Eclectic Topics in no Particular Order
Various Topics Discussed
/>
Rabbi Michael Skobac of Jews for Judaism in Canada likes to say that many missionaries read the T'nach (Jewish bible) with "Jesus glasses" on. This is akin to "rose colored glasses" -- where whatever the missionary sees, if it even has the slightest commonality with Jesus automatically becomes a "prophecy" about Jesus. Thus King David speaking of being thirsty becomes a prophecy of Jesus being thirst on the cross, and son on. . . Rabbi Skobac will suggest that a missionary as him / herself "in the 1500 years Judaism existed before Judaism would any Jew alive have seen that passage as a messianic prophecy?" If the answer is "no" it should be struck from the missionary list. . . although we know it won't be. . . The average Christian is at a great disservice. The missionary will begin with the Christian bible and read "backwards" into the T'nach (Jewish bible). Thus they assume the Christian bible is true, and they are simply looking for "footprints" of Jesus in what they call the "old" -- the T'nach. Does that even make sense? Where else in learning do we begin at the end and look backwards? Normally learning commences at "the beginning" and we move forward. However, doing so will eliminate Jesus from being the messiah -- so this is not how Christians are taught (including children). . . no they begin by being told "Jesus loves the little children" -- and while many a devout Christian may take a highlighter pen and highlight passages in the Christian bible how many of them really study the T'nach first and flow it into the Christian bible -- noticing all the contradictions along the way? After all:
Even worse than learning the bible "backwards" (or sometimes not at all -- many small Christian children are taught "Jesus loves me" but they do not read the Christian bible or the original bible. . . they read "bible stories" which clean up the contradictions, the nastiness, the pettiness, etc. Indeed, the Jesus in the Christian bible never comes out and says he loves the people -- unless he is commanding that they love HIM first. "A new command I give you: love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another" John 13:34, "Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him." John 14:21 and so on. Does John 14:21 mean that Jesus does NOT love the little children since they are too young to understand what it means to love him? Another issue with reading the bible backwards is the fact that the Christians "moved the books around." Taking things out of chronological order -- and removing them from the level of holiness (the T'nach begins with the holiest, the Torah and proceeds to the Prophets who had direct communication from G-d re-enforcing the messages in Torah but a level removed from the prophecy of Moses which was not through visions or dreams as were all other prophets, and finally Writings which is even farther removed and is not direct communication with G-d, but rather influenced words of men). The Christian translations of the T'nach move things around ignoring these layers of connectivity with G-d. . .
0 Comments
In October of 2015 I wrote a blog post entitled Jesus name is not יֵשֽׁוּעַ / Yéshu'a. This post explained in detail why יֵשֽׁוּעַ / Yéshu'a can not possibly be translated as "Jesus." Recently this comment was submitted to the blog, and rather than post it as a comment it is presented here so that a detailed explanation can be given. The comment: "(1) In the Septuagint-Old Greek translation, the sixth book is Iésous, the Greek version of Yehoshua. (2) Yehoshua (Joshua), the son of Nun, is rendered as Iésous in Ecclesiasticus 46:1. And (3) the subscript to this book in 51:30 says that the book was written by Iésous ben Sira, which is the Greek rendering of Yehoshua' ben Sirach in Hebrew. Further, (4) the several mentions of Yehoshua' in Haggai (1:1, 12, 14; 2:2) and Zechariah (3:1, 3, 7, 9) are rendered Iésous in the same version. (5) So also the Aramaic form of Yehoshua' (Yeshua'), the son of Nun, in Nehemiah 8:17. (6) See further Nehemiah 8:7; 9:4; 12:1, 10, 24, 26 for other men who had the Aramaic name Yeshua. These are all rendered Iésous in the LXX-OG, not Jésouas, as you argue (there is no 'J' in Greek)." #1 -- The book of Joshua is not found in the Septuagint. The Septuagint is discussed in detail in the blog post "Greek or Hebrew -- which is most authentic? The "Septuagint." The Septuagint was originally a translation only of the Torah, not of Joshua or any of the other books in the T'nach. No one knows who translated Joshua (or the other books) -- but it is well known that the quality varies from decent to horrendous. Likewise, the Greek translations were all maintained by the Christians. More and more errors