Mosiach,m'shia,and mistranslations, twistings and other ways to shove Jesus in the text

TrueMessiah - Properly Anointed;
FalseMessiah - Smeared with Ointment

by

Messiahtruth

I. Introduction

The ninth chapterin the Book of Daniel has been a popular component in the portfolioof Christian apologists and missionaries. The passage that iscommonly extracted from this chapter as an example of a definitive"messianic prophecy" is Daniel 9:24-27 because, accordingto most Christian translations, it contains two direct references tothe Messiah (Dan 9:25-26), which are claimed to be referencesto Jesus. With the help of mistranslations and some mathematicalhocus-pocus, they transform this passage into a prophecy thatallegedly foretells the coming of Jesus and his crucifixion.

The analysispresented in this essay demonstrates that these claims concerningDaniel 9:25-26 are inconsistent with the teachings of the HebrewBible. Moreover, since these claims also include references to beinganointed, the anointing process, as defined and applied in the HebrewBible, is cast into a template against which the "anointing"of Jesus, as described in the New Testament, is compared in order totest its validity.

II. Christian and Jewish Translations of Daniel 9:25-26

Table II-1 showsside-by-side English renditions and the Hebrew text of the passageDaniel 9:25-26. The Hebrew term (mashia'h)and its respective renditions in the two translations are shown inhighlighted form.

Table II-1– Daniel 9:25-26

Daniel 9 King James Version Translation
25
Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
And you should know and understand that, from the emergence of the word to restore and build Jerusalem until an anointed ruler, [shall be] seven weeks; and [in] sixty-two weeks it will be restored and be built, street and moat, but in troubled times.
26
And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one will be cut off, and [he] will be no more; and the city and the Sanctuary will be destroyed by people of the coming ruler, and his end will come about like a flood; and by end of the war, there will be desolation.

Jewish Translation from the Hebrew

25 And you shall know and understand that from the emergence of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until the anointed king [shall be] seven weeks, and [in] sixty-two weeks it will return and be built street and moat, but in troubled times.
26 And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more, and the people of the coming monarch will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, and his end will come about by inundation, and until the end of the war, it will be cut off into desolation.

A significant disagreement exists between the two translations in their respective renditions of the noun . A study of the applications of this term in the Hebrew Bible helps resolve this issue.

III. Review of Hebrew Terminology

According to theHebrew Bible, the men who were selected to fill the positions of the high priest [(ha'kohen ha'gadol)] and king[(melech)] had to go through a ritual anointing ceremony. The Hebrew root verb (mashah),[to] anoint, appears in the Hebrew Bible 70 times in various conjugations. This verb is used on 63 occasions to describe an act of anointing, i.e., applying a specially prepared oil or compound to someone or something for the purpose of sanctification or consecration; and on the seven remaining occasions, it is used in thecontext of covering something with paint or oil for various other purposes.

Someone who wentthrough the process of anointing was referred to as (mashi'ah),an anointed one, in the Hebrew Bible. The noun derives fromthe root verb , [to] anoint, and it appears in variousconjugations and forms in the Hebrew Bible on 39 occasions. Thesalient fact about the noun is that not one of these 39instances refers to the Messiah. The reason is that the usage of thenoun as the present Hebrew term for Messiah is a product of thefirst century B.C.E., which is interesting information that emergedfrom research done on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Around that time, theJewish messianic vision experienced a significant paradigm shift fromthe expectation of an era (i.e., “End of Days”) to an expectationof a Jewish leader who will deliver Israel ("Redeemer"). This fact alone defeats the claim by Christian apologists andmissionaries concerning references to the Messiah in Daniel 9:25-26.

IV. Application of the Noun in the Hebrew Bible

An analysis of the39 applications of the noun in the Hebrew Bible, and how these arerendered in most Christian Bibles, provides the Biblical evidencethat refutes the claims concerning its occurrences in Daniel 9:25-26. Table IV-1 shows the 39 applications of the noun in the HebrewBible. Each form of the noun is shown separately along with thefrequency of occurrence, a pronunciation guide (CAPS identify theaccented syllable), the respective Scriptural citations, the correctEnglish translation, and the respective KJV rendition. Referencesindicate chapter and verse numbers in the Hebrew Bible; verse numbersin Christian Bibles, if different from the Hebrew Bible, are shown inbrackets.

Table IV-1– The term in the Hebrew Bible and its KJV renditions

Hebrew Term
3
mah-SHEE-ah Pronunciation
2 Sam 1:21 References
an anointed Correct Translation
anointed KJV Rendition

Dan 9:25
an anointed Correct Translation
The Messiah KJV Rendition
Dan 9:26
an anointed Correct Translation
Messiah KJV Rendition

4
ha'mah-SHEE-ah Pronunciation
Lev 4:3,5,16,6:15[22] References
the anointed Correct Translation
[the priest] that is anointed

8
me-SHEE-ah Pronunciation
1 Sam 24:6,10, 26:16; 2 Sam 1:14,16, 19:22[21], 23:1;Lam 4:20 References
anointed [of] Correct Translation
anointed [of]

3
bim-SHEE-ah Pronunciation
1 Sam 26:9,11,23 References
against the anointed of - Correct Translation
against [the LORD's] anointed KJV Rendition

lim-SHEE-ah Pronunciation
1 Sam 24:7 References
to the anointed of - Correct Translation
to [the LORD's] anointed KJV Rendition

1
me-shee-HEE Pronunciation
1 Sam 2:35 References
my anointed Correct Translation
mine anointed KJV Rendition

1
lim-shee-HEE Pronunciation
Ps 132:17 References
for/to my anointed Correct Translation
for mine anointed KJV Rendition

6
me-shee-HEH-cha Pronunciation
Hab 3:13; Ps 84:10[9], 89:39[38],52[51], 132:10; 2 Chron 6:42 References
your anointed Correct Translation
thine anointed KJV Rendition

7
me-shee-HO Pronunciation
1 Sam 2:10, 12:3,5, 16:6; Ps 2:2, 20:7[6], 28:8 References
his anointed Correct Translation
his anointed, *[the LORD's] anointed KJV Rendition

3
lim-shee-HO Pronunciation
2 Sam 22:51; Is 45:1; Ps 18:51[50] References
to his anointed Correct Translation
to his anointed KJV Rendition

2
bim-shee-HAI Pronunciation
Ps 105:15;1 Chron 16:22 References
at/upon my anointed Correct Translation
[touch not] mine anointed KJV Rendition

The KJV renditionof the term differs from the generic an anointed one in onlytwo cases out of the 39 applications, with both instances occurringin Daniel 9:25-26. The question is: "What motivated the KJVtranslators to cast the term as a reference to the Messiah inDaniel 9:25-26, particularly in view of the historical fact that thisassociation of the two terms came much later than the Book ofDaniel?"

