Does the New Testament Misquote the Jewish Bible?-2

[Music] does the New Testament misquote the Jewish Bible welcome to another edition
in our series is Christianity the Mormonism of Judaism I'm Christy Turlington director of witnesses for
Jesus and the last couple videos we have been talking about Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah and today we
are going to be covering more of these prophecies and particularly those prophecies that we would call dual
fulfillment prophecies the Jewish rabbis claim that Christianity has distorted the religion of Judaism in much the same
way that Mormonism has distorted the religion of Christianity and so they use this false parallel where they'll try to
say that Christianity is the Mormonism of Judaism and one of the ways they do that is to look at prophecies that we
Christians call dual fulfillment prophecies or typology there are prophecies that had their immediate
fulfillment in the days of those prophecies were given so prophecies like Isaiah 7:14 a virgin shall conceive and
bear a child there was a part of that prophecy that was fulfilled in that day and age and they will say see that
prophecy was fulfilled and they'll say that Christianity's use of that passage particularly Matthew when he quotes
Isaiah 7:14 they will claim that that is a misapplication of the Jewish Bible so they'll draw parallels to that and then
they'll say that's like Mormonism's misuse of the Christian Bible we will be examining these claims today in our
video so let me give you a little bit of overview today in our study of the dual fulfillment prophecies we will be
looking at Isaiah 7:14 in the quote in Matthew 1:23 about a virgin conceiving and bearing a child we will look at in
Matthew chapter 2 there are several prophecies will look at Micah 5:2 and you Bethlehem land of Judah
are by no means least among the leaders of judah for out of you shall come forth a ruler who will Shepherd my people
Israel Matthew applies this that was a quote of Micah 5:2 in Matthew 2 6 so we'll be looking at Matthew 2 6 quote of
Micah 5:2 we'll look at Matthew 215 the quote of Hosea 11:1 where he quotes Hosea is saying out of Egypt I have
called my son we will also be looking at Matthew 2 18 which is quoting jeremiah 31:15 a voice was heard in Ramah weeping
and great mourning Rachel weeping for her children when the children were killed when Jesus was born so we'll be
looking at that prophecy and also Matthew chapter 2 verse 23 talks about how Jesus or how the Messiah would be a
Nazarene it's a play on words from Isaiah 11:1 so we're gonna look at those prophecies and then we're also going to
look at Matthew chapter 4 we're at the very beginning of the chapter Matthew says then Jesus was led up by the spirit
into the wilderness and to be tempted of the devil and we read in that passage that he was tempted as he was in the
wilderness for forty days he was tempted by Satan so he was tempted in the wilderness after having fasted for forty
days what is the parallel there that Matthew is drawing we'll look at that and then
we're gonna look a little bit later on in that passage we also read in Matthew chapter 4 14 through 16 a prophecy from
Isaiah chapter 9 verses 1 & 2 now we're all familiar with the Christmas song for unto us a child is born unto us a son is
given and the government shall be upon his shoulders we're familiar with Isaiah 9:6 this particular part of Isaiah
verses 1 and 2 are quoted in Matthew chapter 4 giving an idea that Matthew saw in Isaiah 9 references to the
Messiah so we're gonna look at those Matthew chapter 1 virgin shall conceive quote of
Isaiah 7:14 Matthew chapter 2 several passages from the Old Testament that Matthew chapter 4 the beginning part of
Isaiah 9 being quoted and incidentally that verse Isaiah 9:6 is not found in any direct quotation of the New
Testament the New Testament writers did not quote Isaiah 9:6 specifically but Matthew alluded to Isaiah 9 being
picturing the Messiah in the beginning parts of the of the chapter which he quotes and then we also see in Luke Luke
chapter 1 the particular reference to the Messiah the government shall be upon his shoulders and Isaiah 9 verse 7 is
referenced in Luke chapter 1 so there's a lot of parallels that mostly Matthew but other gospel and writers a New
Testament writers like Apostle Paul also reference Isaiah in reference to the Messiah and we're also gonna look
briefly at Isaiah chapter 8:14 being quoted by the Apostle Paul in Romans chapter 9 verse 33 and first Peter 2 7
and 8 so these are what we call fulfillment prophecies dual fulfillment prophecies because they had an immediate
fulfillment in the day and age but ultimate fulfillment was found in Christ so to begin this study I want to talk
about something that the Jewish rabbis did in the days of Christ and also continue to do today in some of their
Talmudic writings that are read by the Jews or referenced by the Jews and Talmud in particular is as we have noted
in other videos that you guys have been watching and I've been putting together on this topic the Talmud is the Jewish
interpretation of the Old Testament now in the Talmud we see many examples of this this is called Midrash in the text
what is Midrash now this is taken a Jewish website my Jewish learning comm and they say what is Midrash these
writings which fill in gaps in biblical texts falls into two categories I'm not sure if I'm pronouncing this right so
please understand I'm not Jewish so I don't know how to read these words but it's Holika it's a che la CH a and a
cada AGG Adah two categories of Midrash and they explain what is that what is Midrash Midrash is an interpretive act
seeking the answers to religious questions both practical and theological by plummeting the meaning of the words
of the Torah and then they talk about comes from the root Rasch is used to mean inquiring into any matter including
occasionally to seek out God's Word Midrash responds to contemporary problems and crafts new stories this is
very important did you catch that Midrash responds to contemporary problems and crafts new stories making
connections between new Jewish realities and the unchanging biblical texts so here's the point what the Jewish rabbis
engaged in in Jesus's days and continuing on to today was looking at an Old Testament passage looking at the
Jewish Bible and saying you know these stories or this particular verse here although it means this one thing it can
also possibly have another meaning for us today that's essentially what Midrash in is
and they go on and talk about the two different categories the helices interpretating the bare biblical
narrative exploring questions of ethics or theology or creating homilies and parables based on the text a coda means
telling any Midrash which is not halakha falls into this category so basically a good
midrash would be telling the stories in maybe a different way but basically still retelling the story if it's not
falling into the questions of crafting homilies and parables on the text it falls into the set of a category now
don't ask me to explain all the ins and outs of these different types of Midrash but the important thing I want you to
just understand just the basic concept of Midrash because it's going to come into play when we look at the biblical
text as given by matthew the quotations that matthew pulls out of the Old Testament in some cases although those
are pulled out of context he's employing this midrashic method of saying yes that prophecy meant this one thing but look
at how it can also apply to Yeshua Jesus and that is essentially what Matthew does in many of these passages we are
examining and it is what the Jewish rabbis do in the Talmud which we will examine a little bit later on after we
look at these verses because you're going to see examples of the exact same type of interpretive manner that the
Jewish rabbis did in their commentaries they're Talmudic writings and also there's other Jewish writings they do do
this in many other passages Midrash Hakka this website explains attempts to clarify or extend a law beyond the
conditions assumed in the Bible and to make connections between current practice and the biblical text it made
possible the creation and acceptance of new liturgies and rituals which de facto replace sacrificial worship after the
fall of the Second Temple so you ask could you today why don't you do sacrifices well they don't have a temple
there can only be sacrifices done where there is a temple and in the jerusalem temple being destroyed that second
temple was destroyed the Jewish rabbis employed Midrash II to come up with a new way of interpreting the sacrifice
versus to come up with new forms of ritual to take away sin so having an understanding of bid rash can help us
understand these passages here in the New Testament let's start with Matthew 1:23 let's back it up a little bit well
look at Matthew chapter 1 verse 20 but when he had considered this speaking of Joseph behold an angel of the Lord
appeared to him in a dream saying Joseph son of David do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife for the child who has
been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit now just a little note I'm reading from the new American Standard
Bible whenever I'm reading the New Testament I typically read for the NASB although occasionally I might reference
a different translation I'll let you know but in the New Testament it's an NASB and then when we get to the Old
Testament will be reading the Jewish translation Jewish publication societies 1917 edition and so just a little note
