• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Jewish Messiah / Messianic Prophecies

Which Jewish rabbis conclude that Daniel 9 speaks of the messiah, other than Jews for Jesus?

There were no 'Jews for Jesus" rabbis referenced. But several of the Judaism Jews referenced were the great Maimonides, along with Rabbi Moses Abraham Levi and in Targum Tractate Megillah 3a, Rabbi Jonathan ben Uzziel was referenced.

As generally recognized by Jews, the Hebrew Bible is organized into three main sections: the Torah, or “Teaching,” also called the Pentateuch or the “Five Books of Moses”; the Neviʾim, or Prophets; and the Ketuvim, or Writings. The Book of Daniel is a part of the "Writings". Unlike the Torah and the books of Prophets, the works found in Ketuvim do not present themselves as the fruits of direct divine inspiration.

That's not accurate either. I'll address the "prophet" Daniel in a separate post.

And by the way, numerous ancient Jewish Rabbis also considered Isaiah 53 as speaking of the Messiah. And in Isaiah 53 he is also "cut off from the land of the living as a "guilt offering," and then the chapter speaks of his days being prolonged thereafter.

Isaiah 53 Rabbinical Commentary
 
As generally recognized by Jews, the Hebrew Bible is organized into three main sections: the Torah, or “Teaching,” also called the Pentateuch or the “Five Books of Moses”; the Neviʾim, or Prophets; and the Ketuvim, or Writings. The Book of Daniel is a part of the "Writings". Unlike the Torah and the books of Prophets, the works found in Ketuvim do not present themselves as the fruits of direct divine inspiration.

Was the Book of Daniel originally in the Prophetic Section of the Tenakh?

“…the present position of the Book (of Daniel) in the Hebrew Canon is not its original position. We have it on the authority of the Jewish historian Josephus that that at the close of the first century A.D. the Canon of the Old Testament books was differently arranged from that at present accepted among the Jews; and it is also evident from the writings of the Early Fathers that a change must have been made in the arrangement of the Jewish Canon between the middle of the third and the end of the fourth century A.D.” - Charles Boutflower, “In and Around the Book of Daniel,” pages 276-277.

Josephus in Contra Apionem 1:8 writes, “We have but twenty-two (books) containing the history of all time, books that are justly believed in; and of these, five are the books of Moses, which comprise the laws and earliest traditions from the creation of mankind down to his death. From the death of Moses to the reign of Artaxerxes, King of Persia, successor of Xerxes, the prophets who succeeded Moses wrote the history of the events that occurred in their own time, in thirteen books. The remaining four documents comprise hymns to God and the practical precepts to men.”

Daniel was included in those 13 books.

“The Book of Daniel would not be out of place in the prophetic section, Joshua, Judges and Kinds are included in the Prophets, and the translators of the Septuagint version of the Jewish Scriptures placed Daniel there also.” Joseph D. Wilson, “Did Daniel Write Daniel,” page 84.

Next,

Rabbi Moses Abraham Levi said, "I have examined and searched all the Holy Scriptures and have not found the time for the coming of Messiah clearly fixed, except in the words of Gabriel to the prophet Daniel, which are written in the 9th chapter of the prophecy of Daniel."

From Maimonede’s Sixth Principle of Faith:

"Third, when a prophet receives prophecy, even though it was only a vision and by means of an angel, he would nevertheless be weakened by it and his body would shudder. He would be stricken with a very great fear almost to the point that his spirit would leave his body, as Daniel said when [the angel] Gavriel (Gabriel) spoke to him, "No strength remained in me; my robustness changed to pallor, and I could retain no strength... and I was in a deep sleep upon my face, and my face was to the ground". And as he says later, "during the vision my joints shuddered and I could retain no strength". (Daniel 10:8-9, 16). But Moshe, may he rest in peace, was not so, rather, the word came to him and he did not experience trembling and shivering in any way, as it says, "And HaShem spoke to Moshe face to face, as a man speaks to his friend" (Shemos [Exodus] 33:11). In other words, just as a man does not experience trembling from the speech of his fellow, Moshe did not tremble from the word even though it was face to face. This was due to his total attachment to the intellect, as we said earlier."