crept into them causing people like Origen to state they should not be used and a new translation from the Hebrew should be requested from Jews. #2 The name "Joshua" in the Greek translation of the book of Joshua you are calling the Septuagint is a mistranslation. The transliteration of Y'hōshū'a should be Ιοσοα (Iosoa) or Ιοσοας (Iosoas), Ιοσαυα (Iosaua), or Ιοσα (Iosa), but the not-really Septuagint translation of יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ / Y'hōshū'a (Joshua) is spelt Ἰησοῦς (“Iēsous”). This is a mistranslation. The letter “-a” (ע / 'ayin) at the end of יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ / Y'hōshū'a (Joshua) is not represented in the Greek translation in the "not-really Septuagint." The ע / 'ayin should be represented in a Greek translation -- because the ע / 'ayin is a part of the word’s root (Hebrew words are based on root words). Ergo Ἰησοῦς / Iésous is a mistranslation of the name Y'hōshū'a / Joshua. Whoever created (or changed) the translation of the name "Joshua" in the "not-really Septuagint" played fast and loose with the Hebrew. Not only are they missing the ע 'ayin ("-a") there is another issue with the translation. The various Hebrew names that are similar (meaning those names that begin the letters יְהוֹ־ (“Y'ho–”) in Hebrew) are all translated Ιω– (“Io–”). But the translators did not translate יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ / Y'hōshū'a (Joshua) with Ιω– (“Io–”). Why? Why is it the only name begining with יְהוֹ־ (“Y'ho–”) in Hebrew that begins Ἰη-- (“Iē") and not Ιω– (“Io–”) is יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a (Joshua / Jesus) Ἰησοῦς (“Iēsous”)? Is it possible that the translators translated the other names properly, but somehow when it came to יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ / Y'hōshū'a (Joshua) they suddenly made a mistake? Check for yourself. Examine the fourteen Hebrew names in the T'nach that begin with the letters יְהוֹ־ (“Y'ho–”) in Hebrew, and then compare them to the transliterations of these names in the not really-septuagint. Every single of those fourteen names which were translated into Greek begins with Ιω– (“Io–”) in all of cases EXCEPT for Ἰησοῦς / Iésous / יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a / Joshua. יְהוֹאָחָז Y'ho'aḥaz is spelt Ιωαχας (“Ioakhas”), יְהוֹאָשׁ Y'ho'ash is spelt Ιωας (“Ioas”), יְהוֹזָבָד Y'hozavad is spelt Ιωζαβεδ (“Iozabed”), יְהוֹיָכִין Y'hoyachin is spelt Ιωακιμ (“Ioakim”) [although this is actually an error], יְהוֹיָקִים Y'hoyachin is also spelt Ιωακιμ (“Ioakim”), יְהוֹנָדָב Y'honadav is spelt Ιωναδαβ (“Ioanadab”), יְהוֹנָתָן Y'honatan is spelt Ιωναθαν (“Ioanathan”), יְהוֹעַדִּין Y'ho'addin is spelt Ιωαδιν (“Ioadin”), יְהוֹצָדָק Y'hotzadak is spelt Ιωσαδακ (“Iosadak”), יְהוֹרָם Y'horam is spelt Ιωραμ (“Ioram”), יְהוֹשֶֽׁבַע Y'hosheva is spelt Ιωσαβεε (“Iosabee”), יְהוֹשַׁבְעַת Y'hoshav'at is spelt Ιωσαβεθ (“Iosabeth”), and יְהוֹשָׁפָט Y'hoshafat is spelt Ιωσαφατ (“Iosaphat”). All fourteen begin with יְהוֹ־ (“Y'ho–”) in Hebrew -- and all are all translated Ιω– (“Io–”). BUT יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is spelt Ἰησοῦς (“Iēsous”). This seems to be less an error (since the other fourteen names were translated correctly) than to have been a deliberate choice by the translator(s) to make it look as though the spelling of the transliteration of יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a into Greek has been altered to make it match the way יֵֽשׁוּ Yéshu (“Jesus”) is spelt in the Christian bible. It looks like whoever translated Y'hōshū'a into the Greek doctored the translation to make it "fit" יֵֽשׁוּ Yéshu (“Jesus”) because the Greek in the translations is not the correct translation of the Hebrew into the Greek. Why do I say it looks like a deliberate "doctoring" to influence Christian readers? Because just as those fourteen names are translated correctly we also have examples in the T'nach of the Greek translators properly translating the letter “-a” (ע / 'ayin) at the end of יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ / Y'hōshū'a (Joshua) -- which is not represented in the Greek translation in the "not-really Septuagint." In B'reshit / Genesis 38:2 the name שֽׁוּעַ Shū'a is transliterated as Σαυα (Saua) in the not-really Septuagint. In Shmuel Alef / 1 Samuel 14:49 and 31:2 a man named מַלְכִּי־שֽׁוּעַ Malki-Shū'a is translated into Greek as Μελχισα (Melkhisa). The Greek translators got it "right" with those names, but not with "Joshua" which they seem to try to be "matching" to Jesus. . . The transliteration of יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ / Y'hōshū'a (Joshua) should be Ιοσοα (Iosoa) or Ιοσοας (Iosoas), Ιοσαυα (Iosaua), or Ιοσα (Iosa), but the not-really