on translation so we're really Matthew 1:20 the context is Joseph receiving a word from the angel of the Lord appeared
to him and telling him don't be afraid to take Mary as your wife even though she was pregnant and he's like why you
know verse 21 she will bear a son and you will call his name Jesus for he will
save his people from their sins and then we get to verse 22 now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the
Lord through the Prophet now here's where Matthew quotes Isaiah 7:14 behold the Virgin shall be with child and shall
bear a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel which translated means God with us now if you go over to Isaiah 7 the
context is a completely different context it is talking about a battle that was going to take place in Isaiah 7
we read and it came to pass in the days of our has the son of Jotham the son of Uzziah the king of Judah that resin the
king of Arum and Pitka the son of imlah king of Israel went up to Jerusalem to wage war against it but could not
prevail against it so that's the context Isaiah 7 it's a specific context in the day of Ahaz and so god's word comes to a
has through isaiah who says thus is the lord god verse 7 it shall not stand neither shall come to pass so you don't
need to worry you know this is not gonna happen they're not gonna take over jerusalem but you know the the king it
has had trouble believing so verse 11 asked the assign of hashem thy god ask it either in the depth or in the height
above but it hath said I will not ask neither will I try Hashem and he said hear ye now o house of David isn't a
small thing for you to be weary men that you will weary my God also now here we get to the Court of Matthew 1:23 here in
Isaiah 7:14 therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign behold a young woman shall conceive and bear a son and
shall call his name Emmanuel curtain honey verse 15 shall I eat when he knows to refuse the evil and choose the good
yay before the child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good the land whose two kings thou has a Horeb
shall be forsaken so this is the sign that Isaiah gives to the King Ahaz about a young woman bearing a son and this son
before he knows the difference between good and evil this these Kings aren't going to be an issue they're going to be
forsaken so they these kings are gonna leave Jerusalem there's not going to be a battle he doesn't need to be concerned
and this is a sign that God gives through Isaiah to King Ahaz now that's the context of this quote about a virgin
conceiving it's technically the word alma which literally means a young woman chuck conceive and bear a child and it
does make sense that in the days of a has it wouldn't have been a virgin who were to conceive but rather a young
woman because this is going to be a child who's going to be conceived who is going to
not even grow up before those Kings dissipate they no longer concern Jerusalem so the context is clearly an
event that took place in the days of King Ahaz not something that would take place many years later but what does
what does Matthew see Matthew looks at this story in the Old Testament that did take place and said but there is another
a dual fulfillment to this passage and he draws a connection to the Virgin Mary who was a young woman but she was a
virgin and so this is why Matthew translates that word young woman as virgin when he's applying Isaiah 7:14 to
his passage in Matthew 1:23 he is seeing the fact that this young woman who in Mary's case was a virgin would conceive
and bear a child and he's saying look he cause name Yeshua for he will save his people from his sins we see that spoken
by the angel to Joseph and Yeshua means Jehovah saved so Matthew looks at these names and says we'll look that's just
like this story in Isaiah 7:14 about a young woman who was going to bear a child I was going to call his name
Emmanuel which means God with us and he says see the connection that what took place here in the days of King Ahaz
essentially Matthew is saying that this was ultimately fulfilled in a greater fulfillment a second a dual fulfillment
prophecy that was fulfilled with Christ so again context yes we can agree that the context of this child that was born
took place in the days of King Ahaz but there was a dual fulfillment that Matthew was drawing on and this is an
example of Midrash it's an example of looking at the original text looking at an incident that happened and said look
but there's a greater meaning for us today and that's in Yeshua Jesus who also had a young woman who brought a
child and Alma as essentially although it means young woman does not necessarily mean virgin
or non virgin it can be translated virgin if you look at the lexicon aids and the dictionaries for the word alma
they say that it can be translated virgin but it can also be translated as a young woman who maybe is a young
married woman so it's not specific to virginity and the Jewish rabbis are right about that but it's not a wrong
application to say that this young woman in the case of Mary was a virgin hence using the word virgin when translating
Isaiah 7:14 in reference to Mary in Matthews context so again we have to keep everything in context and say what
is Matthew essentially doing here yes he's taking this verse out of the original context but he is applying this
in a way that was very midrashic in a way that said yes this particular situation took place but look at how it
also had a dual fulfillment in Messiah Yeshua Jesus and Matthew goes on with several more quotes from the Old
Testament to draw parallels to incidents that happened in the Old Testament took place or prophecies that were fully
fulfilled in the Old Testament but the ultimate fulfillment the the secondary fulfillment secondary meaning matthew
applies to yeshua jesus let's look at the next prophecy we see in matthew which takes place in chapter 2 of
Matthew and Matthew chapter 2 verse 6 says and actually backing up a little bit get in the context beginning at
verse 1 now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the King Magi from the east arrived in
Jerusalem saying where is he who was born King of the Jews verse 2 for we have we saw his star in the east and
have come to worship Him now you remember this story I'm not going to read everything here but the the Magi
had come to Herod and he's like I don't know where this King what there's a king that's born and so one of the ants
Harrod goes and inquires of the wise men who say well yeah actually this child was to be born in Bethlehem so this is
the this is the context and matthew draws from that story here in matthew – of an incident that took place when
jesus was born and he says this is just like Micah 5:2 verse 5 they said to him in Bethlehem of Judea for this is what
has been written by the Prophet verse 6 and you bethlehem judea land of Judea are by no means least among the leaders
of judah for out of you shall come forth a ruler who shall Shepherd my people Israel
now the actual quote Micah 5:2 we're gonna go ahead and read that now but thou Bethlehem Ephrata which are little
to be among the thousands of Judah out of vd shall 1 come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel whose going forth
are from old from ancient days verse 2 therefore he will give them up until the time that she who travaileth hath
brought forth then the residue of his brother and shall return with the children of Israel and he shall stand
and shall feed his flock in the strength of Hashem in the majesty of the name of Hashem his God now Matthew when he
quotes I Micah 5:2 you could see he left parts of it out he left the part about well essentially
he summarizes it he left the second half of the verse out where it says here but thou Bethlehem Ephrata though thou be
little among the thousands of the Judah out of thee shall come forth unto me that is to be ruined Israel and then he
leaves this part out who's going forth are from old from ancient days now the Jewish rabbis point to that and say well
why didn't you leave that out if he put it in it would not have fit the context for the points of Matthew's quotation
why did he leave the other half of the verse out I say actually that is not the case
he didn't leave that second half of the verse off when he quoted it about the goings forth from old or from ancient
days he didn't leave that off because he was trying to hide anything there he was trying to summarize these
three verses here he stops at the middle of verse two and then he essentially summarized his verses the following two
verses and he comes down to and he shall stance to Shepherd the flock strength of Hashem Matthew says for out of you
should come forth a ruler who will Shepherd my people Israel so it wasn't that Matthew was trying to do a direct
word-for-word quote out of Micah rather he's trying to get the concepts out of Micah chapter 2 and look particularly at
verse 2 and verse 4 and say look at the parallels here the this one's supposed to come from Bethlehem and he's supposed
to shepherd God's people so he pulls from those two verses he doesn't necessarily quote the whole thing but
had he quoted the whole thing it would not have diminished the strength of his argument in any way here is why
who's going forth our from all from ancient days now what does this remind you of does this remind you of Daniel
chapter 7 about a son a man who's going to come before the Ancient of Days this you see two persons you have this son of
man coming before the Ancient of Days and yet it says here that this person who comes out of Bethlehem comes forth