A related issuearises from the way some other Christian Bibles render the noun inDaniel 9:25-26, as shown in Table IV-2.

Table IV-2– The term as rendered in other Christian Bibles

Amplified Bible (AMP) Source
Daniel 9:25 Verse
the Anointed One Source Translation (note:capitalized)
an anointed one Correct Translation
Daniel 9:26
New International Version (NIV) Source
Daniel 9:25 Verse
the Anointed One Source Translation (note:capitalized)
an anointed one Correct Translation
Daniel 9:26
New Living Translation (NLT) Source
Daniel 9:25 Verse
the Anointed One Source Translation (note:capitalized)
an anointed one Correct Translation
Daniel 9:26 Verse
World English Bible (WEB) Source
Daniel 9:25 Verse
the Anointed One Source Translation (note:capitalized)
an anointed one Correct Translation
Daniel 9:26

The translation of as the Anointed One, although closer to the correct ananointed one, still contains Christological bias, though it ismore subtle. The use of the definite article, the, and thecapitalization of the terms in the expression, Anointed One,is a design that implicitly points to Jesus.

For the sake offairness, it should be noted, however, that not all Christian Bibleshave mistranslated in Daniel 9:25-26. Among the Christian Biblesthat translate the term correctly are: Basic Bible in English(BBE), Revised Standard Version (RSV), and NewRevised Standard Version (NRSV).

V. Anointing According to the Hebrew Bible

The process of anointing

According to theHebrew Bible, the substance used and the ritual performed are the twosignificant components of the anointing process.

1. The substance

In order to beconsidered properly anointed, a king (or high priest) had to besprinkled with a special substance that was stored in a specialcontainer, and which was prepared from pure olive oil, according tothe following formula:

Exodus 30:22-25– (22) And the L-rd spoke to Moses, saying, (23) "And you,take for yourself spices of the finest sort - of pure myrrh fivehundred [shekel weights]; of fragrant cinnamon half of it, twohundred and fifty [shekel weights]; of fragrant cane two hundred andfifty [shekel weights], (24) and of cassia five hundred [shekelweights] according to the sacred shekel, and one hin of olive oil.(25) And you shall make it onto anoil of sacred anointment [(shemenmish'hat-qodesh)] aperfumed compound according to the art of the perfumer; it shall bean oil of sacred anointment[(shemen mish'hat-qodesh)]."

No other substanceis acceptable for anointing and, being a holy substance, thisanointing oil had to be stored in the (portable) Tabernacle while theIsraelites were in the wilderness, and in the Temple in Jerusalemlater on.

2. The ritual

Moses wascommanded to anoint his brother Aaron as the first high priest:

Exodus 29:7– And then you shall takethe anointing oil, and pour [it] upon his head, andanoint him.

The Hebrew Biblecontains several accounts of the anointing of royalty in Israel.

a. King Saul

Saulwas anointed as King of Israel when the prophet Samuel poured thespecial oil on his head:

1Samuel 10:1 - AndSamuel took the vialof oil, and poured it on his [Saul's] head,and kissed him. And he [Samuel] said, "Indeed, the L-rd hasanointed you to be a ruler over His inheritance."

b. King David

David,the son of Jesse, was anointed as King of Israel when the prophetSamuel poured the special oil on his head:

1Samuel 16:13 -And Samuel took thehorn of oil, and anointed him[David] in the midst of his brothers. And a spirit of the L-rd passedover David from that day forth, and Samuel arose and went to Ramah.

c. King Solomon

Thisis who anointed Solomon to be King of Israel, and how it was done:

1Kings 1:34,39,45- (34) And Zadok the[high] priest and Nathan the prophet shall anoint him[Solomon] there as king over Israel, and blow the horn and say,"[Long] live King Solomon."
(39) And Zadokthe [High] Priest took the horn of oil from the Tabernacle [theSanctuary] and anointed Solomon,and they blew the shofar [ram's horn], and all the people said, "Longlive king Solomon."
(45) And Zadokthe [high] priest and Nathan the prophet anointed him [Solomon] kingin Gihon, and they came up from there rejoicing, and (therefore) thecity was in an uproar; that is the noise you were hearing.

A template for the anointing of kings

TheBiblical accounts of the anointing of the first three kings ofIsrael, Saul, David, and Solomon, contain the necessary elements forthe construction of a template for the process of anointing royaltyof Israel, one of which will be the promised Jewish Messiah. According to the Hebrew Bible, these elements are:

[1] A special preparation from pure olive oil was used as the oil of anointing.

[2] Being sacred, the anointing oil was stored in the Temple.

[3] A universally recognized prophet performed the ritual of anointing a king.

[4] The prophets used the vial of oil, or the horn of oil, to anoint the new king, not merely a vial of oil or a horn of oil.1[1]

[5] The oil of anointing was poured only on the head.

[6] Anointing was tantamount to crowning a king (or appointing a high priest).2[2]

I. Anointing According to the New Testament

Thistemplate for the anointing process can now be used to test thevalidity of the anointing of Jesus, as deduced from the accounts inthe New Testament.

The process of anointing

1. The substance

Thefour Gospel authors describe the substance used on Jesus as follows:

Matthew26:7-9(KJV) –(7) There came unto him a woman having an alabasterbox of veryprecious ointment,and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat. (8) But when hisdisciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose isthis waste? (9) For thisointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor.

Mark14:3-5(KJV) –(3) And being in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he satat meat, there came a woman having an alabasterbox of ointmentof spikenard veryprecious; and she brake the box, and poured it on his head. (4) Andthere were some that had indignation within themselves, and said, Whywas this waste of the ointment made? (5) For itmight have been sold for more than three hundred pence, and have beengiven to the poor.And they murmured against her.

