The Life of Jesus as the Fulfillment of Prophecy
Prophet Isaiah
Right at the outset a problem confronts us in dealing with the
notion of an ancient literature containing prophetic intimations of
the future life of Jesus—namely, the modern prejudice against the very
notion of prophecy.
Ancient peoples had no problem with the idea that men’s words could
be inspired by God/ the gods and so predict things which had not yet
come to pass. Pagans had recourse to all kinds of divination, such as
visits to shrines like the one at Delphi and to the venerable
prophecies of the Sibyl. The Jews believed that their own prophets had
knowledge of the things to come, and so had no difficulty in
principle with the idea that their Scriptures could predict details
from the life of the Messiah. They found in the prophets intimations
of events in their own day (such as the famous application the
prophecy in Numbers 24:17 about a star coming forth out of Jacob to
the Messianic pretender in the second century, styled Bar Kochba, “son
of a star” after this prophecy). But most moderns reject the very
possibility of such prophecy, along with all hint of the supernatural.
For most moderns (including many modern Jews) the Bible is a
collection of ancient books containing human wisdom, but with no
divine supernatural elements. We therefore confront a prejudice
against the very possibility of genuine prophecy. What are we to do?
For those who admit the possibility of the prophetic—like Orthodox
Jews—there is no problem, and we can proceed immediately to lay before
them the evidence. For others the best we can do is lay out the
evidence and ask whether the amassed abundance of co-incidences of
ancient poetry with the life of Jesus isn’t just a little too
coincidental to be simply a series of coincidences. One or two
coincidences might be reasonably discounted, but after a while, when
the coincidences begin to pile up, a reasonable person will be open
to rethinking secular dogmas and prejudices.
In making the case, it is important to state what we are suggesting
and what we are not suggesting. In particular we are not suggesting
that the writers of the ancient oracles had as full a knowledge of
Christ as we do. We are not suggesting that they knew all the facts of
the life of Jesus and entertained a full and complete understanding
of His life and ministry. We do not suggest that they were in all
respects like Christians after the day of Pentecost
with the sole difference that Christians knew by hindsight and
history while they knew by prophetic revelation. The New Testament
itself shuts the door to such a possibility: “The prophets who
prophesied of the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired
about this salvation. They inquired what person or time was indicated
by the Spirit of Christ within them when predicting the sufferings
of Christ and the subsequent glory. It was revealed to them that they
were serving not themselves, but you, in the things which have now
been announced to you” (1 Peter 1:10-12). In other words, the prophets
were in the dark about the details of Christ’s life and how it
would all fit together. They were told that these prophecies were for a
time far in the future, and not for their own day. The prophets and
psalmists, for all their inspired words, were not Christian
theologians. The case for Christianity allows them to remain men of
their own time.
In speaking of the prophetic element in the ancient prophets and
the Psalter, we must resist the temptation to treat this ancient
literature as if it were a collection of predictions like those of
Nostradamus. A sound and scholarly exegesis demands that we first
treat the texts as grounded in their original historical context, and
only then begin to mine them for second meanings and prophetic
content. This is particularly true when dealing with the Psalms, which
must be first regarded as poetry and only then as prophecy. The
Psalms were dealing with the hopes and aspirations of the House of
David and the people of Israel, both of which had been promised a
glorious destiny by God. These poems expressed this hope for future
glory, and so it is not unreasonable to insist that the full meaning
of the poems be found in events after their time of writing.
We turn now to several examples of poetry from the Psalms. In Psalm
69:7-9 we read of the psalmist getting into trouble for the zeal he
shows in the Temple of God, so that he becomes a stranger even to his
own family and friends.
In Psalm 78:2 we read of the psalmist teaching
in parables. In Psalm 89:26 the psalmist cries to God and addresses
Him as “my Father”. In Psalm 31:13 the psalmist complains of enemies
who scheme together and plot to kill him. In Psalm 41:9 we hear how
the psalmist’s close friend who ate his bread lifted up his heel
against him. In Psalm 55:20-21 we read of the psalmist and his friends
being betrayed by his companion, whose loyal words were hypocritical.