from old from ancient days who does this but God God Himself was called the Ancient of Days
so if Matthew had quoted this other half of the verse it would have strengthened his argument to not only the fact is
this Messiah unique in shepherding God's people and in coming out of Bethlehem but this Messiah comes forth from the
Ancient of Days just like we read about in Daniel chapter 7 it's an allusion to the Messiah being from eternity past to
eternity future so that actual half of the verse strengthens the argument it does not weaken it and Matthew not
quoting the half of the verse wasn't trying to hide anything but was rather drawing a point off the passage and
essentially midrashim the text to say the akan except of a shepherd coming out of
Bethlehem is what is portrayed in Micah Micah chapter 5 being quoted here in Matthew chapter 2 so no Matthews not
taking Micah necessarily out of context he's drawing a parallel to this ruler in Israel whose supposed to Shepherd God's
people and pointing that and applying that directly to Yeshua Jesus here in Matthew chapter 2 the same holds true
for the following passages we're going to examine here in chapter 2 of matthew matthew 215 and talks about how in the
preceding verses how jesus had to be taken to Egypt in order to be protected against Herod who wanted to wipe out all
the babies trying to get rid of this king of Israel all the babies in Bethlehem and so what happens Jesus is
taken down to Egypt well what happened in the nation of Israel when there was a famine how were they protected by God
they were taken to Egypt and when God went to Pharaoh and said to Pharaoh you know through Moses let my people go God
told Moses to tell Pharaoh Israel is my son okay God told Moses to tell Pharaoh of zorro is my son therefore tell them
Farell let my people go let my son go that he may serve me so the context is Egypt
Israel is taken to Egypt to protect from the famine God uses Egypt as a protection place for his son Israel and
Matthew draws on that parallel with Jesus going down to Egypt and then once Israel is taken out of Egypt as we read
in hosea chapter 11 hosea chapter 11 verse 1 says when Israel was a child then I loved him and out of Egypt I have
called my son Matthew all's on that parallel with God calling his son Israel out of Egypt and
essentially applies that to Jesus here in Matthew 215 saying he's speaking of Christ remained there until the death of
Herod this was to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the Prophet out of Egypt I called my son now
contextually in Hosea it clearly says that this is the context of Israel being called God son out of Egypt
Matthew essentially says yes but there is a greater fulfillment those yes that was fulfilled in Israel but there's a
greater fulfillment look at the parallel with God's son Israel being called out of Egypt and God's son Yeshua Jesus
being called out of Egypt so that's what's going on again mid rashing the text pulling a greater meaning from the
original passage to appoint that to Yeshua Jesus now we get down to Matthew to 17 and 18 where we're Matthew is
quoting jeremiah 31:15 here's how Matthew – 17 18 reads then what had been spoken through Jeremiah the Prophet was
fulfilled a voice was heard in Ramah weeping and great mourning Rachel weeping for her children as she refused
to be comforted because they were no more now the context of jeremiah 31:15 reads thus saith hashem a voice is heard
in Ramah lamentation and bitter weeping Rachel weeping for her children she refused to be comforted for her children
because they are not and if we read back a little bit for further and I will say she'd the soul the priestess with
fatness my people shall be satisfied with my goodness saith Hashem and they says Rachel is weeping for her children
and then it goes on this say if Hashem refrain my voice from weeping that eyes from tears for thy work shall be
rewarded safe Hashem and they shall come back from the land of the enemy now contextually this is a
prophecy about Israel and exile coming out from that exile and they will come back from the land of the end me and so
Rachel doesn't need a weep or her children anymore so contextually it's a different
situation in the Old Testament it's talking about Israel in Exodus coming out of that now I want you to remember
what happened in Exodus when God brought Israel out of Egypt what happened to the babies when Moses was born
do you remember Pharaoh was afraid of the Israelite men overtaking his country so he ordered all the baby boys to be
killed so that's what happened when Israel was in Exodus in Egypt and then when Moses was born Satan tried to kill
him and so they had to hide moses in the nile river okay and eventually God worked it all out that he was spared
just like Yeshua Jesus of spirit there is a parallel going on here Moses as the the prophet the mediator between God and
men when they exited out of Egypt Moses served as mediator he mediated on behalf of the people because the people had
sinned so this person who became like the mediator between Israel and God essentially his life was threatened when
he was first born and a bunch of babies died and Rachel was weeping for her children Rachel I was speaking of Rachel
Israel she was a picture of Israel and so this is essentially Jeremiah 31 talking about Israel no longer we being
Rachel no longer weeping because you're gonna come out of Exodus Matthew said looks back at that incident and draws
another parallel to Yeshua Jesus just like jesus' life was threatened when he was born
just like moses his life was threatened when he was born and God brought Israel out of Egypt to protect his son Israel
from the famine now it brought Israel back to her land and Rachel no longer had to weep because she was coming back
into the land and what is Matthew doing he's drawing these parallels in Matthew chapter 2 to that incident again to
Israel coming out of Exile back into the land and so God's son Yeshua Jesus came out of exile in Egypt if you will if you
want to call it exile brought him back into the land and Rachel was weeping for her children because they are not at the
birth of Jesus those children were killed in Bethlehem just like they were killed at the birth of Moses in Egypt so
these are all parallels and shadows as BS – oh Jesus and Matthew is drawing on specific incidences in the Old Testament
and applying that to Yeshua Jesus and drawing these parallels he's not taking these verses out of context per se but
rather drawing a secondary application a secondary meaning out of these passages which is very much what Jewish rabbis
did when they looked at the Old Testament as we will see in a moment when we get into the Talmudic text and
now we get down to Matthew chapter 2 verse 23 and this is a very interesting passage where Matthew draws if you will
a play on words that is taken from Isaiah 11:1 Matthew chapter 2 verse 23 he says and came to live in a city
called Nazareth this was to fulfill what was spoken through the Prophet he shall be called a Nazarene now is there any
place in the Old Testament where the Messiah was to be called a Nazarene specifically and you can look the Old
Testament through and you won't see a specific reference to the Messiah being called a Nazarene so where does Matthew
get this well let's look at isaiah 11 verse 1 which reads in the Jewish Bible Isaiah 11:1 and there shall come forth a
shoot out of Jesse and a twig shall grow forth out of his roots now what in the world that they talk about a shoot out
of Jesse and a twig growing out of his well if you look up the Hebrew word for twig which many of the other
translations render as a branch shall go forth out of its roots that word for branch is Nitzer and essentially that
Netzer that branch is an allusion to Messiah Yeshua Jesus coming out of the root of Jesse out of Israel remember
Israel's call God's Son and then Yeshua Jesus is called God's Son in a very specific way and so matthew is drawing
these and pulling these prophecies together from the Old Testaments and these stories from the Old Testament and
drawing a parallel to the issue of Jesus and he's saying just like this twig this branch this netzer is supposed to come
out of Jesse essentially that's why he's saying he shall be called a Nitzer Nazarene so he's making a play on words
in Matthew 2:23 when he's referencing Hosea chapter 11 verse 1 about the branch the Netzer that is going to come
out of the roots of Israel so it's really fascinating to look at Matthew's writings and quotations of the Old
Testament and see how he understood these prophecies even though they had a medium fulfillment or these stories had
immediate fulfillment in their day and age matthew drew many shadows and many allusions to the messiah right out of
the text of the Old Testament and incidentally when you look at historical evidence for Matthew there is some
indication that Matthew may have been originally written in Hebrew and it makes perfect sense that if Matthew
originally was written in Hebrew he was drawing these parallels for the Hebrew people themselves that to pull out
passages they were familiar with they knew the context of these verses he wasn't making something up to people who
are ignorant he was saying look at these these passages you grew up reading in your Jewish Bible and look at how Yeshua
Jesus fulfill a greater fulfillment of these disease it's a fascinating study to look
at Matthew chapter 1 chapter 2 and then we get over to Matthew chapter 4 he draw some more parallels to Yeshua jesus's
life and the nation of Israel in the Old Testament in Matthew chapter 4 it begins verse 1 with reading then Jesus was led