Luke7:37(KJV) - And,behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew thatJesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought analabaster box of ointment,

John12:3-5(KJV) –(3) Then took Mary a pound of ointmentof spikenard, verycostly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with herhair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. (4)Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, whichshould betray him, (5) Whywas not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to thepoor?

1. The ritual

Allfour Gospel authors describe the manner in which Jesus was anointed:

Matthew26:7(KJV) - Therecame unto him a womanhaving an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and pouredit on his head, as hesat at meat.

Mark14:3(KJV) - Andbeing in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat,there came a womanhaving an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard very precious; andshe brake the box, and pouredit on his head.

Luke7:37-38,46(KJV) –(37) And, behold, awoman in the city, which was a sinner,when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, broughtan alabaster box of ointment, (38) And stood at his feet behind himweeping, and began to wash hisfeet with tears, anddid wipe themwith the hairs of her head, and kissed hisfeet, and anointedthem with the ointment.
(46)My head with oil thoudidst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment.

John11:2(KJV) - (Itwas that Mary whichanointed the Lord with ointment,and wiped his feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick.)

John12:3(KJV) - Thentook Marya pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointedthe feet of Jesus,and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with theodour of the ointment.

Moreover,Jesus himself allegedly states the purpose of his anointing:

Matthew26:12(KJV) - Forin that she hath pouredthis ointment on my body,she did it for myburial.

Mark14:8(KJV) - Shehath done what she could: she is come aforehand toanoint my body to the burying.

Elements of the ritual of anointing Jesus

Theaccounts quoted from the Gospels contain the elements of the processthat was described as the anointing of Jesus, and these are listed inthe order of the elements in the template for the anointing processdeveloped above:

[1] The substance used to anoint Jesus was an ointment of spikenard.3[3]

[1] It is unknown from where the costly ointment of spikenard came. It clearly was not a sacred substance, since people complained about having wasted it by pouring it on Jesus rather than selling it and giving the money to the poor.

[2] Jesus was anointed by a woman (Mary of Bethany, described as a sinner).

[3] The ointment used on Jesus was contained in an alabaster box.4[4]

[4] There are conflicting accounts in the New Testament about where on his body the anointing substance was applied to Jesus. The accounts in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark say it was applied to his head; while the accounts in the Gospels of Luke and John state it was applied to his feet only.

[5] Jesus declared that his anointing was a preparation for burial, i.e., for death, and not for kingship.5[5]

II. The Anointing of Jesus Contrasted with the Requirements in the Hebrew Bible

TableVII-1 contains an element-by-element comparison of the components ofthe anointing process in the template against the accounts describedin the Gospels. For each element, a yes/noscore indicates whether the respective component from the Gospelaccounts meets the specification set forth in the Hebrew Bible.

TableVII-1 – HebrewBible specifications versus New Testament accounts of anointing

Item
Hebrew Bible Specifications
According to the
New Testament
Comments
Valid?
[1]
The oil of anointing was a special mixture of spices and pure olive oil.
The substance used to anoint Jesus was an ointment of spikenard.
Ointment of spikenard, no matter how costly, cannot substitute for the sacred special oil.
NO
[2]
Being sacred, the oil of anointing had to be stored in the Temple.
The spikenard was not sacred, and its source is unknown.
Sacred items were kept in the Temple, and were not offered for sale.
NO
[3]
A recognized prophet had to anoint a king.
A woman named Mary anointed Jesus.
Did a recognized prophet anoint Jesus?
NO
[4]
A special vial, or special horn, of the special anointing oil had to be used in anointing a king.
The spikenard ointment used on Jesus came from an alabaster box.
The Hebrew Bible never speaks of alabaster containers used for holding the oil of anointing.
NO
[5]
The oil of anointing was poured on the head only.
2 accounts - head only;
2 accounts - feet only.
Which version of the account is the true one?
NO
[6]
The anointing was a preparation for kingship (or high priesthood).
Jesus declared his anointing was to prepare him for burial.
Jesus never reigned as the monarch over any kingdom.
NO

Thiscomparison demonstrates that the anointing of Jesus, as described inthe New Testament, violates all the specifications for a validanointing of royalty in Israel as provided in the Hebrew Bible.

Conclusion: Jesus was smeared with ointment and not properly anointed and,
for that reason alone, he was a false Messiah.

III. Summary

Twoimportant and interconnected issues were addressed. The firstquestion concerned the Hebrew noun as it appears in Daniel9:25-26:

¤ What is the correct translation of the Hebrew noun , which appears twice in the passage Daniel 9:25-26?

Accordingto most Christian translations, the term points to Jesuseither by being translated as [the] Messiah or the AnointedOne. A word study on all 39 occurrences in the Hebrew Bible ofthe noun in its various forms demonstrated that the correcttranslation is an anointed one, a "generic"reference to two different individuals who were to appear on thescene at some future time, neither of whom had any connection to theJewish Messiah.

The questionconcerned the validity of the "anointing" of Jesus, whicharose from the translation of theterm in some Christian Bibles as the Anointed One:

¤ Did the "anointing" of Jesus, as described in the New Testament, conform to the specifications given in the Hebrew Bible?

Tohelp determine the validity of the "anointing" processwhich the accounts in the New Testament describe, a template for theanointing process of kings and high priests of Israel was constructedfrom the specifications detailed in the Hebrew Bible. The relevantelements of information were then extracted from the accounts in theNew Testament which describe the "anointing" of Jesus, andthese were compared, on an element-by-element basis against thetemplate. The analysis demonstrated that Jesus was not anointedaccording to the specifications described in the Hebrew Bible.