Septuagint translation of יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ / Y'hōshū'a (Joshua) is spelt Ἰησοῦς (“Iēsous”). Ergo Yéshua is not Jesus' Hebrew name. The name יֵשׁוּעַ (yeSHU'a) appears in the T'nach (Jewish bible) a a name twenty-eight times and once as the name of a town in the Judean desert. For details read The Yeshua Name Game by Uri Yosef. The name יֵשׁוּ (YEshu) appears in the Babylonian Talmud on 9 occasions. So, Jesus Hebrew name was not “Yéshu'a” (יֵשֽׁוּעַ -- a male name). “Yéshu'a” (יֵשֽׁוּעַ -- a male name) is not Hebrew. It is Aramaic. It is an ARAMAIC "nickname" shortened from יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ / Y'hoshu'a / Joshua. The name Yéshu'a” (יֵשֽׁוּעַ) was only used during the Babylonian Exile (between 597- 539 B.C.E. After the Babylonian Exile ended the name was shortened even further to ; after the Return, the name יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ / Y'hōshū'a (Joshua) started to be shortened still further to יֵשׁוּ (YEshu) which is Hebrew, not Aramaic. No one knows what Jesus' Hebrew name might have been, and without a time machine no one will every know. Given that Jesus supposedly lived 500 years or so post-Babylonian Exile it might have been יֵשׁוּ (YEshu) -- but we simply do not know, and the Greek name found in the Christian bible makes it impossible to know what his Hebrew name really might have been. But we simply do not know. Do not let missionaries who are trying to somehow get back to the "Hebrew roots" of Jesus fool you with their shenanigans. The facts do not support their guess -- which seems to be based on tying Jesus to "salvation" by choosing the fake name "Yeshua" for Jesus even though the etymology of the Hebrew disproves their "name game." As Uri Yosef once wrote: "יְשׁוּעָה is a feminine noun (meaning salvation), and יֵשׁוּעַ is a masculine proper name, and their respective pronunciations are different. In the Hebrew language, terms applied as proper names generally follow gender. Conclusion: yeshu’AH ( יְשׁוּעָה / feminine noun) means “salvation" -- a term referring to being rescued (the physical life being saved by G-d). YeSHU’a ( יֵ שׁוּעַ / masculine proper name) can not be the Hebrew name for Jesus based on the Greek name we do have for him. The Greek name for Jesus in the not really Septuagint are in error, seemingly on purpose. "Why did G-d permit the Holocaust?" "Why do children die?" "Why do terrorists kill innocent people?" Why does life seem so unfair? Doesn't G-d care? Why would G-d allow these things to happen? Wrong questions. G-d created everything including suffering, including evil - yet we know G-d is good. So that means that suffering and even evil have a good purpose. Consider why G-d created this world in the first place -- with its imperfections, its imperfect people, its hurricanes, its earthquakes, its children with cancer, its murderers, its despots. . . why would a loving G-d create a world where these things exist? There was already a perfect creation -- the angels exist in a place of no evil, no temptations -- and no free will. And no growth. Stasis. Mere existence -- not life. G‑d created our world incomplete and imperfect so that humans can complete it. Consider the very first covenant between G-d and the Jewish people, the brit milah (covenant of circumcision). The act of circumcision is the human "completing" the male body is a human act. This covenant is a symbol of the human / G-d partnership. This first covenant is a very physical / visual way of showing that completion in this world -- requires human effort. Mankind was put in this world to complete creation -- we are partners with G-d to perfect this world. It is the role of us humans transform this world and elevate it to a spiritual state. We have the power to experience people, places and things in a G‑dly way, thus changing their composition from merely physical to a new spiritual dimension. The only reason weird things happen to us, is because we are challenged to elevate that situation from the annoying (to humans) to the pleasurable (to G‑d). In other words "Everything happens for a reason" are not words of passive acceptance, of consolation. Instead of asking "why" of G-d, as "why" of yourself. How can you impact suffering? How can you repair yourself? Others? G-d gave us the blessing and the curse -- and He gave us the choice of which one to choose. . . The goal of this world -- including suffering and evil -- is for us to grow in understanding and wisdom. . . we can't have good without evil. When you witness evil, replace it with good. In this way we can transform suffering into something good. Instead of asking "why G-d" ask "what can I do?" It is why you were created in the first place. R' Tovia Singer's