up by the spirit unto the wilderness to be tempted by the devil now what happened when Jesus was in the
wilderness he was in the wilderness for how long forty days how long was the nation of
Israel in the wilderness forty years do you see the connection Matthew is drawing here he's starting to see
another parallel drawn from the nation of Israel God's son Israel now being applied to God's son personally in this
individual Yeshua Messiah Jesus forty days in the wilderness Jesus suffered and then he was tempted
by the devil just like God's Son Israel was tempted by the devil in the wilderness for forty years so there is a
parallel here in Matthew chapter four and it goes on we get over here to Matthew 4 14 through 16 this was to
fulfill what was spoken through Isaiah the prophet and now he's going to quote Isaiah chapter 9 verses 1 through 2
matthew 4:15 the land of Zebulun the land of Naphtali by the way of the sea beyond the Jordan Galilee of the
Gentiles the people who were sitting in darkness saw a great light and those who were sitting in the land and shadow of
death upon them a light dawned so why is Matthew drawing a parallel to Isaiah chapter 9 verses 1 through 2 as we saw
at the very beginning of this video I pointed this out Isaiah 9:6 unto us a child is born that passage we're all
familiar with is not quoted by any New Testament writer directly but Matthew alludes to the context of Isaiah 9 and
says look a light has dawn and just like a light has done in Isaiah 9 he's drawing a parallel to
Yeshua Jesus being that light and that's what he goes on and talks about how Jesus preached verse 17 from that time
Jesus began to preach and say repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand so that light has dawn that the light that
became the light to the Gentiles how did Jesus become the light to the Gentiles well we non-jewish people have accepted
Yeshua Jesus as our Savior and because of the issue of Jesus we now believe in the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob and
so just sure what Jesus has brought that light to the Gentiles as Isaiah 9 foretold and Matthew drew that parallel
in the beginning verses of Isaiah 9 to draw to Yeshua Jesus and that is why a lot of Christians today will look at
Isaiah verse 6 as a a 9 verse 6 continuing on in that passage and we'll see Yeshua Messiah Jesus foretold in
that passage and this is what not only Matthew who saw messianic shadows in Isaiah 9 but also the Apostle Paul and
Peter saw shadows of the Messiah in Isaiah as well and particularly the writer of Luke in his writing and
foretelling or going through the account of Jesus and his birth in Luke 1 2013 233 he quotes Isaiah 9:7 directly so
let's take a look at that and Luke chapter 1 verse 31 we read the angel speaking to Mary and behold you will
conceive in your womb and bear a son and you shall name him Jesus verse 32 and he will be great and will be called the son
of the Most High and the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David and he will reign over the house of
Jacob forever and his kingdom will have no end okay so that's 31 to 33 now what is this passage alluding to it's Isaiah
9:7 so let's read Isaiah 9:6 and seven even though verse six isn't specifically quoted in any New Testament
book we see it diluted herein in Luke chapter one so verse six and seven for a child is born to us a son is given unto
us the government is upon his shoulder and his name shall is called talas al-ghab or a B ad sarah Shalom that the
government may be increased in a peace there will be no end upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom to establish
it and uphold it through justice and through righteousness from henceforth even forever
the zeal of Hashem of hosts death performance now these were transliterations of Hebrew words his
name shall be called wonderful counselor mighty God everlasting father they translate her in a it here in this
Jewish Bible that I'm reading so I had a hard time reading it because I did I can't read Hebrew but Pelin JL Gabor I
know alga Bors mighty God and then Shalom's peace Prince of Peace but don't ask me to try to hate these Hebrew words
I struggle with that but we are all familiar with that verse 6 from our Bibles and in verse 7 specifically talks
about the government being upon his shoulders at peace will be no end and upon the throne of David and upon his
kingdom to establish it forever ok so that's the context and again a Luke applies Isaiah 9 just like Matthew
does as a messianic foreshadowing of Yeshua Jesus and says in verse 33 and he shall reign over the house of Jacob
forever and his kingdom will have no end so there is a direct parallel in the writings of Luke as well and then we get
over to Apostle Paul and Peter quoting another Isaiah passage let's read Isaiah chapter 8 verse 14 and in speaking verse
13 Hashem of hosts him shall he sanctify let him be your fear and let him be your
dread this is directly quoted by Peter and he shall be for a sanctuary but for us
stone of stumbling and for a rock of offense to both the houses of Israel for a grin and for a snare to the
inhabitants of Jerusalem now who is this rock of offense this is directly applied Isaiah chapter 8 verse 14 – yes schewe
Jesus in the writings of Paul in Romans 933 just as it is written behold I lay in Zion is started stumbling and a rock
of offense and he who believes in Him will not be disappointed speaking of him being Jesus
so Paul quotes that passage and we see Peter doing the same thing in 1st Peter – 7 through 8 this precious value then
is for you who believe for but for those who disbelieve the stone which the builders rejected this became the very
cornerstone and a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word
and to this doom they were also appointed so isn't that beautiful we see throughout the New Testament beginning
with Matthews many references to the Old Testament text and the stories of the Old Testament and applying them to
Yeshua Jesus we see the same thing in the writings of Paul and Peter and Peter quotes other passages of the Old
Testament can't get into it all but I just want you guys to see the overall theme of the New Testament is consistent
with rabbinic Midrash you of the Old Testament as we will see now when we examine these questions is the New
Testament taking these verses out of context as I've already showed you as we read through the verses and as we look
at the Old Testament stories even though there was direct application in the day and age that these prophecies were
written direct application to events that Israel endured and prophecies that were fulfilled there was shadows there
were shadows that could not be fully fulfilled accepting the Messiah Jesus particularly the name that this King
would would have that we've read about nazia nine mighty God everlasting father Prince of Peace is king of OB forever
knocking his kingdom before ever if he's just a human just a single human that existed in the days of Isaiah
I suggest you as New Testament writers suggests there was an allusion to someone greater who would live forever a
messiah who would be both Prince of Peace and King and as we've seen in the rabbinic writings the two comings of the
Messiah that the rabbi's would argue about well what about this Messiah is coming on the clouds in Daniel chapter 7
and then you have this Messiah who's riding on a donkey how do you reconcile that you reconcile that in the person of
Jesus who came the first time as his suffering servant will come a second time in the future hopefully in our day
he will come and become king of Israel forever as the mighty God is as a96 foreshadows so it's not a misapplication
to look at the Old Testament and to draw parallels to the New Testament but yet the Jewish rabbis argue that it is so
let's examine that next what are the Jewish arguments against these verses so to be clear so some Christians do say ok
we can see the fact that the plain natural reading of the text it's not talking about it doesn't seem to be
talking about a virgin Matthew changed a whole bunch more that I'm not going to explain here we can see that the context
of Isaiah 7 is clearly not talking about the Messiah being born 700 years later but it's about a contemporaneous
event that is occurring them but they say hold on a moment now listen carefully is that isn't it true that the
rabbi's engaged in all kinds of midrashic homilies where they read into texts all kinds of secondary meanings
that are part of a oral tradition of the Jewish people which does not necessarily follow the natural reading of the plain
text so there is a secondary meaning and of another meaning that is a kind of called
midrashic reading you know where they're using a kind of or a typology a typology means that we see something happening
2700 years ago but this is really just a type of something in the future okay got it and so on so that's their argument
they say yeah it's true it doesn't say it the plain reading the Jews are right but Matthew is engaging in what rabbi
you do now the truth is this is a a this sounds like at first glance a a good argument but what you need to do is you
need to dig and then dig a little deeper and you find out that this is a completely fatuous claim to begin with
all the evangelical Christians the Protestants they actually do accept the Protestant
the teachings of the Protestant Reformation and importantly germane to this show is that they accept the
Soler's which means the only most importantly Sola scriptura so the these Christians who are mission Island Jews