Therefore, sinceJesus was never properly anointed according to the specificationscontained in the Hebrew Bible, the Scripture in force during hislifetime, neither of the two applications of the term in Daniel9:25-26 can possibly point to him.
1[1] King David and his royal descendants were anointed with the sacred oil poured from the horn. According to the Jewish Sages, this indicated the superiority of the Davidic kings over the non-Davidic kings of Israel (e.g., Saul), who were anointed using the vial.
2[2] Saul, David, and Solomon all sat on the throne as kings soon after being anointed. They successfully fought those nations that were enemies of Israel. They commanded entire governments, complete with soldiers, spies, tax collectors, foreign ambassadors, treasuries, palace servants and courts.
3[3]The American Heritage Dictionary (Second College Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, Publishers [1991]), describes spikenard as: "1. An aromatic plant, Nardostachys jatamansi, of India, having rose-purple flowers. 2. A costly ointment of antiquity, probably prepared from the spikenard."
4[4] The authors of the New Testament refer to Jesus as the "son of David", implying that he is from the royal line of King David: Matthew 1:1(KJV) - The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. If, as claimed in the New Testament, Jesus were a bona fide king of the Davidic dynasty, why was the anointing substance taken from an alabaster box and not from that special vessel called the horn?

5[5] The New Testament is silent on whether Jesus sat on the throne of David during his lifetime, and whether he led a Jewish army in any battles against Israel's enemies and defeated them. Likewise, there is no mention in the New Testament of Jesus being in command of an entire political government.