granddaughter was born with half a heart. She is two and has suffered greatly. Her life is still in jeopardy as she faces yet another and again life threatening surgery. This child of G-d has been through 3 major surgeries, nearly died numerous times and caused worry and grief to her family. BUT in her name thousands around the world have come together to pray for her, to bake challah in her name. . . She has brought many people closer to G-d and made them better people. Just think of that -- thousands of people who have never met her (me included) have been blessed by her. These people are all over the world. They have not cursed G-d, they have proactively done good on behalf of this child. Make a difference. The Torah tells us: "See! Today I have set before you [a free choice] between life and good [on one side], and death and evil [on the other]." D'varim / Deuteronomy 30:15 "I (G-d) form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I HaShem do all these things." Isaiah 45:7 G-d has given us a CHOICE between life and good on one side and death and evil on the other. CHOICE. This is all about choice. Free will. When G-d created man He did so in His image. G-d is the only entity in the universe, aside from man, who can CHOOSE. When everything is "good" where is the choice? If you knew that to touch fire would burn you, would you put your hand in the fire? But what if you didn't know (like a baby?). You are drawn to the fire's beauty. You are drawn to its warmth. Fire cooks your food. Yet fire can be misused -- it can burn people even to death. It can destroy our homes. Fire can be good AND bad. The fire can't choose - - it simply exists, but WE can choose. We can make a difference. Suffering will not end. Children will still die, hurricanes will still come. . . it is part of the cycle of life to help us learn and grow and to change the world for the better. We are partners with G-d. It is up to us to help complete this world and we do that by helping those who are suffering, including ourselves. As R' Hillel said: הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, אִם אֵין אֲנִי לִי, מִי לִי. וּכְשֶׁאֲנִי לְעַצְמִי, מָה אֲנִי. וְאִם לֹא עַכְשָׁיו, אֵימָתַי -- translation "If I am not for myself, who is for me? And if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?" Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers) 1:14. A missionary wrote to me: "there is NONE righteous NOT one" " I saw the bodies of those who rebelled against Me... and their worm never died and their fire not quenched" WHY would a Holy being ALLOW unholiness near Him and WHAT would be the currency that would permit such a union ?" This question is nearly at the center of the difference between Christianity and Judaism. Most Christians believe they are not good enough. That humans are somehow filthy -- a worm that is unholy and unworthy of G-d. Jesus had to die for them because they weren't good enough to "save themselves." The phrase "there is none righteous, not one" is found in Romans 3:10, but it is not found in the T'nach. The closest to this one will find in T'hillim / Psalm 14:3 and 53:4 says "no one does good, not even one." The Hebrew here is ט֑וֹב -- good. Not righteous. . . good. The book of Romans is misquoting the T'nach. When the psalms say "no one does good" does it mean that there are no good people in the world? Does it mean that it is impossible to be a good person? Nope. Read it IN CONTEXT. "The degraded one says in his heart, "There is no G-d!" They have acted corruptly and abominably (in their) action; there is no doer of good." The degraded one does no good. Not all people. There are hundreds of verses that stress we can do good and amend wrongs. Perfection is neither expected or required! Romans 3:10's anonymous author reverses the bible! Romans states that there are no righteous people in the world. Romans 3:9 - 12 says "For we have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin. As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks G-d. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.”" Totally unbiblical! People ARE righteous. People DO understand. People seek G-d (isn't that why you are reading this blog?). While some reject G-d, many seek Him and do not turn away. How dare the anonymous author of Romans 3 reverse G-d's eternal word and say that His creation, mankind, is worthless? Why does Romans make it seem as if no human alive does good -- not even one -- when the psalmist makes it clear that he is speaking of a select few -- the degraded -- who "do no good"? Christianity teaches that people should be perfect, and because Adam and Chava (Eve) sinned the whole world is damned to not being perfect -- meaning that according to Christian doctrine G-d screwed up and screwed up