all accept are part of the Protestant movement they reject the authority of the Roman Catholic Church right down the
line they all insist that they don't believe in any oral tradition they all demand that it's sola scriptura which
means the Bible alone and that no other meaning that is not clearly expressed in Scripture can be used to for confession
or a doctrine of what they believe so what the doing is a playing a game now that they have their standing not on
thin ice they're drowning under the water of the plain text of meaning they then suddenly all becoming Labov atures
and they're going to some measure they have they have you can't use amid this kind of claim a drastic thing you reject
all the I've got to jump in here and analyze for just a minute what this popular Jewish
rabbi that we've been featuring and many of our shows what he's actually saying he just made the claim that Christians
cannot use the typology or midrashim argument for Matthews parallels that he drew between the Old Testament or the
Jewish Bibles passages in Isaiah and that of the life of Christ in that Matthew talked about in many of his
writings he said we cannot use those parallels and call it Midrash inge on the basis of Sola scriptura now I don't
know about you but I don't know a single Christian a single Protestant who believes in the souls of the reformation
who does not regard Matthew the Gospel of Matthew as Scripture it's Scripture so how can he say that were to throw
Matthews analogies to the Old Testament out on the basis of Sola scriptura when Sola scriptura Matthew is part of
the scripture alone beliefs of Christians of Protestant Christians going back to the 15th century when the
Reformation occurred Matthew was well recognized as Scripture by then in fact many many centuries
earlier Matthew was accepted as authoritative Scripture so the Christian tradition for
centuries has been to accept Matthew's writings as Scripture so how we to throw out Matthew's analogies to the Old
Testament on the basis of Sola scriptura when Matthew's book itself is Scripture that's that's an invalid argument but
let's just think about this on another level let's consider for a moment that we're back in the 1st century and we're
evaluating the writings of math you in the context of the culture and the context of the Jewish writings as
well as the ancient scriptures the Hebrew Scriptures those Old Testament Scriptures that the Jews call the Jewish
Bible as we pointed out in many examples in Matthew's analogies he drew on the actual context the actual stories of the
Old Testament and pointed out the shadows the aspects of those prophecies that could not be fulfilled in their day
for example in Isaiah we see shadows of a of a prince who would be the Prince of Peace the government would rest on his
shoulders and he would reign forever we also see an Isaiah this this corner stone that the builders rejected well
who other than Jesus who other than Yeshua our Messiah was rejected by his people the builders the Jews he saw in
these passages and and not just Matthew you know the Apostle Paul and Peter saw in these passages aspects that could not
fully be fulfilled in their original context and they drew parallels based on those aspects that were contained within
the Jewish Scriptures within those Old Testament texts so far from taking scripture out of context and making
something up on those scriptures they actually drew from the very context and the very ideas that were embedded within
those scriptures in fact Matthews even his his claim that that he shall be called a Nazarene as you remember that
references back to the word the word the Hebrew word netzer which means branch this one who was coming was to be called
a righteous branch or righteous twig as the Jewish Bible renders it and that Hebrew word is netzer and
Matthew even played on the words of Netzer and said that's like nazarine I mean similarities and sound of course
he was kind of playing on on the sound of the words but indeed yeshua is a righteous branch coming out from that
root from that tree as we read about 953 so throughout isaiah we see these parallels and the not just isaiah but
throughout these passages in the old testament that matthew references and that Paul and Peter also reference there
were these shadows that could not be fully fulfilled within the original context of these passages so even using
the argument of Sola scriptura to evaluate Matthew's claims against the Jewish Old Testament is an invalid
argument because these ideas these shadows came out of the Jewish Old Testament now let's continue on and
listen to another argument this rabbi gives against the midrashic or typology argument that Christians used to justify
Matthews quotations of the Old Testament if we're going to say that the Christians are you that Matthew use the
madrasa reading if you're gonna say that then what claim can be falsified then why
aren't you Catholic so maybe the Catholic Church rules to say we believe that Mary was born
without the stain of original sin when she was born Tana why don't you accept that because you say Sola scriptura a
means of Leonard to them believe in Hari Krishna why don't you then believe in Mormon the Mormons have big claims the
fast growing Christian sect the reason you reject Mormonism you ask any Christian I was saying to you my sweet
brothers or sisters who are Christians I say to you sweethearts listen to me you know that if I ask you as an evangelical
why do you reject the claims of the LAT of the Church of the latter-day Saint you know what your answer is your answer
is is because the teachings of them the Mormon Church this is incompatible with the teachings of the New Testament
now I want to ask you a question would you accept from a Mormon the claim that oh yeah it's true it doesn't really say
that Jesus is going to make a second coming in Jackson Missouri and he's not gonna appear to Joseph Smith but Joseph
Smith was using a madrassa thing you were to reject that as a completely ridiculous fractious and absurd
so please do understand that you can't just go claiming midrashic reading this rabbi just asked the question if we're
going to use the midrashic method to justify the use of the Old Testament in the New Testament in Matthew's
quotations and other quotations daunts elsewhere in the New Testament he said then what claim can be falsified in
asking that question the Jewish rabbi either unknowingly or intended Li miss represented what Midrash ISM really is I
just gave you a number of examples where math you utilize mid racism by looking at the Old Testament passages in their
original context and drawing parallels between the Old Testament Jewish Bibles story and the New Testament story in
Christ and drawing similarities between the two for something to be Midrash or for
something to be a legitimate typology or what we would call a dual fulfillment near-far prophecy there has to be a
connection with the original passage that is being Midrash as in the case of God calling Israel his son
okay the nation of Israel out of Egypt and then applying that to God's real son Yeshua Jesus out of Egypt when he fled
there for safety just like the nation of Israel fled to Egypt to be saved from the famine there are a
lot of parallels that were being drawn there between Matthews quotation of that incident in Matthew chapter 2 and Hosea
11 but that is not the case in any of the examples that this rabbi gave of claims he thought could not be falsified
if we accept the midrashic interpretation that Matthew utilizes examples like Mary being a virgin a
perpetual virgin taught in Catholicism how do you falsify the claim well you do so simply by reading the text of the
scripture which clearly teaches that she had other children she wasn't a perpetual virgin that's how you falsify
those claims it's not a situation the duty the idea that Mary is a virgin in the Catholicism is not to ride from any
Texas scripture it's Catholic tradition that's why we as Protestants reject Sola scriptura but that is not the case with
these examples again where Matthew is quoting a Texas scripture there is a one-to-one parallel between the actual
real incident being discussed in the Old Testament and the real-life incident being discussed in the New Testament
that Matthew is drawing a parallel to that's what Midrash ISM it has to have a connection to the original context in
the original reading and the meaning of the passage and an application that could be a near-far prophecy fulfillment
there has to be some connection if there's nothing there you can't say that's Midrash ism you
can't say that that is a topology so his analogies are our bogus and the example that he gave of Mormonism supposedly men
rashing an idea that Jesus was going to come to Jackson County Missouri that Joseph Smith claimed he said was from
Midrash ISM where where did Joseph get that from any text of Scripture in the Bible you can look and research
Mormonism and you will find those not a single example where Joseph Smith said this Bible verse teaches that Jesus will
come back to Jackson County Missouri rather that was a revelation you'll read about in Doctrine and Covenants Joseph
Smith had this revelation he claimed God gave him directly so that's not Midrash ISM he's not looking at a text of
Scripture and saying well this Texas scripture in this context means this but it really means this today
he wasn't been rashing a single text of Scripture of the Old Testament or the New Testament he was making up his own
scripture from his own supposed alleged revelations from God so even again another example that rabbi gave to say