1
ISSUES: Christian missionaries are very attracted to the 53rd chapter of Isaiah’s book because it refers to the “affliction, oppression, and persecution of a suffering servant who submitted to his grave.” Superficially, Isaiah’s description sounds enticingly like the Christian view of Jesus. However, chapter 53 is part of Isaiah’s fourth servant song, which does not refer to the Messiah ben David; it refers to a “suffering servant of God.” There are at least five major problems with their interpretation that these verses in Isaiah refer to Jesus:
First, Christian missionaries use the 53rd chapter of Isaiah as a proof-text for the Christian belief that Jesus died for the sins of others. However, people may have seen Jesus die, but it is not conceptually possible to see someone die as atonement for the sins of others. It is merely a theological assertion by the writers of the New Testament intended to give meaning to Jesus’ death. Only if one first accepts the New Testament teaching that Jesus’ death had this non-visible, spiritual significance is it logically possible to assert that Isaiah confirmed Christian beliefs. Therefore, Isaiah 53 is in reality no “proof” at all but rather circular reasoning and a contrived confirmation for someone who has already chosen Christianity.
Second, virtually all of the “proofs’ used by missionaries are from rabbinic texts and commentaries such as the Talmud, the Targum and the Zohar. Missionaries use these rabbinic texts to support their assertion that Jesus is Isaiah’s “servant.” The problem with their argument requires an understanding of the nature of “psat” and “midrash.” “Psat” is the plain meaning of a text. All the authors of the Talmud, Targum and Zohar agree that the “psat” of “servant” is Jacob/Israel which means the Jewish People. Midrash never contradicts psat. Midrash is a poetic overlay of meaning designed to teach Jewish theology, not the plain meaning of the text. These rabbinic texts refer to Isaiah’s “servant” as Moses, the soul, an angel, the righteous of Israel, and the messiah ben Joseph (a descendent of Joseph who is prophesized to die before messiah ben David appears to fulfill all the messianic prophecies). Missionaries falsify their analysis of these texts by ignoring all of these non-messianic references and by pretending that messiah ben Joseph is really messiah ben David. They play these name games to shoehorn Jesus into Isaiah’s text. Problematically, Christian theologians universally reject these texts because they contradict or reject the fundamental Christian faith claims about Jesus. It is the height of disingenuousness to use isolated out-of-context verses from Jewish texts to “prove” what the texts themselves reject! Missionaries intentionally misapply these verses to falsify “proofs” to further the Christian missionary agenda.
Third, it is very important to note that while missionaries are grasping at Talmudic straws to support their forced interpretation of Isaiah 53, the Christian Bible contradicts them. It is obvious from the Gospel accounts that Jesus’ handpicked disciples didn’t view Isaiah 53 as a messianic prophecy. After the disciple Peter (a pillar of the Church and supposedly the first Pope) identified Jesus as “the Messiah” (Matthew 16:16) Peter is informed that Jesus will be killed. (Matthew 16:21) Peter’s response is most telling: “God forbid it, lord! This shall never happen to you.” (Matthew 16:22 and also Matthew 17:23, Mark 9:31-32; Mark 16:10-11; Luke
1 Source: Lets Get Biblical by Rabbi Tovia Singer
18:32, John 20:9). Peter didn’t joyfully exclaim: “Praise God, you are the suffering servant of Isaiah 53!” Clearly, the disciples did not know that the Messiah was supposed to suffer and die nor did they view Jesus’ impending death as “good news.” Their reaction makes it abundantly clear that they had no concept that their messiah’s suffering and death was prophesized by Isaiah 53.
Fourth, Jesus’ enemies such as King Herod certainly didn’t think that the Messiah was supposed to be killed. Otherwise, why would Herod help Jesus’ cause by trying to kill him? (Matthew 2).
Fifth, Jesus himself obviously didn’t see Isaiah 53 as relevant to his messianic claims. According to the Gospel of Mark, “And he (Jesus) went forward a little, and fell on the ground, and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him. And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me.” (Mark 14:35-36). By asking God to “take away this cup from me” Jesus clearly wanted God to allow him to live and not be killed. This creates a monumental problem for today’s missionaries. Didn’t Jesus know that if God listened to him and “removed the cup” Jesus would not be able to fulfill (the current missionary interpretation of) Isaiah 53? Obviously, until Jesus suffered and died there was no need for Christian missionaries to re-interpret Isaiah 53 to explain his death. Parenthetically, since Jesus was supposedly “god” as a member of the trinity, was Jesus speaking to himself when he asked God to “remove this cup?” Does any of this really make sense?
It is important to note that there is no scriptural basis in Isaiah 53, the Torah or the Jewish Bible to support the Christian faith claim that it is necessary to “believe in the Messiah” for personal salvation. God gave the Jewish People a detailed instruction manual (the Torah) containing 613 commandments /tools to make moral choices. According to Jewish theology, each person determines their own personal salvation based upon their own moral choices. Therefore, even if Jesus were the messiah there would be no need to “believe” in him for personal salvation.
TEXTUAL ANALYSIS
The speakers throughout chapter fifty-three are the Gentile kings who are introduced at the end of Chapter 52 who remark in shock and astonishment at the sudden elevation of the Jewish People. The Christian Church has always taught that the Jews have suffered for the past 2000 years as a punishment for rejecting Jesus, but in Chapter 52 God reveals and these Gentile kings admit that the Gentiles caused the Jews to suffer for their own sins:
ISAIAH 52: “Behold, My [God’s] servant [Israel] will succeed; he [Israel] will be exalted and become high and exceedingly lofty. Just as multitudes were astonished over you [Israel] …so will the many nations [exclaim about him [Israel] and [Gentile] kings will shut their mouths [in amazement] for they [Gentiles] will see that which had never been told to them [Gentiles], and will perceive things they (Gentiles] had never heard.” (Isaiah 52:15)
CONCLUSION: In Isaiah 52, the Gentile kings “shut their mouths” when they realize that they sinned by persecuting the Jews for their own benefit. They are the speaker in chapter 53. Once this is understood, Isaiah’s 53rd chapter becomes clear. Remember that in Chapter 53, the “we”
are these Gentiles and the “he” is Israel (the Jewish People). This is the correct translation from the Hebrew:
ISAIAH 53: “Who would believe what we [Gentiles] have heard! For whom has the arm of Hashem been revealed! Formerly he [Israel] grew like a sapling or like a root from arid ground; he had neither form nor grandeur; we saw him but without such visage that we could desire him. He was despised and isolated from men, a man of pains and accustomed to illness. As one from whom we would hide our faces; he was despised, and we had no regard for him. But in truth, it was our ills that he bore, and our pains that he carried – but we had regarded him diseased, stricken by God, and afflicted. He was pained because of our rebellious sins and oppressed through our iniquities; the chastisement upon him was for our benefit, and through his wounds, we were healed. We have all strayed like sheep, each of us turning his own way, and Hashem inflicted upon him the iniquity of us all. He was persecuted and afflicted, but he did not open his mouth; like a sheep being led to the slaughter or a ewe that is silent before her shearers, he did not open his mouth. Now that he has been released from captivity and judgment, who could have imagined such a generation? For he had been removed from the land of the living, an affliction upon them [lamo in Hebrew] that was my people’s sin. He submitted himself to his grave like wicked men; and the wealthy [submitted] to his execution, for committing no crime and with no deceit in his mouth.
Hashem desired to oppress him and He afflicted him; if his soul would acknowledge guilt, he would see offspring and live long days and the desire of Hashem would succeed in his hand. He would see (the purpose) and be satisfied with his soul’s distress. With his knowledge My servant will vindicate the Righteous One to multitudes; it is their iniquities that he will carry. Therefore, I will assign him a portion from the multitudes and he will divide the mighty as spoils – in return for having poured out his soul for death and being counted among the wicked, for he bore the sin of the multitudes, and prayed for the wicked.”
These verses will be analyzed in detail below.
JACOB AND ISRAEL ARE REFERENCES TO THE JEWISH PEOPLE: According to Genesis, the Jewish patriarch Jacob’s name was changed to Israel. Collectively, Jacob and Israel refer to the Jewish People:
GENESIS: “He [an angel] said, “No longer will it be said that your name is Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven with the Divine and with man and have overcome.” (Genesis 32:29)
ISRAEL IS GOD’S SERVANT NATION: Isaiah identified the “servant” as Jacob and Israel (the Jewish People) many times in the twelve chapters preceding his 53rd chapter:
1. “But you, Israel, are my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen.” (Isaiah 41:8-9)
2. “Yet hear now, O Jacob My servant and Israel whom I have chosen.” (Isaiah 44:1)
3. “Remember these, O Jacob, And Israel, for you are My servant, I have formed you,
you are My servant.” (Isaiah 44:21)
4. “…for Jacob My servant’s sake, and Israel My elect.” (Isaiah 45:4)
5. “The Lord has redeemed His servant Jacob.” (Isaiah 48:20)
6. “You are My servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.” (Isaiah 49:3)
ANALYSIS: The idea that the servant is the Jewish people in Chapters 41 through 49, and that Isaiah would suddenly turn the servant into the messiah in Chapter 53 without warning defies logic. Missionaries attempt to benefit from the fact that Isaiah had explained who the “servant” was so many times by the times he reached Chapter 53 he did not bother to do so again.
FURTHER PROOF: In the Jewish Bible Israel and Jacob are often referred to as God’s “servant.”
1. “A heritage to Israel His servant, for His mercy endures forever.” (Psalm 136:22)
2. “But do not fear, O My servant Jacob, and do not be dismayed, O Israel! (Jeremiah 46:27)
3. “Do not fear, O’ Jacob My servant, says the Lord, for I am with you for I will make a complete end of all the nations.” (Jeremiah 76: 28)
4. “Therefore do not fear, O My servant Jacob, says the Lord, nor be dismayed, O Israel, for behold, I will save you from afar, and your seed [zera] from the land of their captivity, Jacob shall return, have rest and be quiet.” (Jeremiah 30:10)
Israel is also referred to as God’s servant in the Christian Bible:
5. “He [God] has helped His servant Israel in remembrance of His mercy.” (Luke 1:54)
THE CHRISTIAN VIEW REQUIRES GOD TO BE HIS OWN SERVANT: The Christian view is that the suffering servant of God described in Isaiah 53 is Jesus. However, Christians also assert that Jesus is a part of the “trinity,” one of the three persons in the Christian triune godhead, and therefore is God Himself. Therefore, according to the Christian view, God sent Himself as His own “suffering servant.” This does not make sense logically and is contrary to the plain meaning of the text. Logically and in context, a servant and the servant’s master are not the same person.
CAN “HE” REFER TO ISRAEL? Christian missionaries claim that since the "servant" is referred to as "he" (singular, masculine) Chapter 53 cannot refer to Israel. However, the verses below demonstrate that the Jewish Bible specifically refers to Israel as “he, him, his servant and God’s son,” in the singular, masculine.
1. EXODUS: “You shall say to Pharaoh, ‘So said Hashem, My firstborn son is Israel. So I say to you, send out My son that he may serve Me – but you have refused to send him out: behold, I shall kill your firstborn son.” (Exodus 4:22) Israel is referred to as God’s “son” and “he” in the collective.
2. HOSEA: The prophet Hosea said, “When Israel was a lad I loved him, and since Egypt I have been calling out to My son.” (Hosea 11:1)
3. HOSEA: Hosea confirmed that in exile, Israel struggled as a young tree growing on parched land, “I will be as the dew unto Israel; he shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his roots as Lebanon. His branches shall spread, his beauty shall be as the olive tree, and his smell as Lebanon.” (Hosea 14:6-8)
ANALYSIS: This confirms the verse in Isaiah 53:2 which says “he came up like a sapling before it, and like a root from dry ground, he had neither form nor comeliness; and we saw him that he had no appearance that we should have desired him.”
ISAIAH SHIFTED TO THE PLURAL: Isaiah himself proves the Jewish understanding is correct by switching back from the masculine singular (he) to the plural form (them) when referring to the Jewish People in verse 53:8. Isaiah said:
“Now that he [Israel] has been released from captivity and judgment, who could have imagined such a generation? For he had been removed from the land of the living, an affliction upon them [lamo in Hebrew] that was my people’s sin.” (Isaiah 53:8, Jewish Bible, Stone Edition)
ANALYSIS: Isaiah’s switch from him to them (lamo) is a fatal problem for the Christian claim that it applies to one man, Jesus. Christian missionaries can plausibly claim that “he” applies to Jesus but they cannot plausibly claim that “them” applies to Jesus. The New King James and the NIV versions of the Christian Bible dealt with this monumental problem by merely mistranslating “lamo” as him, fraudulently translating the plural as the singular.
The prophet Hosea also described the Jewish People as “lad,” “him,” and “son” (singular masculine) and then switched to the plural them (lamo) in exactly the same way:
“When Israel was a lad, I loved him, and since Egypt I have been calling out to My son. [As much as] they called to them, [Israel] so did they [Ephraim] turn away from them [Israel]…” (Hosea 11:1-2)
ANALYSIS: Like the prophet Isaiah, the prophet Hosea also referred to Israel in the first person masculine as God’s child and God’s son. Hosea then switched to the plural, “them.” This confirms the Jewish understanding that the “he” in Isaiah 53 describes the Jewish People, God’s suffering servant.
THEOLOGY BY BIBLE TAMPERING: The New King James (NKJ) Christian translation of Isaiah 53 further manipulated the text in Isaiah 53:3-5 by changing the tense from past to present and by strategically mistranslating key words and phrases in order to force Jesus into the text. The Jewish Bible correctly translates the Hebrew. The reader can compare this to the Christian translation:
THE JEWISH BIBLE: “…he had neither form nor grandeur…he was despised and isolated from men, a man of pains and accustomed to illness. As one from whom we would hide our faces; he was despised, and we had no regard for him. But in truth, it was our ills that he bore, and our pains that he carried-but we had regarded him diseased, stricken by God, and afflicted. He was pained because of our rebellious sins and oppressed through our iniquities…” (Isaiah 53:2-5)
THE CHRISTIAN OLD TESTAMENT (NKJ): “He has [instead of had] no form or comeliness…He is [instead of was] despised and rejected [instead of isolated] by men. A man of sorrows [instead of pains] and acquainted with grief [instead of accustomed to illness]. And we hid, as it were, our faces from him. Surely he has borne our griefs [instead of ills] and carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed him stricken, [instead of diseased] smitten by God, and afflicted, but he was wounded for our transgressions. (Isaiah 53:2-5)
ANALYSIS: Isaiah referred to an event that had already occurred and therefore used the past tense. Christian translators manipulated the text by changing the tense to the present tense to apply it to Jesus. Christian translators avoided the problem that Jesus never was reported to have suffered from “illness or disease” by mistranslating these words as “sorrows and grief.” This manipulation of the text shifted the meaning of Isaiah’s words to support Christian theology.
ANALYSIS OF KEY VERSES:
ISAIAH 53:3: “He [Israel] was despised and isolated from men, a man of pains and accustomed to illness [not grief]. As one from whom we would hide our faces; he was despised, and we had no regard for him.”
ANALYSIS: “He” [the Jewish People] was subjected to 2000 years of anti-Semitism, “despised,” and forced to live in walled ghettos in Europe “isolated from men” and “we “ [Gentiles] had no regard for “him” [the Jewish People].
ISAIAH 53:4: “But in truth, it was our ills that he bore, and our pains that he carried-but we had regarded him diseased, [not sorrows] stricken by God, and afflicted!”
ANALYSIS: The Gentiles admit that it was “our” [the Gentiles] “ills and pains” that “he” [the Jews] bore. The Gentiles regarded the Jews cursed by God and “diseased, stricken, and afflicted.” Clearly, Jesus was not “accustomed to illness, diseased, stricken or afflicted.”
ISAIAH 53:5: “He was pained because of our rebellious sins and oppressed through our iniquities; the chastisement upon him was for our benefit and through his wounds, we were healed.”
ANALYSIS: “He” [the Jewish People] “was pained” [suffered] because of “our” [the Gentiles] rebellious sins and “he” [the Jewish People] was “oppressed” by “our” [the Gentiles] “iniquities” [sins]. The Gentiles believed that the suffering of the Jewish People was deserved because the Jews rejected and killed Jesus but his death redeemed their sins. “We” [the Gentiles] believed that they were “healed” [justified] “through his [the Jewish People’s] wounds” that the Gentiles inflicted upon the Jewish People.
ISAIAH 53:6: “We have all strayed like sheep, each of us turning his own way, and Hashem inflicted upon him the iniquity of us all.”
ANALYSIS: “We” [Gentiles] “strayed [from God] like sheep,” [by persecuting the Jewish People], and Hashem “inflicted upon him” [God’s servant nation] “the iniquity of us all” [that the Gentiles deserved].
ISAIAH 53:7: “He was persecuted and afflicted, but he did not open his mouth; like a sheep being led to the slaughter or a ewe that is silent before her shearers, he did not open his mouth.”
ANALYSIS: This verse refers to the many hardships that “he” [the Jewish People] endured in their exiles. For example, in the eleventh century, the Jewish People was “persecuted and afflicted” by crusaders who brutally tortured and killed Jews in the name of their lord Jesus. In this century the Nazis murdered millions of Jews in the death camps, “like a sheep being led to slaughter…like an ewe that is silent before her shearers.” This verse cannot be about Jesus who “opened his mouth” on the cross to complain that God had forsaken him.2
ISAIAH 53: 8: “Now that he has been released from captivity and judgment, who could have imagined such a generation? For he had been removed from the land of the living, an affliction upon them that was my people’s sin.”
ANALYSIS: “He” [the Jews] had been "removed" [exiled] from the "land of the living" [Israel]. The Jews were afflicted and exiled to Babylonia. The Jews were afflicted and exiled from Spain. The Jews were afflicted and removed from Germany in boxcars and taken to death camps.
ISAIAH 53:9: “He submitted himself to his grave like wicked men; and the wealthy [submitted] to his executions, for committing no crime [NKJ and NIV Christian Bibles translates crime as violence] and with no deceit in his mouth.”
2 Mark 15:34, Matthew 27:46
ANALYSIS: For one thousand years, European Christians killed wealthy Jews to steal their money who “submitted to execution, committing no crime” [although they were innocent]. “With no deceit in his [the Jewish People’s] mouth” [without pretending to accept Jesus] “he" [the Jewish People] submitted themselves to their grave.”
THE SUFFERING SERVANT “HAD DONE NO VIOLENCE” According to Isaiah the servant “had done no violence.”3 This verse cannot possibly be about Jesus. With whip in hand Jesus attacked the merchants in the Temple area, overturning tables and seats.4 He destroyed a fig tree for not having fruit out of season.5 He caused the death, by drowning, of a herd of swine by allowing demons to purposely enter their bodies.6 Attacking merchants, cursing and killing a fig tree, and permitting demons to enter the swineherd and causing their death is violent behavior. Whether Jesus was justified in this violence is irrelevant. Therefore, Jesus could not have been the subject of Isaiah 53:9.
THE SERVANT HAD PHYSICAL DESCENDANTS: Properly translated Isaiah 53:10 says, “He [the suffering servant] would see offspring.”7 The Hebrew word for “offspring” (zera) literally means sperm. As one would expect, “zera” is always used in the Jewish Bible to denote physical descendants. There is no indication in the Christian Bible that Jesus left physical descendants, (offspring) and therefore, Isaiah 53 cannot possibly be about him. In the Jewish Bible when spiritual descendants are intended, the Hebrew word “ben,” which means “sons” is always used.
THE SERVANT HAD A PROLONGED LIFE: Isaiah said the servant “…[would] live long days…”8 According to the Christian NKJ and the NIV translations [God] will “prolong his days.” “Prolonged days” means a long life, which cannot possibly apply to Jesus. Jesus allegedly died at about 30 years of age, which is not a “prolonged” life. Also, if Jesus was “god” as Christians claim, he was in essence an eternal (not mortal) being whose life could not have been “prolonged.” Although this description cannot fit Jesus, it does fit the Jewish People perfectly, whose physical survival notwithstanding millenniums of persecution is legendary in the face of overwhelming odds against survival. Significantly, the Jewish People are the only biblical people that have survived to the modern era as a distinct people. The days of the physical descendants of the Jewish People have truly and miraculously been “prolonged” for 3200 years and have fulfilled this prophecy and every other prophecy in Isaiah 53.
CONCLUSION: God’s servant nation was referred to as Jacob/Israel many times in the twelve chapters preceding Chapter fifty-three of Isaiah. The Christian Bible also refers to Israel as God’s servant. The Jewish servant nation is referred to in the singular as “he” in Isaiah, Exodus, and Hosea. According to the Christian theory of the trinity, Jesus was God. Logically, God cannot be His own servant. The Christian Bible changed tense, mistranslated the plural (lamo) as
3 Isaiah 53:9 New King James and NIV translations
4 Matthew 21:12, Mark 11:15-16, Luke 19:45, John 2:15
5 Matthew 21:18-21, Mark 11:13-14
6 Matthew 8:32, Mark 5:13, Luke 8:33
7 Isaiah 53:10, Jewish Bible, Stone Edition
8 Ibid
singular and falsely capitalized pronouns. The suffering servant “did no violence” and Jesus committed several acts of violence. Isaiah’s servant had physical descendants and a prolonged life, which cannot apply to Jesus.