In Psalm 27:12 the psalmist is surrounded by false witnesses who
breathe out violence. In Psalm 35:11 malicious witnesses rise up who
requite the psalmist evil for the good he has done. In Psalm 109:3
the psalmist finds himself beset with lying tongues who attack him
without cause.
In Psalm 2:2 we read of the kings of the earth and
rulers taking counsel together against Yahweh and His Messianic king.
In Psalm 118:22 the king from the House of David is rejected by all
the rulers but later glorified by God, even as builders reject a stone
as worthless only to find that later it becomes the valuable
cornerstone. In Psalm 22 we read how the Davidic psalmist is forsaken
by God (v. 1), scorned and despised (v.6), mocked and derided by the
people who taunt him saying, “He committed his cause to Yahweh; let
Him deliver him, for He delights in him!” (v. 7-8). In Psalm 69:21 we
read of the psalmist abandoned by all and being given vinegar to drink
when he is thirsty. He is surrounded by a band of evil-doers, his
hands and feet are pierced (Psalm 22:16), and even his clothes are
divided among his enemies (v. 18). Yet after all this he will be saved
with the final result that all the nations will turn to God (v.
24-27). In Psalm 110:1-4 the king from the House of David sits at
God’s right hand, as serves Him as a priest as did Melchizedek.
We may quote also from some of the prophets. In Isaiah 7:14 we read of a child whose life means “God is with us” being born of a virgin. In Micah
5:2 we read that the ruler of Israel will come forth from
Bethlehem, the hometown of David. In Isaiah 9:6 we read of a son is
given to Israel who will be called “Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace”. In Hosea
11:1 we read of God bringing His son out of Egypt. In Isaiah 11:1-2
we read of the Spirit of God resting upon the king from the House of
David, and in Isaiah 61:1-3 of him being anointed to bring good news
to the afflicted and to bind up the broken hearted. In Isaiah 35:5-6
we read of blind eyes being opened, deaf ears unstopped, the lame
leaping up, and mute speaking. In Isaiah 42:1-4 we read of the
Messianic Servant not lifting up his voice, but establishing justice
in lowly humility. In Zechariah 9:9 we read of the Messianic King
coming to Jerusalem, riding on a donkey.
In Isaiah 49:7 we read of the
Messianic King being abhorred and despised by the Gentiles. In Isaiah
50:6 we read of the Lord’s servant giving his back to the smiters,
his cheeks to those who pulled out the beard, and his face for
shameful spitting. In Isaiah 52:14 we read of the Messianic King as
being marred beyond human semblance; in Isaiah 53 we read of him being
despised and rejected, smitten and wounded, of him being bruised for
the people’s iniquities and beaten with stripes that they may be
healed; of him being oppressed and denied justice, but never
protesting; of him being led like a lamb to the slaughter, and of
being buried in the grave of a rich man, and of making himself an
offering for sin. In Hosea 6:2 we read of Israel finding resurrection
after three days. In Daniel 7:13-14 we read of the Son of Man being
presented to God and receiving universal dominion from Him. In
Jeremiah 31:31 read of God making a new covenant with Israel, one
different from the covenant of Moses, and in Jeremiah 3:16 we read
that in that day the Ark of the old covenant will not even be missed.
In Joel 2:28 we read of the Spirit being poured out upon all flesh,
even the most humble of the land.
The saints of the Judaic Holy Scripture (Old Testament), Prophets & Patriarchs (Orthodox Christian holy icon)
Those familiar with the life of Jesus will recognize the narrative
of that life in the disparate images scattered throughout the Psalms
and the Prophets. But these details are not present in the Hebrew
Scriptures as parts of a single coherent portrayal of a single
individual—and that is the point. The prophetic elements in
the Old Testament were not given to fully describe an individual so
that he could be recognized in advance. The Old Testament does not
present us with a single fully integrated picture, so that the
Messiah could be immediately recognized as the Messiah as soon as he
emerged. The prophetic elements were deliberately diffused throughout
the texts to allow for a free response from the people. The Messiah
would be recognized and valued by those whose hearts were tender and
open, while the hard-hearted would stumble and refuse to recognize
him. This arrangement was the judgment of God, meant both to reward
the humble and recompense the proud. As St. Paul would later observe:
“Those in Jerusalem and their rulers, because they did not recognize
Him nor understand the utterances of the prophets which are read
every Sabbath, fulfilled these by condemning Him” (Acts 13:27). The
prophetic utterances had to be ambiguous enough for allow for freedom
of response.