The “Prophet Daniel” found in the Dead Sea Scrolls:

“Comment: It is interesting to note that every chapter of Daniel is represented in these manuscripts, except for Dan 12. However, this does not mean that the Book lacked the final chapter at Qumran, since Dan 12:10 is quoted in the Florilegium (4Q174) - (Dead Sea Scrolls), which explicitly tells us that ‘it is written in the Book of Daniel the Prophet.’

JOSEPHUS [Antiquities, 11.8.5] mentions that Alexander the Great had designed to punish the Jews for their fidelity to Darius, but that Jaddua (332 B.C.), the high priest, met him at the head of a procession and averted his wrath by showing him Daniel's prophecy that a Grecian monarch should overthrow Persia. Certain it is, Alexander favored the Jews, and JOSEPHUS' statement gives an explanation of the fact; at least it shows that the Jews in JOSEPHUS' days believed that Daniel was extant in Alexander's days, long before the Maccabees.

The Talmud refers to Daniel as a Prophet

"Hatach is another name for the prophet Daniel. He was called Hatach (related to the Hebrew word for "cut") because he was "cut down," demoted from his position of greatness, which he held at the courts of the previous kings (Megillah 15a).

http://www.virtualpurim.org/scripts/tgij/paper/IndexPurim.asp?ArticleID=1436&Cat=Megillah

So I'm afraid what you originally wrote at the beginning of this post is inaccurate.
 
The Talmud refers to Daniel as a Prophet

"Hatach is another name for the prophet Daniel. He was called Hatach (related to the Hebrew word for "cut") because he was "cut down," demoted from his position of greatness, which he held at the courts of the previous kings (Megillah 15a).

http://www.virtualpurim.org/scripts/tgij/paper/IndexPurim.asp?ArticleID=1436&Cat=Megillah

So I'm afraid what you originally wrote at the beginning of this post is inaccurate.

Your virtualpurim.org link returned, "page not found". The Talmud's Megilah 3a says Daniel is not a prophet.

And I, Daniel, alone saw the vision; for the men that were with me saw not the vision; but a great quaking fell upon them, and they fled to hide themselves.21 Who were these ‘men’ — R. Jeremiah — or some say, R. Hiyya b. Abba — said: These were Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. They were superior to him [in one way], and he was superior to them [in another]. They were superior to him, because they were prophets and he was not a prophet.22 He was superior to them, because he saw [on this occasion] and they did not see.
http://halakhah.com/pdf/moed/Megilah.pdf

According to the Holman Bible Dictionary, Hatach means "runner".
Hatach - Holman Bible Dictionary - Bible Dictionary - StudyLight.org

And Esther called Hatach.16 Rab said: Hatach is the same as Daniel. Why was he called Hatach? Because he was degraded [hataku-hu] from his position.17 Samuel said, Because all affairs of state were decided [nehtakim] by his voice.
http://halakhah.com/pdf/moed/Megilah.pdf
 
Like I said, various Jewish rabbis have concluded that Daniel chapter 9 speaks about the Messiah. And in Daniel chapter 9, it says that he (the Messiah) will be "cut off" (killed), and then, AFTER THAT, "war will continue until the end." So, either the Messiah returns from the dead, or a second Messiah will have to usher in the ultimate millennial reign. Which will you have?

Do you have an answer for that?

Yes, you are misquoting and lying... That's the answer.
 