I never read in the Christian book that Jesus was slaughtered in the courtyard, roasted and eaten that night by those that applied for it. Never mind that,like it shows,the Passover lamb isn't a sin sacrifice and is the least holy.It makes one wonder why the Christian faith equates Jesus being called the Passover lamb with atonement of sin. If you examine the book, the offering to G-d on Passover is Numbers 28:16. And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the Lord.
17. And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast: seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten.
18. In the first day shall be an holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work therein:
19. But ye shall offer a sacrifice made by fire for a burnt offering unto the Lord; two young bullocks, and one ram, and seven lambs of the first year: they shall be unto you without blemish:
20. And their meat offering shall be of flour mingled with oil: three tenth deals shall ye offer for a bullock, and two tenth deals for a ram;
21. A several tenth deal shalt thou offer for every lamb, throughout the seven lambs:
22. And one goat for a sin offering, to make an atonement for you.
23. Ye shall offer these beside the burnt offering in the morning, which is for a continual burnt offering.

Is this another place where Paul didn't understand Torah law though he claimed to be a Pharisee "brought up at the feet of Gamaliel", a teacher of higher studies not children.If you refer to my article New Covenant?, you will see where Paul also misquoted Jeremiah.

Mishnah,Zevachim Chapter 5
1)What is the location of the offerings? [Regarding] the most holy offerings,their slaughter is in the north(a).The slaughter of the bull and the he-goat of Yom Kippur is in the north and the reception of their blood in a service vessel (b) is in the north. Their blood requires sprinkling between the pole[of the holy Ark](c),and towards the Curtain {of the Holy of Holys} and upon the Golden Altar(d).Every one of these applications is essential.(e)The leftover blood he would pour onto the western base of the Outer Altar;but if he failed to apply it[leftover blood to the base],he has not prevented atonement.

