(urth) IROSF

brunians at brunians.org brunians at brunians.org
Sat Apr 4 04:05:00 PDT 2009


> At 22:40 03/04/2009, brunians wrote:
>> > At 20:17 03/04/2009, you wrote:
>> >> It's an interesting period in Jewish history: when people talked
>> >> about the Messiah, at that time, they usually meant Cyrus the Great.

>> > I think that had to some extent worn off by the time of the setting
>> > of the Soldier books, upwards of 50 years after Cyrus's death.

>> Why do you say that? The books of Ezra and Nehemiah were recently
>> published and widely read.

> Sure, and those books talk about Darius and Artaxerxes in the same
> enthusiastic terms as they do about Cyrus.

I believe but am not sure that Messiah became one of the regular titles of
the Persian Great King, and was read out in the familiar litany, "King,
Great King, King of Kings, King of Persia, King of Media, King of the Two
Lands, King of Babylon, Messiah ...."

>                                              Clearly Cyrus was still
> regarded as an anointed arm of the Lord, but not as "The" Messiah in
> the Book of Isaiah sense.

Are we talking a Christian or a Jewish interpretation of the Book of
Isaiah? They are significantly different, you know.

>                           Which is what I thought you were referring
> to -- apologies if not.

See directly above....

>> What did people mean, then, when they said 'moshiach', anyway?

> An interesting question, which we can only explore by rather
> imperfect means. Presumably, though, it's safe to say that different
> people may have meant different things by it.

Significantly, there is the Christian idea of the Messiah being God
Incarnate, which idea is anathema to the Jews, and the Jewish conception,
which is much more that of a national redeemer, someone who restores the
nation - sort of like Cyrus did.

This is an oversimplification, but since this is one of the main
differences between the two faiths it cannot, I think, be overemphasized.




.





More information about the Urth mailing list