Malfuzat - Volume IV — Page 201
201 Malfuzat – Volume IV perspective. As far as my comments are concerned in relation to these prophecies, I can say that the following matters require reflection. Firstly, in relation to these prophecies, did the Jews (in whose scriptures they are recorded) also understand them to be proof of the concept of atonement or the divinity of Christ? Secondly, did the Messiah also accept that these prophecies were about him? Then after declaring himself to be the fulfilment of those prophecies, did he give practical evidence of the fact that he held true to those prophecies? Now, although the subject of whether the prophecies in question were recorded in the actual book in exactly the same way or not could become a lengthy debate, but without considering it necessary to engage in this debate, let us consider two other matters which require further investigation. The Jews who are the actual inheritors of the book known as the Torah, and about whom the Messiah said himself that they occupy the seat of Moses as , have never understood these prophecies in the manner that you and other Christians interpret. They have never awaited the coming of the Messiah as one part of a trinity. As such, previously I have spoken about this in very clear terms. The Christians forcibly apply these prophecies to the Messiah, even though they simply cannot apply to him in any way. Otherwise, testimony of Jewish scholars ought to be presented as to whether they understood these prophecies in the same way as you. Then you can read the Gospel and see (it is not a very voluminous book); nowhere is it recorded that the Messiah quoted these prophecies in full and said that in view of these prophecies, I am God and these are the arguments in favour of my divinity. For any wise person would agree that a mere claim is not admis - sible as evidence. This suggestion that the prophecies in question prove that the Messiah is God constitutes nothing more than a claim. The Messiah himself has never made such a claim, so for someone else to turn him into God is a strange thing indeed. Then, even if the impossible is assumed and he did, there is such abundant con - tradiction in his claims and actions that no intelligent and God-fearing person could read these accounts and say that Jesus as was God; in fact, one would find it difficult to even refer to him as a great and noble man. This claim of the Gospel can be sufficiently repudiated by the Gospel itself, because nowhere is there evi - dence that the Messiah made this claim. On the contrary, when the opportunity