badly. Why would anyone want to worship a god capable of making that bad a mistake -- right from the start? Why would such a god deserve respect let alone worship? To make things worse, Christianity then claims that in order to fix the mistake -- mess -- that this god made He commands the painful murder of himself to himself to "atone" with human blood for his screw up. Again. Not biblical. One of the verses most devastating to Original Sin is B'reshit / Genesis 4:7, where G-d tells Cain that he can overcome temptation. Cain is envious of Abel because G-d accepts only Abel's sacrifice. Cain is tempted to murder Abel. G-d says, "if you do not do good, sin crouches at the entrance. Its desire is for you, but you can rule over it." Right from chapter 4 we are told that we can rule over sin. The bible also tells us that G-d created everything -- good and evil are His. G-d does not make mistakes. Let's return to the claim. Since the two psalms do not say that no one is righteous, but rather "no one is good" -- what does it mean? Obviously a lot of people do good -- so we must first as ourselves -- to whom is this addressed -- everyone in the world or a select population which is not good? It is actually NOT everyone in the world. T'hillim / Psalm 14:3 is about Nebuchadnezzar. Rashi says that Nebuchadnezzar was destined to destroy the Temple -- and that not one man would try to stop him. Let's start with recognizing that T'hillim (Psalms) are 150 poems. POEMS. Most of them were written by Dovid HaMelech (King David) and they were sung in the Temple as prayers. Some praise G-d. Some thank him, some plead to Him -- and some even speak of human fears and how G-d's love transcends our fears. The psalms deal with real human issues and real human lives. These are not the words OF G-d, these are our words TO G-d. Here is T'hillim / Psalm 14:3: "For the conductor, by David. The degraded one says in his heart, "There is no G-d!" They have acted corruptly and abominably (in their) action; there is no doer of good. 2 From heaven HaShem gazed down upon mankind, to see if there exists a reflective person who seeks out G-d. 3. Everyone has gone astray, together they have become depraved; there is doer of good, there is not even one. 4. Do they not realize -- all those evildoers, who devour my people (those seed of Nebuchadnezzar per Rashi) as they would devour bread, who do not call upon HaShem -- 5 (that) there they will be struck with terror, for G-d is with the righteous generation? 6 You shame the poor man's counsel, that HaShem is his refuge. 7 O', that out of Zion would come Israel's salvation! When HaShem restores the captivity of His people Jacob will exult, Israel will rejoice." T'hillim / Psalm 14, Artscroll Stone Edition Translation. None of those people helped -- not one looked for G-d. But the day will come when G-d will restore us Jews and we will rejoice (when the messiah comes, the Temple is rebuilt and global knowledge of G-d is here -- along with worldwide peace). Remember: G-d created everything... and He did so for a purpose. He created us imperfectly, but with the ability to make mistakes and learn from them. He MADE US this way. He gave us free will to choose good over evil -- but without evil how would would humans have anything to choose FROM? Nowhere in the T'nach (bible) is it even hinted that man is expected to be perfect. Indeed the T'nach tells us "there is no righteous person who never sins." (Kohelet / Ecclesiastes 7:20). Righteous people sin. Sin is part of G-d's plan. G-d does not expect perfection -- He expects us to try, to fail, to pick ourselves up and to try again. The bible itself tells us we can do it! "It is not in heaven, to say 'Who will go up for us to heaven, and acquire it for us, and teach it to us, and we will do it?' Nor is it across the sea, to say Who will cross the sea, and acquire it for us and teach it to us, and we will do it?' For the matter is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, to do it." (D'varim / Deuteronomy 30:11). The Hebrew word for prophecy is נְבוּאָה / navua (a feminine noun). Nouns in Hebrew are either masculine or feminine -- there is no "gender neutral" noun in Hebrew. A נָבִיא / navi (prophet) had direct communication with G-d (through dreams and / or visions with the exception of Moses who spoke directly with G-d), and who relayed G-d’s message to his or her own generation. The way a Christian uses the term "prophet" or "prophecy" would be more fittingly a רֹאֶה Ro'eh (“Seer”) not a נָבִיא Navi (“Prophet”). The prophet Shmuel (Samuel) is called a רֹאֶה Ro'eh (“Seer”) in Divrei Hayamim Alef / 1 Chronicles 9:22, 26:28 and 29:29, but he is also called a נָבִיא Navi (“Prophet”) in Divrei Hayamim Beit / 2 Chronicles 35:18, showing that the two terms are