It is also important to recognize that these utterances were never intended to be received in vacuo,
or apart from an experience of Jesus of Nazareth. It was never
envisioned that someone would read the Hebrews Scriptures never having
heard of Jesus, and then accept Him as the Messiah because certain
biographical details of His life coincided with details in the Old
Testament. Rather these details were hidden throughout the Scriptures
to tip the scales as thoughtful humble men pondered whether Jesus
could really be the Messiah.
For there was not one single authoritative version of what the
Messiah would be like, but a number of different ones. One who
resolutely refused to open his heart to the possibility that the
Messiah would notcome as a conquering revolutionary whose
task it was to exalt Israel to a place of international supremacy, but
might come in humility to offer a spiritual Kingdom to all, will find
these prophetic details unconvincing. But a heart which experienced
the love of Jesus, heard of His claims to divinity, His miracles, His
power to raise the dead, and the news of the empty tomb might well
ponder whether the military picture of the Messiah was correct after
all. Impressed with the majesty of Jesus’ person and His obvious
divine power, such an open heart will find the wealth of Old Testament
images which coincided with the life of Jesus not simply
coincidental, but prophetic.
Whether or not one finds the prophecies of Jesus in the Hebrew
Scriptures convincing therefore depends upon the heart of the one
reading those Scriptures and pondering the question. For one who
refuses to budge from the concept of a military Messiah bringing a
Jewish Kingdom, but who accepts this as a first principle, of course
such a person will not find the Old Testament prophecies convincing.
But if someone is open to rethinking such a concept, the reflection of
the life of Jesus in the Old Testament will prove more compelling. A
stubborn heart will refuse to be convinced. To quote Paul, a veil
lies over such a heart (2 Corinthians 3:14). It is only when one turns
to God in openness and humility that the veil is taken away.
The Lessons of History
Francesco Hayez. Destruction of Temple of Jerusalem (1867). Photo: Wikipedia
Finally in our dialogue with our Jewish neighbours we look to the
patterns and lessons from Jewish history as interpreted by the Hebrew
Scriptures. Thinking about the catastrophe that befell Israel in 70
A.D. when the Temple was destroyed and the people of Judea scattered
through all the world, I would like to make two points.
The first point involves the promises of God made to Israel through the prophets.
The promise was made over and over again that God would bring
Israel back from the lands of their captivity after the disaster of
586 B.C., and would raise up the Davidic Messiah under whom they would
finally find peace and security. Thus Isaiah 51:11f: “The ransomed of
Yahweh shall return and come to Zion with singing; everlasting joy
shall be upon their heads; they shall obtain joy and gladness, and
sorrow and sighing shall flee away…Behold, I have taken from your hand
the cup of staggering; the bowl of My wrath you shall drink no more,
and I will put it into the hand your tormentors”. Thus Isaiah 60:9f:
“The coastlands shall wait for Me, the ships of Tarshish first, to
bring your sons from far, their silver and gold with them, for the
Name of Yahweh your God, and for the Holy One of Israel, for He has
glorified you. Foreigners shall build up your walls, and their kings
shall serve you, for in My wrath I smote you, but in My favour I have
had mercy on you.” Thus Jeremiah 3:14f: “Return, O faithless children,
says Yahweh, for I am your master. I will take you, one from a city
and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion. And I will give
you a shepherd after My own heart who will feed you with knowledge and
understanding. At that time Jerusalem shall be called the throne of
Yahweh, and all nations shall gather to it”. Thus Jeremiah 30:3f:
“Behold, days are coming, says Yahweh, when I will restore the
fortunes of My people Israel and Judah, and I will bring them back to
the land which I gave to their fathers, and they shall take possession
of it. Strangers shall no more make servants of them, but they shall
serve Yahweh their God and David their king whom I will raise up for
them”. Thus Ezekiel 37:21: “Thus says the Lord Yahweh: Behold I will
take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone
and will gather them from all sides and bring them to their own land
and one king shall be king over them all…My servant David shall be
king over them, and they shall all have one shepherd…They shall dwell
in the land where your fathers dwelt that I gave to my servant Jacob;
they and they and their children and their children’s children shall
dwell there forever, and David My servant shall be their prince
forever”.