you can't falsify this claim if you accept the midrashic method is invalid because they had no connection
whatsoever to what Midrash ISM is and that's why I said this rabbi is not even accurately portraying what Midrash ism
is he's either ignorant about it which I find that rather strange I find that hard to believe that a rabbi would be
ignorant of what mid racism really is so I tend to lean on the side that he's intentionally throwing out examples that
are ear relevant to the issue of mid racism to try to lend confusion to the issue so that his unsuspecting audience
his unsuspecting viewers who are watching his videos and trying to learn about Judaism have no idea that he's
misrepresenting what Metis ISM is but as we've looked at the examples of Mathew it has to have a one-to-one connection
to the original passage for it to be a legitimate case of mitr sysm and yet in Mormonism when Mormonism does pull a
scripture out of context when Joseph Smith does pull a scripture to try to support his ideas we find that he not
only disregards the context of those verses but he draws parallels that have no
relevancy to the original context or the original story that he is drawing or trying to make a claim to and so let me
give you a couple of examples of how Joseph Smith Mis applied Scripture and how easy it is to falsify his claims by
looking at these scriptures in their context and in the actual meanings of the word an example 1st Corinthians
chapter 15 and I'm gonna be reading the King James Bible because that's the Bible that Joseph Smith used when he
made his claims 1st Corinthians 15 verse 35 says but some men will say how are the dead raised up and with what body do
they come so the context is talking about a resurrected body what body are you going to be raised in and we're
gonna skip on down to verse 40 which is the verse Joseph Smith took out of context there are also celestial bodies
and there are bodies terrestrial but the glory of the celestial is one and the glory of the terrestrial is another all
right now verse 40 there are celestial bodies there are terrestrial bodies do you see any word called Telestial in the
text you only see two words terrestrial and celestial Joseph Smith did not know what those words meant in the ancient
King James language the archaic King James language of celestial was another word for heavenly bodies their archaic
King James term of terrestrial is another word for earthly bodies just look this up in any other translation of
this passage in 1st Corinthians 15 and you will see in any other translation it says heavenly bodies earthly bodies
because that's what the Greek word actually means and what the King James actually meant in the day and age when
it was written people understood what that term celestial and terrestrial meant but Joseph Smith reading this
passage not looking at the car this is talking about a resurrected body he pulls this verse out of context it
not only takes these verses to mean something other than what they meant he says celestial means it's a kingdom
it's not really talking about a body a resurrected body but rather a kingdom that you will resurrect too and then he
said terrestrials another Kingdom so now we have two kings but wait he read somewhere else in the Bible where there
are three heavens so he says well I guess there must be three kingdoms so he made up a third kingdom and that third
kingdom he calls the Telestial Kingdom that is a word that does not exist in the King James language it does not
exist in the King James Bible nor does it exist in this text there is not a single translation at first Corinthians
1540 that says that there is a cholesteral body or a Telestial Kingdom but he made it up because he did not
understand the meaning of these words nor did he look at the context if you're gonna call that midrashim you have a
real problem because there is absolutely no connection between Joseph Smith's application of this verse and the actual
original meaning of the verse in its context but let's do another example as if that's not enough to show Joseph
Smith's misapplication of Scripture is not midrashim let's look at another example someone might say well maybe
this is an example of Midrash II that Joseph Smith did on this text of Scripture is it really let's look at it
Ezekiel chapter 37 and we're gonna just kind of highlight a couple verses here mainly verse 15 the word of the Lord
came again unto me saying Ezekiel verse 16 is equal thirty seven verse 16 moreover thou son of man take the one
stick and write upon it for Judah and for the children of Israel and his companions then take another stick and
write upon it for Joseph the stick of Ephraim and for the house of Israel and his companions now Joseph Smith took
these two sticks here in Ezekiel chapter 37 verse 16 and said all these sticks are actually talking about one stick the
Bible and the other stick the Book of Mormon but is that what the context says is that what was the original story that
is being told here is that what this prophecy was really talking about let's read on in the context verse 17 of
Ezekiel 37 and joined them one to another into one stick and they shall become one in 9 hand and then when and
when the children of thy people shall speak unto thee saying wilt thou not show us what thou meanest by these verse
19 saying to them thus saith the Lord God behold I will take the stick of Joseph which is in the hand of Ephraim
and the tribes of Israel his fellows and will put them with him even with the stick of Judah and make them one stick
and they shall be one in mine hand and the sticks were now Rytas shall be in nine hand before thy eyes before their
eyes and saying to them thus saith the Lord God behold I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen you got
to remember the context of this Israel the northern tribes had been taken captive to Assyria so God's saying I
want to take the children of Israel from among the heathens here in verse 21 whether they be gone and will gather
them on every side and bring them into their own land in verse 22 of Ezekiel 37 and I will make them one nation in the
land upon the mountains of Israel and one king shall be king to them all and they shall be no more two nations
neither shall they be divided into two King anymore at all so what is this talking
about is this talking about two books thinking gonna be somehow brought into one is this talking about two different
people groups that are separated by an ocean the American Indians that Joseph Smith called the Book of Mormon lands
the people of the Book of Mormon the Native American Indians that he believed were the principle ancestors of Jewish
migrants to America is that what this passage is talking about and then the other nation the other stick being a
reference to the Bible's people that it would be the Jewish people in Israel is this talking about two completely
separate groups of people that are separated by a notion that are somehow migrated and separated by a migration a
travel by ship over to America is that what this is talking about or is this in context talking about the nation of the
northern tribes of Israel of the nation of Israel and then the tribes of Judah being split at this time of this writing
because the northern tribes have been taken captive by Assyria clearly as we write the very meaning is given in the
text and there is no allusion to another group of people in America but Joseph Smith pulled this passage out of context
and so no this is really talking about the Book of Mormon people and the Bible people being separated and eventually
brought into one now first of all the text itself says that these two tribes two divisions northern kingdom and the
southern kingdom of Israel is going to be brought into one nation under one king have the Book of Mormon people even
if you want to say that they're Native Americans like Joseph Smith taught had they ever been brought how the Native
Americans ever been brought into one nation that was made up of the Jews in Israel
and America has America ever annexed the Jewish nation is one of the states so that we could become one nation under
one king no so there's absolutely no parallels here to Joseph Smith application of the text and the original
application of the text given in the nation of Israel with the northern tribes and the southern tribes being one
stick for each combined into one nation under one king that's how the text was supposed to be fulfilled if we were to
draw a midrashic application to something else that would be repeated let's say a near-far prophecy or a dual
fulfillment prophecy like what we see in the in Jesus Christ Yeshua our Messiah fulfilling these Old Testament passages
these these passages we read about in Isaiah there has to be a connection to the original application of that passage
for it to be a true example of Midrash II and just as in the case of first Corinthians chapter 15 where there was
absolutely no relevancy to Joseph Smith application of the text so is the case with Ezekiel 37 in fact not only is
there no relevancy when we research the Book of Mormon people the Book of Mormon lands the cities the coins the battles
there is not one bit of archaeological evidence that supports a Jewish migration to America from Israel in fact
when the DNA evidence is compiled on the Native Americans we find that they have an Asian origin not a Near Eastern
Jewish origin so the very claims of the Book of Mormon that there is a group of people from Israel that this is talking
about two separate Israelites one in America and one group in Israel is bogus because it's not even based on a real
historical event there's no connection again to an application that
could be made here from Ezekiel 37 to the Book of Mormon people's being the Book of Mormon one stick and the Jewish
people in Israel being another stick or the Bible's people as a second stick so again this passage that Joseph Smith
miss applied to support his claims about the Book of Mormon is not a case in midrashic because it's not even based on
real historical facts that can be validated by archaeology the very opposite is the case when we look at the
New Testaments use of the Old Testament quoting the Old Testament stories concerning Israel's migration into Egypt
and Jesus Christ having traveled to Egypt to for protection there were real events that took place here and you can
see in the historical records that there was indeed a man named Jesus who people believed is the Messiah and many people
every reported that he rose from the dead these are accounts that are recorded both by the Gospel writers and
by even historians like Josephus the life and times of Christ can be validated on many levels as a real
historical event not only in the writings of people who witnessed him but also in the archaeological digs that can
be done in the cities that he visited we can find the very coins mentioned in the New Testament being actually verified by
archeological digs today we cannot find a single book of Mormon coin we cannot find a single place where the battles
that the Book of Mormon supposedly took place large scales of battles of numbers of people that were supposedly killed in
the Hill Cumorah and yet they have not found a single weapon uncovered in the Hill Cumorah in archeological digs
not a single claim of the Book of Mormon can be validated by a true historical record and thus even if you want to try
to say the Mormons use Joseph Smith's use of Ezekiel 37 is an example bid rashing it's easily falsifiable just by
looking at the lack of archaeological evidence for their claim so again let's go back to the very question the Jewish
rabbi just asked in his second argument against Matthew's quotations of the Old Testament that we can't falsify a claim
if we accept the midrashic method for the New Testament quotations of the Old Testament I say yes we can we can't
falsify the claim we can easily falsify the claim are those claims consistent with the actual meaning of the text is
there a parallel between the ancient account that's being spoken of and then being applied to the times of Christ and
we see yes there there are definite parallels and there are also not only historical real historical parallels but
we also see the allusions to something greater in the very tax of the Old Testament that could only be fulfilled
in the Messiah Yeshua Jesus things like a king that would reign forever that we read about in Isaiah 9 or aspects of a
Prince of Peace father of eternity eternal father someone who has an eternal nature someone who is able to be
that chief corner stone that the builders rejected yes too much Jesus fulfills all of these illusions shadows
that are given in the Old Testament that seem to be pointing to something that would have a greater fulfillment as we
see fulfilled in the New Testament so again it's consistent with the text of the Old Testament it's not inconsistent
these quotes do fit the Jewish midrashic method now now let's go to the issue of samples in the Talmud the Jewish Talmud
how did the ancient rabbis interpret their Old Testament messianic passages and how did they apply the midrashic
method in their day we're going to ask the question again and consider this question did the Christian writers take
the Old Testament Scriptures out of context when they were quoting these Old Testament passages were they out of
context or were they consistent with the ancient Jewish rabbis use of midrashic or typology teachings in their writings
let's examine those next does the New Testament miss apply the ancient prophecies of the Messiah and does the
New Testament miss apply the ancient stories that we read in the Old Testament to the Messiah I'm gonna say
the New Testament does not miss apply anything for two reasons first of all when we read in Luke 24 where Jesus is
talking to the disciples on the road to Emmaus he talks about how the Old Testament stories were pictures of him
beginning with Moses and all the law and the prophets Jesus taught his disciples how they foreshadowed how they pictured
his coming and so when we read in the New Testament here in Matthew and other passages where these Old Testament
stories are applied directly to the Messiah Jesus that is not a misapplication of the Old Testament is
rather an understanding of what Jesus taught the disciples we should expect to see this kind of thing done in the New
Testament because that's what the New Testament teaches us that the Old Testament was just a shadow of the
Messiah to come and so therefore when you read stories of Moses and the Israelites in the wilderness and Joseph
in Egypt you can see how those were pictures of Jesus now not only okay the first reason not only do I say that this
is not a misapplication because Jesus taught it but the second the reason I say that is because when we
read in the ancient jewish talmud 'ok literature that's the talmud where the jews interpret their Old Testament
stories and prophecies we see the exact same thing happening where they apply the Old Testament account of Moses to
the Messianic prophecies here in Isaiah 53 and other places I'd like to read a few of these statements from the Jewish
Talmud and you read in sukuk 52 I put those on the screen where the Messiah is called not just son of David we see
plenty of references to the Messiah being a king like being called the son of David in the Old Testament but the
rabbi's also called the Messiah son of Joseph now where do you think they got the idea to call the Messiah son of
Joseph or ben Yosef as it's stated in some of the translations of the Talmud in Sukkot 52 I suggest to you that they
were looking at those prophecies in Zechariah 12 where the Messiah is pierced or in Isaiah 53 and the psalm 22
where the Messiah again experiences piercing of his hands and feet and his image is marred in Isaiah 53 and the end
of 52 they were reading those passages of a suffering servant a messiah that would be rejected by his people Israel
and they thought of the story of Joseph and how Joseph was rejected by his brothers sent away to Egypt to a foreign
land and there Joseph experienced a great deal of suffering and he eventually he was raised up to the
position of second-in-command next to farrell he basically became a king and what happened when he became a
king his Israelite brothers came back and received him it's the same kind of thing that happens with Jesus when we
read of the suffering servant in Isaiah 53 we see the same kind of thing Israel is rejected he was bruised and afflicted
but we esteemed him not Israel rejects her Messiah but later Israel receives her Messiah as we read
on in other prophecies they will look on him zechariah 12 who may appear sand they will mourn for him as one mourns
for an only son that's the prophecy that suck up 52 the ancient rabbis are talking about when they say the messiah
is killed but then later he's received he's received again he's a king he's the son of david so if they called him
messiah son of joseph because they saw an Old Testament story that pictured very much the prophecies of the Messiah
I'm also going to point out some other PLASA jiz in the Jewish Talmud that are very interesting that relate to this
whole idea of applying the story of Moses to the Messiah and I have here SOTA for chapter 14 a and it's where the
rabbi's are discussing the death of Moses and the fact that nobody knows where he's buried and the the fact that
Moses was not able to enter the Land of Israel and it says rabbi Semler taught for what reason did Moses our teacher
greatly desire to enter yet to Israel did he need to eat of its produce or did he need to satisfy himself with its
goodness rather this is what must Moses said now this is there this is their interpretation of what Moses said I
don't believe this is a quote in their Old Testament Scriptures there's no referenced in the Talmud to this being
an Old Testament statement but they say this Moses said many mitzvahs were commanded to the Jewish people and some
of them can only be fulfilled in yatza Israel so I will enter the land in order that they can all be fulfilled by me
again that's the rabbinic teaching on this I don't believe that comes from any Old Testament passage but they go on
they state the Holy One blessed be he said to him do you seek to enter the land to perform these myths votes for
any reason other than to receive a reward I will ascribe you credit as if you had performed them and you will
receive your reward as it is stated now they're gonna quote an Old Testament statement they're gonna quote isaiah
53:12 of moses look at this isaiah 53:12 therefore while i divide him a portion among the grain and he shall divide the
spoil with the mighty because he bared his soul unto death and was numbered with the transgressors yet he bore the
sin of many and made intercession for the transgressors isaiah 53:12 there quoting isaiah 53 a future prophecy of
the Messiah of the suffering servant and who are they applying it to Moses an Old Testament story that had already been
fulfilled let's read on rabis Emily proceeds to expound on the verse therefore will I divide him a portion
among the great to mean that he will receive a reward one might have thought that he will receive reward like the
