
"A little more than forty years before the destruction of the Temple, the power of pronouncing capital sentences was taken away from the Jews." (Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin, folio 24)

Many times it is not easy to express complex intricate parts of Scriptures in a few emails, etc and would confess to not always being completely clear. I hope this helps.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)