Isaiah 56

Thoughts, questions, and discussions of all topics pertaining to Torah
Forum rules
1. Polite discourse only. No ad hominem attacks or any other name-calling
2. No politics.
3. No comparative religion, no bashing other religions.
4. NO MISSIONARIES! Not even for Karaites.
5. Moderators may delete or break links to other web sites.
6. This is an Orthodox forum. Attacks on Halacha will not be tolerated.
7. Moderators reserve full rights to edit and delete posts, and ban users.

Re: Isaiah 56

Postby mariaw » Tue Jan 13, 2015 12:37 pm

Dear Neto, This is about the symbolic & literal sense of the Word.
I live in a forest and it's Jan. All of my trees are dry & the leaves are
all gone except for the cypress I planted. You might agree that I live in a literal forest.

The dispersed of Israel (Isaiah 56:8) are also literal.
Look closely at the barren ones (ones is plural) & the list of rewards he (they) receive from HASHEM.
The end result of observing HASHEM'S Sabbath & grasping His covenant tightly,
is the gathering in of the "dispersed of Israel & even more than those already gathered to him." (Isaiah 56:8)

Is this the family patriarchs gathering in children for a long awaited family reunion?
Do they think some of their children are lost & making them feel like a dry tree? Teachers of Torah
sometimes get discouraged when their students stray off.

for My house will be called a house of prayer for all the peoples. (Is. 56.7)
They will be gathering in & filling HASHEM'S house with life & joy, no more dry tree.
This is in a very literal sense.


How literal is that?
mariaw
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 5:23 pm

Re: Isaiah 56

Postby Neto » Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:34 am

David_L wrote:The commentary I have for verse Isaiah 56:3 says:

"An infertile person should not think, 'Since I am barren and doomed to be forgotten, why should I try to improve my ways?' (Rashi). Alternatively, 'since the world was created for procreation and I cannot have children, this means that G-d has no interest in me' (Radak). One should never express such hopelessness."

The following two verses, 56:4-5, say that if that person keeps the Sabbath and the other commandments, then his reward will be "better than sons and daughters."

I don't understand why you say in your earlier post that "a man who was not 'whole' was not welcomed in the temple." He may have been excluded from the priesthood and from marrying, but otherwise I don't think he was excluded.


I was thinking of Deuternomy 23:01. I thought that this meant that such a man would not be permitted to enter past the outer courtyard of the temple.
Neto
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 5:46 pm

Re: Isaiah 56

Postby David_L » Thu Jan 15, 2015 2:30 am

Do you mean Deuteronomy 23:2? That seems to refer only to marriage. Here's the Rashi-interpolated translation from the Kehot chumash:

"A Jewish man with injured testicles or whose reproductive organ is cut such that his reproductive seed oozes rather than ejaculates, thus disabling him from having children naturally, may not enter the assembly of G-d by marrying a born Jewess. He may, however, marry a convert or a freed bondwoman."

http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_c ... 50a1945254

Of course you can't rely on the written Torah alone for determining the law.
David_L
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 10:54 pm
Location: Eastern US

Re: Isaiah 56

Postby Neto » Fri Jan 16, 2015 12:35 am

David_L wrote:Do you mean Deuteronomy 23:2? That seems to refer only to marriage. Here's the Rashi-interpolated translation from the Kehot chumash:

"A Jewish man with injured testicles or whose reproductive organ is cut such that his reproductive seed oozes rather than ejaculates, thus disabling him from having children naturally, may not enter the assembly of G-d by marrying a born Jewess. He may, however, marry a convert or a freed bondwoman."

http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_c ... 50a1945254

Of course you can't rely on the written Torah alone for determining the law.


Yes, sorry, I was referring to 23:2, not 23:1.
Neto
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 5:46 pm

Re: Isaiah 56

Postby ittai » Wed Mar 11, 2015 2:20 pm

mariaw wrote:A couple of examples of gentile women who became righteous are:
Ruth, the Moabite (Ruth 1:4) And Rahab, the innkeeper of Jericho (Josuah2:1)

As to Ruth we remember: A Moabite does not enter into his assembly.
However His mercy is to the heavens, his truth into the clouds.
So his kindness is to those loving him and keeping his commands, as did Ruth so.
ittai
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Isaiah 56

Postby rivka » Wed Mar 11, 2015 3:38 pm

ittai wrote:As to Ruth we remember: A Moabite does not enter into his assembly.

Yes, but the word in question ("Moabite") is masculine, and thus excludes only men from that nation, not women.
rivka
 
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:28 pm

Re: Isaiah 56

Postby ittai » Thu Mar 12, 2015 2:28 am

rivka wrote:Yes, but the word in question ("Moabite") is masculine, and thus excludes only men from that nation, not women.

Thank you Rivka! However let me ask whether we can think the next way:
Ruth had been married with an Moabite and thus had become one flesh with him.
To the second point, the latter part of Deut 23:3 mentions a tenth generation of them.
ittai
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Isaiah 56

Postby rivka » Thu Mar 12, 2015 3:21 am

ittai wrote:Thank you Rivka! However let me ask whether we can think the next way:
Ruth had been married with an Moabite and thus had become one flesh with him.
Two things:
1) What Moabite was she married to? She was married to Machlon, who was a Jew.
2) "Become one flesh" is a metaphor. It does not mean take on each others' characteristics.

ittai wrote:To the second point, the latter part of Deut 23:3 mentions a tenth generation of them.
Because, under Jewish law, Moabit-ism passes through the patrilineal line. If a male Moabite converted to Judaism, he would not be allowed to marry a Jew. Nor would his children, grandchildren, etc. -- until 10 generations down.

(Who this hypothetical male-Moabite-turned-Jewish-convert could marry is complicated, but he would have some options. Otherwise, there are no children or grandchildren to worry about.)
rivka
 
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:28 pm

Re: Isaiah 56

Postby ittai » Thu Mar 12, 2015 4:15 am

rivka wrote: What Moabite was she married to? She was married to Machlon, who was a Jew.

Oh, that was known to me. Why that stupid comment by me?
ittai
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Isaiah 56

Postby rivka » Thu Mar 12, 2015 4:40 am

No worries. It's not a very Jewish name (in fact, I believe some commentaries believe it was a pseudonym, not his real name).
rivka
 
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:28 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Torah Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron