Your Brother Daniel
For more great blogs as
this one go to Daniel’s blog site at: www.Mannsword.blogspot.com
The
Rabbis, Messiah, and Substitutionary Atonement
The rabbis oppose the
idea that Jesus is the promised Messiah. They argue that the Messiah will not
die for the sins of Israel, and that the Hebrew Scriptures even forbid this possibility.
Rabbi and debater Tovia Singer claims that the Scriptures teach against human vicarious
(substitutionary) atonement:
·
“…nor does Scripture ever tell us that
an innocent man can die as an atonement for the sins of the wicked.”
However, the rabbis prior to Rashi were in agreement that Isaiah 53
taught that the Messiah would die for the sins of the people:
·
Rabbi Moshe Alshekh, a famous sixteenth-century scholar, asserted: “[Our]
Rabbis with one voice, accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet [Isaiah
53] is speaking of king Messiah.
·
The Talmud tractate Sanhedrin states: “The Rabanan [rabbis] say that
Messiah’s name is The Suffering Scholar . . . for it is written, “Surely He
hath borne our grief and carried our sorrows, yet we did esteem him stricken,
smitten of God and afflicted.” [Isaiah 53]
·
The highly regarded first-century Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai stated: “The
meaning of the words ‘Bruised for our iniquities’ [Isaiah 53:5] is that since
the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of his being
bruised, it follows that whoso will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for
our iniquities, must endure and suffer them for them himself.”
·
The Midrash Aseret Memrot states: “The Messiah, in order to atone for
them both [for Adam and David] will ‘make his soul a trespass offering,’
[Isaiah 53:10].”
Nevertheless, Singer
claims that Scripture rules out the
possibility that one man will die for all. He offers as “proof” God intervening
to prevent Abraham from sacrificing his son Isaac:
· “When Abraham was ready
to sacrifice Isaac, the Almighty admonished him that He did not want the human
sacrifice…The Almighty’s directive—that He only wanted animal sacrifices rather
than human sacrifices—was immediately understood. This teaching has never
departed from the mind and soul of the faithful children of Israel.”
However, this doesn’t
seem to be the point that either Abraham or Israel derived. For one thing, God
did not admonish Abraham for offering his son as a sacrificial offering.
Instead, He commended Abraham:
· But the angel of the Lord called out to him from
heaven, “Abraham! Abraham!” “Here I am,” he replied. “Do not lay a hand on the
boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God,
because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.” Abraham looked
up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns. He went over and
took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son. So
Abraham called that place The Lord Will Provide. And to this day it is
said, “On the mountain of the Lord it will be provided.” The angel of
the Lord called to Abraham from heaven a second time and said, “I swear by
myself, declares the Lord, that because you have done this and have not
withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you and make your
descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the
seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies,
and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you
have obeyed me.” (Genesis 22:11-18)
Because Abraham had been
faithful, God promised to bless him. Contrary to Singer’s assertion, He
certainly wasn’t chastening Abraham for his willingness to offer his son as a
sacrifice.
Also, it seems that both
Israel and Abraham had derived an even greater message about something that God
would offer in the future – “The Lord will
Provide.” Ordinarily, this would be a strange way to name Mt. Moriah, since
this event described how God had already provided an animal substitute
for Isaac. Why then wasn’t Moriah named, “The Lord has Provided?” Evidently, what God would provide in the future
would overshadow what He had already provided. But it would be
something akin to what had already been provided – Jesus Himself!
However, this isn’t our
point, but merely that Singer’s assertion – “that He only wanted animal sacrifices rather than human sacrifices” – is
scripturally unwarranted!
Instead, there are many
verses that envision human substitutionary atonement – the Cross of Christ (Isaiah 53:5-7; Psalm 40:6-8; Dan
9:24-27; Zech. 12:10-13:1, 7; Psalm 22, 69).
No comments:
Post a Comment