not identical. There is also the word חֹזֶה Ḥozeh (“Visionary”). This word describes someone who experiences “visions." Other than Moses all prophets did communicate with G-d through visions and dreams. Some messages had meaning for the current and future generations, but all prophecy must have a message for the current generation (of that prophet), be direct from G-d (not through an angel or intermediary) and cannot contradict the Torah. If a prophet did tell of what would happen in the future such a statement was given either as a promise or a warning. Promises always come to pass. Warnings from prophets (of potential calamities) may or may not happen. Any negative prophetic warning can always be prevented through prayer and repentance. Think of the story of Jonah and the people of Nineveh who were able to avoid the curse by heeding the prophet’s warning. . . From the Orthodox Union (OU) on the fact that all positive future visions will happen, but that negative visions are warnings which may be averted through heeding the warning: "A negative prophecy cannot be refuted – but a positive one can. If the good foreseen comes to pass, then the prophecy is true. If it does not, then you cannot say, ‘God changed His mind’ because G-d does not retract from a promise He has made of good, or peace, or return. "It is therefore only when the prophet offers a positive vision that he can be tested. That is why Jonah was wrong to believe he had failed when his negative prophecy – the destruction of Nineveh – failed to come true. This is how Maimonides (the Rambam) puts it: "[The above principles do not apply to] prophecies of retribution which a prophet will utter - e.g., "So and so will die," "This or that year will be a year of famine or a year of war," and the like. If his words do not come true, this does not nullify the validity of his prophecy, nor do we say [in condemnation of him]: "Behold, he spoke and his words were not fulfilled."[This is because] the Holy One, Blessed be He, is slow to anger, abundant in kindness, and forgiving of evil. Thus, it is possible that they will repent and [their sin] will be forgiven, as in the case of the people of Nineveh, or that [retribution] will be held in abeyance, as in the case of Hezekiah. [This does not apply regarding prophecies for the good.] If [a prophet] promised that good would come and such and such will occur, and the good about which he prophesied did not materialize, he is surely a false prophet. Any good which God decrees - even if [the decree] is provisional - will never be nullified. {We find [God] nullifying a positive prophecy only during the destruction of the first Temple. He had promised the righteous that they would not die together with the wicked; however, He nullified this prophecy, as explained in the tractate of Shabbat.} We can conclude from this that a prophet should be tested on the basis of his positive prophecies. This was what Jeremiah meant by his reply to Chananiah ben Azur, when he was prophesying doom and Chananiah was promising a [glorious future]. He told Chananiah: "If my words are not fulfilled, this will not lead to the conclusion that I am a false prophet. If your promises are not fulfilled, however, it will be proven that you are a false prophet," as implied by [Jeremiah 28:7,9]: "Hear, now, this word... As for the prophet who prophesies for peace, when the word of the prophet shall come to pass, it will be known that God has truly sent this prophet." (Yesodei ha-Torah 10: 4). "Fundamental conclusions follow from this. A prophet is not an oracle: a prophecy is not a prediction. Precisely because Judaism believes in free will, the human future can never be unfailingly predicted. People are capable of change. G-d forgives. As we say in our prayers on the High Holy Days: “Prayer, penitence and charity avert the evil decree.” There is no decree that cannot be revoked. A prophet does not foretell. He warns. A prophet does not speak to predict future catastrophe but rather to avert it. If a prediction comes true it has succeeded. If a prophecy comes true it has failed. The second consequence is no less far-reaching. The real test of prophecy is not bad news but good. Calamity, catastrophe, disaster prove nothing. Anyone can foretell these things without risking his reputation or authority. It is only by the realization of a positive vision that prophecy is put to the test. So it was with Israel’s prophets. They were realists, not optimists. They warned of the dangers that lay ahead. But they were also, without exception, agents of hope. They could see beyond the catastrophe to the consolation. That is the test of a true prophet." The text in purple was written by the Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks. |
Categories
All
|