The promise, plan, and progression are clear—after the return from the Babylonian exile
Israel is regathered to the Promised Land, where the Davidic King
Messiah reigns over them, and under his rule Israel is finally safe
from future threat. Note: the return from the Babylonian exile forms
the background for this regathering and Messianic safety. If Jesus was
the promised Messiah and if the Kingdom of God was not of this
world (as He taught), then all was fulfilled as the prophets foretold:
after the Babylonian exile, Israel returned to their land, the
Messiah came on time, and established a Kingdom of transcendent
spiritual peace. But if Jesus was not the Messiah—if the Messiah is
still yet to come—then the words of the prophets proved false, for
the Messiah did not come on time after the Babylonian exile. After the
Babylonian exile, Israel was indeed regathered after the catastrophe
of 586 B.C. but then yet was again scattered after the even greater
catastrophe of 70 A.D. This post-70 A.D. thus represents the terminus
ad quem for the coming of the Messiah. For the prophets did not simply
promise that God would send the Messiah, but them He would send the
Messiah after the return from the Babylonian captivity.
The second point involves the cause of the catastrophe of 70 A.D.
when the Temple was razed, Jewish nationhood lost, and its people led
captive to all nations (Luke 21:23-24). The Law of Moses contains
God’s covenant with Israel, and in this covenant God promised to bless
His people with prosperity, security, victory, and peace if they
would obey Him (Deuteronomy 28:1-14). He also promised that if they
disobeyed Him and broke His covenant, He would curse them, sending
upon them drought, famine, pestilence, and defeat, culminating in the
scattering of the nation to the four corners of the earth
(Deuteronomy 28:15-68)—indeed, God would “scatter them among all
peoples, from one end of the earth to the other” (v. 64). This theme
and threat was the constant theme of the prophets: obedience would bring prosperity and security, while disobedience would bring disaster and exile.
The events of 586 B.C. proved the truth of the prophets’ words and
the reality of the divine threat. Israel disobeyed God, filling the
land with injustice and turning from God to idols, and for these
sins God allowed the Babylonians to destroy the Temple, destroy their
nation, and take the majority of the people into exile. This exile
lasted until 538 B.C., when under Cyrus the Persian as many as wanted
to could return home to begin to rebuild the shattered nation and its
Temple.
Given this covenant with its cause-and-effect of obedience leading to
victory, and disobedience leading to defeat the question arises
regarding the cause of the unprecedented defeat of 70
A.D.—specifically what disobedience, rebellion, and sin could have
caused that catastrophic defeat. A view of history which excludes the
cause-and-effect promised in the Mosaic covenant will not seek any
spiritual cause at all, but will root the disaster solely in political
and military concerns. But as we have seen, Israel was not like the
other nations, and its fortunes were determined by their obedience or
disobedience to their covenant Lord. So, the question remains: what
disobedience in Israel prior to 70 A.D. could have caused that
disaster?