Hi, actual Jew here. Most of the stuff the Logicman tries to pull in support of his religious beliefs are a few thoughts written by a handful of rabbis over several thousand years. There are likewise thousands of other ideas by various rabbis that he ignores. None of the ideas about two kinds of messiahs or anything else is accepted in any part of mainstream Jewish thought. Not now, and not then. It's a weird narrative he tires to put forth about a handful of rabbis secretly deducing a prophecy about Jesus that contradicts all of the normal ideas that Jews had about a messiah. It's nonsense. Rabbis are famous for coming up with weird interpretations about everything. The old saying is that if you lock 4 rabbis in a room overnight, in the morning you get 5 different opinions.

No Jew has ever seriously thought there was some kind of secondary mold that the messiah could fit in to. There's just the heralding by Elijah on Passover, then the uniting Jews all over the world, and then god literally coming down to rule the world himself on behalf of the Jews. That's all there is to it. That's the whole story. Logicman and his ilk also like to mine various passages, especially from Isiah, and claim that they are prophecies about the messiah. Almost all of them aren't. Most of Judaism isn't concerned with the messiah. It's just this thing that's gonna happen someday, and unlike a lot of other religions, Jews don't constantly think that the end times are imminent. They're not. Very few Jews think that the messiah is coming any time soon.

Frankly, I'm pretty offended when Christians portray such false narratives about Judaism in order to justify that Jesus really was connected to Jewish ideas. The story of Jesus basically bears no resemblance to the Jewish stories of the messiah. Nor is adding a second coming later on any excuse. There's no room for that in Judaism. For all that Christianity claims to come from Judaism, it really doesn't. It's mainly Roman paganism with a thin coat of Jewish paint on top. Trying to pretend that Judaism is some kind of preface or precursor to Christianity is actually really rude. That's reducing a people, history, and culture to an introductory paragraph, stripping them of all meaning except to pave the way for this other, real, culture.

Don't listen to Logicman's nonsense. He just sees what he wants to see, and ignores the reality that he doesn't like.

The problem With Logicman is he never actually listens to any other side, he copies and pastes from apologetic websites, without knowing the arguments, without understanding the texts, and then just ignores any response or any data not coming from apologetic websites.
 
That's now, not when the rabbis wrote.

Believe whatever you want. I'll stand with what I've already provided.

Have you read the Talmud? Have you read the mishnah or the Gamara? Have you read the Targums? Have you read the dead sea scrolls?
 
Have you read the Talmud? Have you read the mishnah or the Gamara? Have you read the Targums? Have you read the dead sea scrolls?

Over the last forty years I've seen tons of material from those sources - at least the material germane to the Messiah. And one thing I always keep in mind: unless it's Biblically-based like the Dead Sea Scrolls in part, it's not the Word of God, but the thoughts of men.
 
The problem With Logicman is he never actually listens to any other side, he copies and pastes from apologetic websites, without knowing the arguments, without understanding the texts, and then just ignores any response or any data not coming from apologetic websites.

Racky, you need to give up your left-wing, loony-tune theology and get with the Word of God.

Jesus is divine, and Christians ad nauseum have tried to educate you on this, but you're not interested in the truth. Which is why you're lost.
 
Racky, you need to give up your left-wing, loony-tune theology and get with the Word of God.

Jesus is divine, and Christians ad nauseum have tried to educate you on this, but you're not interested in the truth. Which is why you're lost.

Says the guy who tried to pass off the Zohar as proof that Jews believed in the Trinity .... :)
 
Hi, actual Jew here. Most of the stuff the Logicman tries to pull in support of his religious beliefs are a few thoughts written by a handful of rabbis over several thousand years. There are likewise thousands of other ideas by various rabbis that he ignores.

You're an actual Jew! Well, so are so many Messianic Jews who support Jesus. In fact, Jews started Christianity. The vast majority of the New Testament was written by Jews.

None of the ideas about two kinds of messiahs or anything else is accepted in any part of mainstream Jewish thought. Not now, and not then.

Most Jews I've come across have never even read the New Testament, and many have yet to even read the Tanakh.

