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