Notes on 1:A:The most holy offerings are sin,guilt,elevation,and communal peace because they have stricter laws than individual peace and thanksgiving offerings. B:Special vessels set aside strictly for this purpose C:On Yom Kippur the High Priest sprinkled the blood between the poles of the Ark that extended from either side towards the sanctuary. D:The Golden Altar that the incense was burned on every day E:All of the essential applications must be done or atonement is not achieved.

2)Regarding the bulls and goats that are completely burned(a),their slaughter is in the north and reception of the blood in the north. Their blood requires being sprinkled toward the Curtain and upon the Golden Altar,Every application is essential. Leftover blood was poured on the western base,but failure to do so did not prevent atonement.Both these and the Yom Kippur offerings were burned in the place where the [Altar}ashes are deposited (b) In no case are any parts of the burnt offerings eaten.

Notes on 2:A:Certain parts were burned on the Altar (see Lev 4:8-12) and the remainder burned outside of Jerusalem. B:The ashes from the Altar were removed when necessary to a ritually clean place outside the city.

3)Regarding sin offerings of the community and of individual(a)---the communal offerings are as follows:the he-goats of Rosh Chodesh and festivals--their slaughter [of all sin offerings] is in the north and the blood received in the north in the service vessel. Their blood requires four applications,one on each the four corners of the Altar,First the southwest,then the northeast,then the northwest then the southwest. Leftover blood would be poured out on the southern base. These offerings are eaten within the[Courtyard]curtains (b) by males of the priesthood,prepared in any manner,on the same day and that night until midnight (c)

Note on 3:A;Before giving the laws of sin offerings,the Mishnah lists the kinds of communal sin offerings that fall in this catagory.The listing being necessary because earlier mishnayos, too,have discussed communal sin offerings that fall under the burnt offering category. B:It must be prepared in the Courtyard.The term "curtains" is borrowed from the time in the wilderness when the courtyard was enclosed by curtains instead of walls. C:A sin offering could be eaten on the day it was sacrificed and the following evening until dawn by scriptural law, but the sages imposed a deadline of midnight to prevent mishaps.

4)The elevation offering is among the most holy offerings.It is slaughtered in the north and the blood received in the service vessel in the north.It's blood applications are two that are equal to four (A).It requires flaying and dismemberment ( b) and is entirely consumed by fire

Notes on 4:A:The blood was thrown at two corners of the Altar walls,northeast and southwest.The blood would then spread out to the adjacent walls,Thus,two applications put blood on all four walls of the Altar. B:The hide of all offerings of greater holiness was given to the priests and the body cut up in a prescribed way,only then was it burned.

5)Regarding communal peace offerings(a) and [personal]guilt offerings(b)--the guilt offering is as follows:guilt offering for theft(c),guilt offering for misuse of sacred objects(d),guilt offering for violating a betrothed maidservant (e),the guilt offering of a Nazirite (f),the guilt offering of a metzora ( leper) (g) and a guilt offering in the case of doubt (h).Their slaughter and reception of blood is in the north and they are eaten by the priests in the Courtyard the same day and night until midnight.

Notes on 5:A:The only such offering are the two sheep that are brought in addition to the Shavuos mussaf offering (Lev23:19) The other communal offerings are either sin or elevation offerings. B:There are six kinds C.If one owned money--loan or theft,had an article in safekeeping or whatever and swore he did not owe it intentionally,he is required to bring an offering (Lev 5:20-26) D:If someone unintentionally used an belonging to the Sanctuary,he must bring an offering (ibid 5:14-16)E:A female non-Jewish slave is owned by two Jewish partners,One sets her free but the other does not,making her half free and half slave. Since a freed non-Jewish slave has the same status as a convert,she is half Jewish and half non-Jewish.She is therefore forbidden to marry a Jew nor a non-Jew.She is however allowed to marry a Jewish indentured servant,who is permitted to both a Jewish ands non-Jewish maidservant.If she becomes betrothed to a Jewish indentured servant and has relations with another man,the adulterer must bring an offering. F:A Nazirite who became ritually contaminated by contact with a corpse (Num6:9-12) G:A leper that has been declared cured must bring an offering 8 days after he is pronounced cured .H:If one is unsure whether he needs to bring a sin offering .The possible transgressor protects himself from punishment through a guilt offering,If it becomes evident that the offence was committed, he must bring a sin offering at that time.

6)The thanksgiving offering(a) and the ram of the Nazirite (b) are offerings of less holiness (c) Their slaughter is anywhere in the Courtyard and their blood application is two equal to four.They are eaten by anyone,anywhere in the city,prepared in any manner on the same day and night until midnight.The priestly portion is separated from them (d) and treated like them in preparation and where it can be eaten except that only the priests and their family can eat these portions.

Notes on 6:A:Brought by someone that survives serious danger B:Offered after the Nazirite has completed his period of abstinence he imposed on himself C:The greater leniency of these offerings is obvious from comparison to the above offerings laws. D:Priestly portion is the breast and right thigh before they are cooked,In the case of the Nazirite ram,the priests receive the right foreleg after cooking.

7)The peace offerings (a)are of lesser holiness. Their slaughter is anywhere in the Courtyard and the blood is applied two equivalent to four.They are eaten anywhere in the city and prepared in any manner.The priestly portion is separated and treated the same way except only the priests and their family may eat it.

Notes on 7:A:The peace offering can be eaten for two days and the night between while the thanksgiving offering is just the one day and night

8)The firstborn and tithe of animals,and the Pesach offering are the least holy of the offerings. Their slaughter is anywhere in the Courtyard and their blood requires only a single application (a) provided it is applied above the base.They differ in consumption:the priests only eat the firstborn offering and the tithe by anyone They are eaten throughout the city,prepared in any manner,for two days and one night.The Pesach offering is eaten only at night and only by those registered for it (b) and it may only be roasted.

Notes on 8:A:Unlike all the rest of the offerings,only a single application to the base is required.The base is part of the Altar,one cubit high and one cubit wide that juts out along the entire lengths of the west and north walls,but only one cubit along the south and east walls.The blood may only be applied to that part of the Altar directly above the base. B:Those who wish to eat the Pascal lamb must reserve their share before the slaughter (Ex12:4).In the case of all other offerings,any qualified person may partake of the flesh.