What is the Climax of the Hebrew Bible?

hmm i read recently that from exodus on is really about the history of the hebrews and they tacked on gensis and the other stories after, it seems more reasonable since the exodus stories do not match any other cultures, but genesis do
just wondering what people think
as for the climax? got me, i figure when the jewish messiah comes to sow war then peace maybe

I would understand that to mean when the prophecies concerning a Jewish Messiah are fulfilled in this one's coming to make war then peace.It is a good suggestions.I think the way I would go about this is this: Looking at Genesis 1:31 we see God satisfied. This is after creation of the world and man being made in His image and assigned the dominion over God's creation. It seems that God is at rest there with satisfaction."And God saw everything that He had made, and indeed, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day."No we know shortly afterwards things get all messed up. So perhaps the climax of the Hebrew Bible involves those matters which most closely return the world and man to that state of things.Now I think there is more than one good answer to the Old Testament climax matter. But for now I suggest a possible way is to examine the top satisfaction of God we can see, and what things pertain in the Scriptures of the Jews to returning to that state of things.This is a possible way of ascertaining a Hebrew Bible climax. But your suggestion of the Messiah coming to wage war and peace is a good candidate. Unless you believe that this Messiah is in the Hebrew Bible then I have to assume you are speaking of the prophetic future when such a one does come in fulfillment of these predictions.This message has been edited by jaywill, 03-16-2006 07:58 AM

If this is so I would ask if the Messiah's coming to make war and then peace is an end in itself or a procedure towards an end.If this is a procedure toward an end then the making of war and peace has something else in view of itself. Perhaps then we should explore for what reason is war and peace waged.Is this only that a Jewish state may be free from its enemies and have peace?Is it that Jewish enemies may be defeated perpetually?I wonder how the war and peace waged by a Messiah on behalf of Israel relates to anything else in God's plan in terms of all creation.

The concept of the "Jewish Messiah" is not the same as the christian concept. It developed during the reign of Antichus, and was specifically
considered someone who would throw out forgein invaders, and bring back a human 'home grown' king to the Jews. This pushing out of the foreign invaders, and then becoming king over a peaceful kingdom certainly fits in that mold.However, the concept of the Messiah is not explicitly discussed anywhere in the Jewish scripture itself. The book of Daniel comes the closest. Even that does not come out and SAY it. However, it was written during the affliction by the Jews from Antichus, and is only in the 'writings', so you can't talk about that as being a 'climax'.I don't see there really being a climax.

Well, I am on your chosen ground now. On this thread I will not refer to any New Testament verses.Having said that, if I refer to Hebrew Bible verses concerning a messiah are you sure that I will see something quite foriegn to a "Christian concept" of a Messiah?I think if I can't refer to the New Testament then I will not be able to defend your critique of a "Christian concept" of a Messiah which I find to be a unfair or limiting suggestion from you of a "Christian concept". The sprout that comes out of the stump of Jesse in Isaiah 11 seems to approach both my concerns and the concerns of the other poster somewhat.Here you have in Isaiah 11 a descendent of David anointed with the Spirit of Jehovah. His characteristics wise, just, and knowledgeable (11:2), His judgment is perceptive (v.3), His concern for the poor is righteous (4), his conquest of the wicked is absolute (4), he is faithful forgetting no promise (5).But not only so his presence seems also to signal the recovery of idyllic nature itself. The carnivorous animals will be at peace with the omnivorious ones (6). This seems to be a return to the paradise setting of Genesis. So this messianic figure even has an effect on the natural world.Peace and knowledge of God will then cover the earth as the waters cover the sea (9). May nations will seek this coming one (10). He will recover the Jews back to their land from foreign invaders (11).I think that possible climax is depicted in the 11th chapter of Isaiah. This is a high point. Even the natural condition of the earth seems to be returned to its paradise like condition. So I submit Isaiah 11 as a candidate for a climax of biblical scenes.But there may be some better ones still. Can you think of a state in which Yahweh is the most satisfied, the most at peace with the way things are set in order?That is kind of what I mean by climax.

Yes, Isaiah 11 does concern itself with saying that there will be a branch of the house of David (the term 'stump' can mean living tree'.However, that does not say that the King will be anything but a man. And it is discussing THIS world, not the next one. It basicially is saying that there will be a wise king from the house of David over Israel that brings peace to the world. The 'stump' is more like roots. Rather than the 'high trees' of assyria defined before, the king will emerge from the 'stock' of the tree. If you read 11:4, it is not saying that the world will be perfect (there will still be poor), and there will still be wickness, but it is saying that the king will make fair judgements.The 'lion lays down with the land' is merely allegorical for how nations will react to each other. Although there will still be conflicts, they will be resolved peacefully, rather than through war.That is the hope of Isaiah. That does not mean that "The messiah" will be more than a man. If you read Isaiah 10:34, this poem was in response to the threat of Assyria. Isaiah was trying to reassure King Ahaz that the threat of Assyria will be nothing, and that the branch of Jesse (i.e. King Ahaz) will come to be a great ruler over a peaceful land.

Ramoss, I agree with you and never (in this particular thread) said otherwise.Wait until I say that before you refute me. (If I say it) I never said it involved another world on this thread. Actually neither did I ever on any other thread.Remember, I am restricting my comments to the Hebrew Canon of scriptures. And that is all I said. Then we are in agreement up to this point.Do you also concur that this person's reign seems to have a transforming effect on the natural world also? If yes, then we are in full agreement on this thread up to this point. I agree. It will be a whole lot better and in some sense restored to a paradise like situation that Adam and Eve knew. I also might come short of discribing it as a perfect world. I don't see why that should be necessarily true. But perhaps. And again, in this thread I never said that the messiah was in Isa. 11 more than a man.Even on a thread free to quote the New Testament I would not say that within Isaiah 11 we could see someone who was more than a man anointed by the Spirit of God.It is possible that you will find nothing to argue with me about in this thread Ramoss. Then again latter you may. Why don't you wait until I write something that you feel the need to contradict before you do so? So King Ahaz is the one who is spoken of in chapter 11?Will King Ahaz come back to life and finish off these prophecies? Or did these things happen and just come and go with Ahaz's life and death?

Ramoss,If the animals at peace with one another though carnivorous and omnivorous, represent nations or kingdoms at peace then what does this mean?"The nursing child shall play by the cobra's hole, and upon the viper's den the weaned child will stretch out his hand" (11:8)How do you understand this in the sense of the wild animals being symbols of nations at peace?

no no. this going to sound strange coming from me, but genesis, exodus, and number are ONE book. while it was editted together from at least 3 independent sources, each source extends the length of the three books. this is why we see duplicate accounts well into exodus. (there's probably some in numbers, too, but it's been a while and i hate numbers.)the divide between genesis and exodus is an artificial one. notice the end of genesis and beginning of exodus connects very well? some of the other similar books we have span similar periods.

---

hmm i guess i will have to go over it again then
i may have misunderstood it

I suppose the establishment of the Davidic kingdom would have to be considered the Old Testament's climax. Perhaps Solomon's reign could also be considered the climax, since that was the height of Israel's power and prestige. After that, the kingdom divided and corruption quickly infested both Judah and Israel.So, like a mountain with two summit points, either the Davidic or the Solomonic reigns arguably make the climax of the O.T.

What about the house of God?You have the good land in the hands of Israel. But the good land has a city as its center Jerusalem. And Jerusalem has its center. That is the house of God.Along with the Israel king reigning you also have to have the temple built and Jehovah God's glory in the temple.I would place a highpoint of these three matters - the land, the city with its king, and the temple with the glory of God right in First Kings around chapters 8. I think this must be a summit, a peak, a highpoint of all the promises of God to Israel.And here is perhaps the pinnacle of the summit:"And when the priests came out of the Holy Place, the cloud filled the house of Jehovah; And the priests were not able to stand and minister because of the cloud, for the glory of Jehovah filled the house of Jehovah" (1 Kings 8:10,11)After this you have king Solomon's rich blessing of the people and his prayer for the house of God 12-21 and 22-53.I think today that perhaps this must be the climax and highest point of the Old Testament. From here there is only decline into something less noble and less glorious for Israel.Yet the recovery of the land, the city and the house is perhaps greater. But these three matters must be in line - the good land possessed, the capital Jerusalem established with its king, and the temple filled with the glory of the God of Israel.This is the climax I think today. [b]First Kings

The temple was built by Solomon (well, during his reign), so that tends to support my argument that the "climax" of the Old Testament could be considered as when he was king.

---

Never overestimate the intelligence of someone who thinks you're wrong.

DeclinetoState, I agree.A question though. If we tentatively put the climax at Solomon's reign how should we view the complaining of the people about Solomon when Rehoboam becomes king?It seems that they were kind of glad to see Solomon go since he worked all the people so hard. How would you think about that?This message has been edited by jaywill, 03-24-2006 02:19 PM

Keeping the mountain analogy going here, you may notice that on some mountains, there's a gradual climb to the summit on one side, but a very sharp dropoff on the other. This was the situation in Israel, I think. The peak during the reigns of David and Solomon were followed by a fairly rapid decline that began in the last years of Solomon's reign and continued almost immediately with the division of the kingdoms starting with Rehoboam and Jeroboam.