The Christian answer, based on the words of Jesus, is clear: Israel
suffered such a disaster because it rejected its Messiah, both at the
time of the crucifixion and in the generation following when Israel
had a chance to repent of its national repudiation of Christ. The Lord
said so plainly: “The days will come upon you when your enemies
will cast up a bank about you, and surround you and hem you in on
every side, and dash you to the ground, you and your children within
you, and they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because
you did not know the time of your visitation” (Luke 19:43-44). If
this Christian answer is rejected, what other answer is left? The
disaster that befell Israel in 70 A.D. was much greater than the
disaster of 586 B.C., for after the latter disaster the Temple was
rebuilt within a hundred years, while even now the Temple which was
destroyed in 70 A.D. has not been rebuilt. Accordingly, the sin which
led to the disaster of 70 A.D. must have been much greater than
Israel’s pre-exilic idolatry. If one takes seriously the words of the
Mosaic Law then one must conclude that Israel did something of
unprecedented enormity to warrant such a disaster. Only the Christian
answer fits: Israel rejected its Messiah and paid the terrible
penalty.
When one situates the disaster of 70 A.D. within the covenantal
framework of the Law and the Prophets, the lessons of history are
clear: Jesus of Nazareth was the promised Messiah. He came on time as
the prophets said, and His rejection caused the greatest disaster ever
to befall the Jewish people.
JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN ORTHODOX DIALOGUE
Ελληνικά: Διάλογος μεταξύ Ιουδαίων και χριστιανών (π. Ι. Ρωμανίδης)
Romanity.org [1] & here
Bucharest, Romania, October 29-31.1979, a follow-up of the dialogue held in March of 1977 in Lucerne, Switzerland. Under the Sponsorship of
Patriarch Justinian of Romania
and Chief Rabbi Moses Rosen of Romania
The meeting was chaired jointly by
H.E. Metropolitan Damaskinos of Tranoupolis, [2] Director of the Orthodox Center of the Ecumenical Patriarchate at Chambesy, Switzerland
and
Prof. Shemaryahu Talmon, Chairman of the Jewish Council for Inter-religious Consultations in Israel, Professor of Bible, Institute of Jewish Studies and Dean of the Faculty of Humanities, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
© John S. Romanides
The
papers presented during the sessions of the first day had been prepared
and presented by Prof. Michael Wyschogrod of the City University of New
York entitled "Tradition and Society in Judaism" and the Orthodox paper
had been prepared by Deacon Elie Jones Golitzin of the Institut Des
Sciences Bibliques, Faculte de Theologie; Suisse entitled "The role of
the Bible in Orthodox Tradition". [3] Before the meeting began I had distributed a study about the Logos* in the Old Testament according to the Fathers of the Nine Orthodox Ecumenical Councils. [4]
The Jewish representatives reacted by pointing out that is was the
first time that they encountered Christians who could point out Who the
Logos is in the Old Testament and also asked permission to reproduce
this little paper and distribute it. (*The Son of God, Jesus Christ).The
two conference papers on "Bible and Tradition" had essentially such
similar positions which made it possible to terminate discussion early.
In the light of this I asked whether I may pose a question to the Jewish
chairman in the light of the paper I had distributed before the meeting
began. My question was, "Is the Angel of the Lord Who appeared to Moses
in the burning bush a manifestation of God?" "Of course it is!" came
the rapid answer.Icon from here
I
reacted with the following question, "Is He created or uncreated?" Then
the reply shot back, "Of course uncreated! We Jews do not believe that
God reveals Himself by means of creatures!" I quickly retorted, "That is our Orthodox doctrine of the Holy Trinity". Then
the Jewish chairman reacted with, "then why all the philosophical terms
like "one essence," " three hypostasies" and "homoousion"? I
replied that "These terms were reactions to heretics who had been
transforming the Church’s doctrine into philosophical systems, whereas,"
I continued, "the only purpose of such terms was to guarantee the cure
of the center of the human personality by means of the purification of
the heart, its illumination and the glorification of the whole person". The
Jews reacted with the information that this is the Hassidim tradition.
Then I asked whether this is also that of the modern Hassidim. They
answered that, "as far as we know it probably is". But
this is not only the tradition of the Hassidim. It was and has been the
very foundation of prophethood and apostleship of both the Old and New
Testaments and the ongoing life of the Church since Pentecost. The only
way one becomes a member of the Body of Christ is by means of the
purification of the heart completed by its illumination and
glorification both in this life and the next. I
have been a member of WCC General Assemblies since Nairobi 1975 and of
Central Committee since Vancouver 1983. I have heard a lot of Protestant
claims of being moved by God’s Holy Spirit. However, the only sign of
being really moved by the uncreated Holy Spirit of God is this
purification and illumination of the heart and glorification which is
the foundation of the Nine Ecumenical Councils sponsored by New Rome.