latter ones and not like the earlier ones so the verse states and he shall divide the spoil with the mighty meaning
that like Abraham Isaac and Jacob who were mighty in torah and in mitzvah because he bore his soul unto death
meaning he gave himself over to death on behalf of the jewish people as it is stated and again we're quoting now the
Old Testament reference to to Moses in the Exodus Exodus 32 32 they're gonna quote yet now if you will forgive their
sin if not blot me I pray you out of the book that you have written so this is Moses standing up on behalf of the
nation of Israel saying you know yet now if you will forgive their sin if not blot me out of your book and then they
go on and they say and quoting again the passage in Isaiah and he was numbered with the transgressors meaning that he
was counted among those who died in the desert for just like them he did not enter yet to Israel quote and he bore
the sin of many as he atoned for the incident of the golden calf and may intercession for the transgressors as he
requested mercy for the sinners of Israel so that they should engage in repentance isn't that interesting I find
sort of 14 interesting because they are taking a future prophecy that was given in Isaiah's timeframe many many years
after the Moses incident occurred and they're saying look look at Moses look at how Moses will fill door or pictured
many of the things that this prophecy in Isaiah 53 pictures of the suffering servant of the future Messiah and
they're saying look Moses made intercession for the people of Israel Moses and when he said blot me out of
the books was basically acting like he was going to bear the sins of Israel and they're saying that that is what Isaiah
53 is talking about now I find this interesting because the current Jewish rabbis would have you believe that the
New Testament Scriptures are taking stories of the Bible out of context when they point to Moses the example of Moses
and say look look at how Jesus fulfills this example of Moses and Israel coming out of Egypt in the Exodus and look at
how Jesus came out of Egypt and they're drawing those parallels in the New Testament yet the ancient rabbis did the
exact same thing with their future prophesies that Isaiah 53 prophecy about a suffering servant and they applied it
and said look Moses pictured this for us Moses bore our sins when he said blot me out of the book and stood on behalf of
Israel and made intercession for the sins of Israel they understood the connection of the need of somebody to
act as their intercessor as their mediator between God and men when they were in Israel and they said look this
is what the suffering servant did in Isaiah 53 what he was going to do Moses pictured
for them and they pointed to the example of the story of Moses now we're going to argue that the New Testament is taking
these stories out of context to apply them to the seiyya then you have to argue that the
ancient Jewish rabbis were taking the story of Moses out of context to apply it to a future suffering servant in
Isaiah 53 and I don't think that any current rabbi will want to do that with their Talmud and their ancient
rabbinical teachings but yet we see such a clear example where Moses and the exodus is applied directly to the
Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 53 and it gets even better with another reference to where they look back at Egypt and the
story of Moses and apply it to the Messiah listen to this I have here Sanhedrin 99a and I want to read to you
a section in this set a passage of the Talmud and this is rabbi eliezer says the Messianic air will be 40 years long
it is written here with regard to the 40 year sojourn of the children of Israel in the wilderness and he afflicted you
and suffered you to hunger and feed you with manna Deuteronomy 8:3 and it is written there make us glad according to
the days that you've afflicted us the years that we saw evil Psalm 90 verse 15 so what does this Rabbi Eliezer do he
looks back to the Exodus in Egypt and what does he apply that story to did you catch it let me read it again Rabbi
Eliezer says the Messianic heir will be 40 years long it is written here with regard to the 40-year sojourn of the
children of Israel and the wilderness and he afflicted you and suffered you and hot to hunger and feed you with
manna he took Deuteronomy 8:3 of the Israelite so journey for 40 years in the wilderness and said let's apply this to
none other than the Messianic heir so when we see Matthew quoting this Old Testament passage about out of Egypt
have I called my son and said this is just like what happened with Jesus coming out of Egypt
the rabbi's did the exact same thing when they looked at the Egypt's gen the exodus of Israel out of Egypt and
they said look the Messianic error the Messianic era be like 40 years long just like the Egypt the exodus out of Egypt
and although Jesus probably only lived about maybe 35 years if we go say he was born in 4 BC and different estimates of
his death range from 30 ad to 33 AD so it may be the longest time he was on earth was maybe 37 years but still I
find it very interesting that this rabbi applied a passage of the Old Testament axis in Egypt and applied it directly to
the Messianic era that shows us that the New Testament writers who did the exact same thing with the Old Testament we're
not taking stories out of context they were not taking prophecies out of context either because just like the
ancient rabbis saw shadows of the Messiah in the stories of Exodus in the stories of Moses they so the New
Testament was consistent with ancient rabbinic Judaism indeed New Testament Christianity came out of ancient
rabbinic Judaism so it's no wonder that we see the New Testament making similar application to Old Testament stories
that the rabbi's did when they expounded on their Old Testament Scriptures I have one more thing I want to point out to
you Isaiah 7:14 where a virgin shall conceive and bear a child and we see that as a prophecy of the Messiah Jesus
even though that was fulfilled in the day of a king ad who was looking for that sign and that sign that was going
to be given was a young woman bearing a child and all of our Christian scriptures translate that as a virgin
but the point being is it did have an immediate fulfillment in the days of King Ahab yet we Christians and the New
Testament apply that as again another picture of something that was fulfilled in the Old Testament being applied
directly to the Messiah and another example would be Isaiah 9:6 where a child shall be born to us and his name
shall be called wonderful mighty God the ELCA Borg everlasting father the Prince of Peace
again another reference that was fulfilled immediately in the days of Hezekiah being fulfilled ultimately in
Christ new testament applies these Old Testament prophecies to the Messiah and I'm gonna suggest to you that in many of
these passages of the Old Testament the ancient rabbis did the same thing maybe not on Isaiah 9:6 in Isaiah 7:14 but
they did in many other passages and here is what the rabbis had to say about how they looked at their Old Testament
prophecies rabbi HEC bar Abbas says and rabbi yohanan says in their prophecies with regard to redemption and the end of
days all the prophets prophesied only about the Messianic heir did you catch that this is here in the Talmud
Sanhedrin 99a in their prophecies with regard to the redemption and the end of days all the prophets not just some of
the prophets all the prophets prophesied only about the Messianic era so what do we do when we have a prophecy that had
an immediate fulfillment let's say Isaiah 7:14 or Isaiah 9:6 where the where there is an immediate fulfillment
of a child that was born in King Ahaz days or a child a son that was given a king with with Hezekiah yet the ancient
prophecy said yes they had immediate fulfillment but all the prophets prophesied about the Messianic era that
meant that even though there was an immediate fulfillment in their day and age there was a future fulfillment that
the ancient rabbis were all looking for in their prophecies that's why they say that all the prophecies with regard to
Redemption and the end of days all the prophets prophesied only about the Messianic era that means it would have
its ultimate fulfillment in the Messianic era and that is what we see when Jesus expounded on the statements
and the stories of the Testament beginning with Moses and all the prophets speaking about them
concerning himself he was consistent with ancient rabbinic Judaism he was not bringing in some new religion some
so-called Mormonism view or Mormon view of Judaism Christianity is not the Mormonism of Judaism like the current
rabbis try to say not at all we read the writings of the ancient rabbis and we find Christianity was
consistent with the teachings of ancient Judaism and indeed sprang out of ancient Judaism that is not what we can say
about the rabbi's of today who disregard the teachings of their ancient rabbis and try to make Christianity look like
Mormonism it's absolutely not the case it's a distortion and they are not even being consistent with ancient rabbinic
Judaism from which New Testament Christianity sprang out of so be encouraged any of these prophecies even
though they have an immediate fulfillment or these stories had an immediate fulfillment in the stories of
Moses and the stories of Joseph the ancient rabbis applied them to Jesus just like New Testament Christianity
does today [Music] [Music]
[Music] [Music] [Music]

Source : Youtube
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Author: Webmaster