It's a weird narrative he tires to put forth about a handful of rabbis secretly deducing a prophecy about Jesus that contradicts all of the normal ideas that Jews had about a messiah. It's nonsense. Rabbis are famous for coming up with weird interpretations about everything. The old saying is that if you lock 4 rabbis in a room overnight, in the morning you get 5 different opinions.

And with you it's six.

No Jew has ever seriously thought there was some kind of secondary mold that the messiah could fit in to. There's just the heralding by Elijah on Passover, then the uniting Jews all over the world, and then god literally coming down to rule the world himself on behalf of the Jews. That's all there is to it. That's the whole story. Logicman and his ilk also like to mine various passages, especially from Isiah, and claim that they are prophecies about the messiah. Almost all of them aren't. Most of Judaism isn't concerned with the messiah. It's just this thing that's gonna happen someday, and unlike a lot of other religions, Jews don't constantly think that the end times are imminent. They're not. Very few Jews think that the messiah is coming any time soon.

<yawn>

You guys ought to study up on it further. Maybe the Lord will bless you with new revelations about your Messiah, Jesus Christ.

Frankly, I'm pretty offended when Christians portray such false narratives about Judaism in order to justify that Jesus really was connected to Jewish ideas.

Isaiah 53 predicted that's exactly how you would feel:

"He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

3 He was despised and rejected by mankind,
a man of suffering, and familiar with pain.
Like one from whom people hide their faces
he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.

The story of Jesus basically bears no resemblance to the Jewish stories of the messiah.

Nonsense.

Nor is adding a second coming later on any excuse.

Show me in the Tanakh where it says the Messiah will only appear once?

There's no room for that in Judaism. For all that Christianity claims to come from Judaism, it really doesn't. It's mainly Roman paganism with a thin coat of Jewish paint on top. Trying to pretend that Judaism is some kind of preface or precursor to Christianity is actually really rude. That's reducing a people, history, and culture to an introductory paragraph, stripping them of all meaning except to pave the way for this other, real, culture.

Don't listen to Logicman's nonsense. He just sees what he wants to see, and ignores the reality that he doesn't like.

Take another lap around Mt. Sinai, Paschendale.
 
The problem With Logicman is he never actually listens to any other side, he copies and pastes from apologetic websites, without knowing the arguments, without understanding the texts, and then just ignores any response or any data not coming from apologetic websites.

It's just a typical Xtian evangelical drive by, I'm surprised it is allowed in a Philosophy and Skeptic forum section on an essentially non-religious forum but, I guess the proselytisers do what they do.
 
It's just a typical Xtian evangelical drive by, I'm surprised it is allowed in a Philosophy and Skeptic forum section on an essentially non-religious forum but, I guess the proselytisers do what they do.

I'M a proselytiser, I debate here from a conservative CHristian biblical standpoint, but what logicman does is not only embarrasing, it ends up hurting the cause of defending Christianity.

When you post something without Reading it, and it ends up With you trying to claim that the Zohar proves that 1rst Century Jews believed in the Trinity, you make a Fool of yourself, and ultimately Your religion, when you post websites that cite scriptures that if you actually look up and read in context don't say ANYTHING about what you claim they are saying, you end up hurting Your case and ultimately christianity as a Whole.
 
I'M a proselytiser, I debate here from a conservative CHristian biblical standpoint, but what logicman does is not only embarrasing, it ends up hurting the cause of defending Christianity.

When you post something without Reading it, and it ends up With you trying to claim that the Zohar proves that 1rst Century Jews believed in the Trinity, you make a Fool of yourself, and ultimately Your religion, when you post websites that cite scriptures that if you actually look up and read in context don't say ANYTHING about what you claim they are saying, you end up hurting Your case and ultimately christianity as a Whole.

Hey, I don't care how many angels dance on the head of a pin. You're all either facilitators or facilitated.
 
Hey, I don't care how many angels dance on the head of a pin. You're all either facilitators or facilitated.

... I don't know what you're saying here ...
 
Back
Top Bottom