This therapy cures fantasies among which religions are capable of being
extremely dangerous. This is why the tradition of the Old and New
Testaments and the Nine Ecumenical Councils sponsored by New Rome is not
at all a religion. On the contrary this tradition is the cure of the
sickness of Religion. [5] Although
the Jews at this meeting pointed out to us that our Orthodox tradition
of the cure of the human personality by means of the purification and
illumination of the heart and glorification was that of Old Testament
Hasidim, this did not become part of the résumé of our discussions which
follows. "The
center of discussion was the relation between Scripture and Tradition
with a focus on the interpretation of Scripture in Tradition. It was
found that both sides agree that the interpretation that the
interpretation of Scripture was always inextricably bound to the text of
Scripture since tradition is first and foremost the tradition of
revelation. Furthermore, both sides stressed that Scripture and
Tradition came into existence in a faithful community which preserves
them but also, which interprets and applies them to its ongoing life, as
the authority and source of its identity". "The text of Scripture and its interpretation are both the result of or part of revelation at whose center is God’s revelation to Moses on Mt Sinai.
"The Jewish tradition of the revelation of the written and oral Torah on Mt. Sinai was found to have a parallel in the Orthodox Christian tradition whereby God revealed on Sinai His uncreated Torah and thus inspired Mosses to give His chosen people the created or written Torah".
"The centrality of God’s revelation of Himself to Moses for Jewish and Orthodox Christian understandings of faith and spirituality became evident from the discussions".
"It was found that in spite of the well known differences in belief there are nevertheless areas of identity and similarity which would be worthwhile to explore in an ongoing dialogue".
"It was therefore decided that the subject of investigation for the next meeting would be the subject of the law in the spiritual and social life of the Jewish and Orthodox Christian tradition".
E N D
FOOTNOTES
 |
| fr John Romanides |
B) Orthodox Participants: Father Dumitru, Prof. of Old Testament at the Theological Institute of Sibiu, Romania; Bishop Anthony, Vicar of the Patriarchate of Romania, Bucharest; Father Cyril Argenti, Marseilles, France; Prof. Ion Bria, World Council of Churches; Deacon Emilian Conritescu, Theological Institute of Bucharest; Metropolitan Damaskinos of Tranoupolis, Director of the Orthodox Center of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Chambesy, Switzerland; Deacon Elie Jones Golitzin, Institute des Sciences Bibliques, The Faculty of Theology, Lausanne, Switzerland; Deacon Vassilios Karayannis, Orthodox Center, Chambesy, Geneva; Prof. John S. Romanides, University of Thessaloniki, Greece; Slavco Valcanov Slavov, The Theological Academy of Sofia, Bulgaria.
[2] Currently also Metropolitan of Switzerland.
[3] Papers evidently not originally programmed but read at this conference were as follows: "Tradition and the Bible in the Orthodox Church," by Rev. Cyril Argenti from Marseilles, France: "Le role des diversses traditions dans la vie de l’Eglise Orhodoxe," by Rev. Dumitru, of the Theological Institute of Sibiu, Romania: "Peace and Justice in Biblical Tradition, " by Cand. theol. Slavco Valcanov Slavov: "Jewish Community in the Light of Jewish Tradition," by Israel Singer of the City University of New York and The World Jewish Congress.
[4] 1) Nicea 325, 2) Constantinople 381, 3) Ephesus 431, 4) Chalcedon 451, 5) Constantinople 553, 6) Constantinople 680, 7) Nicea 786/7, 8) Constantinople 879, 9) Constantinople 1341.
[5] See http://www.romanity.org (THE SICKNESS OF RELIGION AND ITS CURE)
ABOUT GOD
The Holy Trinity in the Old Testament
God in Trinity - A Communion of Persons
God the Holy Trinity: 'The Lover of Mankind'
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου