Bible Options Bible Study Software
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
On Isaiah 53
#11
baruch Wrote:
MessianicJew Wrote:Isaiah makes a plain distinction between Israel and a Man. Israel is seen in the feminine, often referred to as "her" not "he". It is easy to see when comparing ch. 52 with 66 below:

Yeshayahu 52:

14. As many wondered about you, "How marred his appearance is from that of a man, and his features from that of people!"

If Isaiah 53 were about Israel, then Isaiah would have used words such as: "Jerusalem", "her" or "Israel" or a "nation" or "Zion" or a "land" etc. often in conjunction with one another, just as Isaiah did in ch. 66 below:

Yeshayahu 66:
8. Who heard [anything] like this? Who saw [anything] like these? Is a land born in one day? Is a nation born at once, that Zion both experienced birth pangs and bore her children?

10. Rejoice with Jerusalem and exult in her all those who love her: rejoice with her a rejoicing, all who mourn over her.

The use of the word "her" is in reference to Israel, not "he" which is in the masculine and referenced to Messiah.

Seems to me that you didn't even read my presentation. Of course, the masculine pronoun is used of Israel!! Give me a break....

Nope, I didn't read your presentation, I skimmed it because it read mostly like an op-ed. Anyway, Isaiah 66 did refer to Israel as her, and whenever speaking about Israel, explicitly refers to Israel by using words such as: the land, nation, Zion, Jerusalem and calls Israel her. That is what is written no op-ed necessary.
#12
baruch Wrote:
HonestAbe Wrote:Is. 51:11 says, "so the ransomed of the Lord shall return"  it seems a price was paid before their return.

Israel was ransomed from Egypt without having someone die for their sins once and for all.

HonestAbe Wrote:chapters 50 and 51 seem to speak more of the person aspect of being, the child of God. and not speaking so much a "the nation".

We can definitely speak of that separately. I'd prefer to deal with the chapters in question right now.

It seems you look singularly at scripture.  Clearly Isaiah speaks about the nation, but the nation is made up of individuals.

I too look eagerly forward to the restoration of Israel and the kingdom of God set up in Jerusalem. But the children who will be there are righteous, they have been ransomed.  You surely understand the sacrifice rituals were a requirement for the individaul sins of the people. Thw shedding of blood was required. And you surely know they did not remove sin or they would not have to be done over and over. The blood of goats and cows does not remove sin.

Here is our delema, You read Is. as only the restoration of the nation. But do not account for the restoration the people of the nation. It is sinners and disobedient people who went into exile.  And you think God is going to restore the nation with sinful people?

In the language of Is. it is easy for you to read one way and only one way .....nation only , not the individual, if one desires to read only one way.  I have a problem with that. You seem to not see the need for personal redemption from sin. If the people are not ransomed, the nation is not redeemed.

David says, Ps. 143:2  "and enter not into judgement with thy servant: for in your sight shall no man liveing be justified."

also, Ps.51:5 "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me."

My questions, are you a sinner?  Do you think you can stand before a Just and Holy God on your own merit?  

It would be a shame for you, who undoubtedly are looking forward to the future Kingdom , established in righteousness, to miss it because you yourself are not worthy.  If you think you would be worthy, on what basis do you think you are?   How would you have been ransomed?

#13
Frankly, I am somewhat surprised :exclaim:


Here we have an essay on what most Christians consider one of the most convincing chapters in the Hebrew bible that references Jesus.

And only ONE person on this entire forum has read and commented on it?


I see many "links" to websites, articles, books, videos, etc, asking the Jewsih people to look at them.

The only reason I can think of would be that no one has anything to refute as to what is written.

Not looking for comments that do not apply. Please don't post long sermons. Only comment on the article.

Just read the article and provide commentary and/or arguements on what is written.

If you cannot invest the time to at least see things from our standpoint, why should we bother to listen to yours? We all talk about the "truth". Well, here is a well put together article that puts it all together, using references from the Hebrew bible.


I expect some good feedback here and point and counterpoints as to what is written.

I mean come on, we're talking about Isaiah 53 here!!!


Thank you.
#14
searchinmyroots Wrote:Frankly, I am somewhat surprised :exclaim:


Here we have an essay on what most Christians consider one of the most convincing chapters in the Hebrew bible that references Jesus.

And only ONE person on this entire forum has read and commented on it?


I see many "links" to websites, articles, books, videos, etc, asking the Jewsih people to look at them.

The only reason I can think of would be that no one has anything to refute as to what is written.

Not looking for comments that do not apply. Please don't post long sermons. Only comment on the article.

Just read the article and provide commentary and/or arguements on what is written.

If you cannot invest the time to at least see things from our standpoint, why should we bother to listen to yours? We all talk about the "truth". Well, here is a well put together article that puts it all together, using references from the Hebrew bible.


I expect some good feedback here and point and counterpoints as to what is written.

I mean come on, we're talking about Isaiah 53 here!!!


Thank you.


I hope you do not think I was avoiding the chapter?  Was my response clear as to the writings are both national (physical) and personal (spiritual).  It is the only way it can read and the only way it can work.

God ransoms the people , they individually become righteous. The righteous people receive their promise from God.  Is. 53 is telling the way The Just and Holy God , pays the ransom for His children....."the Son given".

Like I said in my first response.....the nation is not going to be resored with sinful people.  The nation will be restored with ransomed people.
#15
MessianicJew Wrote:Nope, I didn't read your presentation....

'Nuff said. Guess it doesn't matter that I explained the use of the feminine in those chapters within the essay. If you don't want to read it, why even respond? I was asking for responses to the essay, not your opinion of the type of article it is.
#16
HonestAbe Wrote:Like I said in my first response.....the nation is not going to be resored with sinful people.  The nation will be restored with ransomed people.

What do you make of the final wrap-up, where I mention why specific issues in the verses cannot be references to Jesus?
#17
baruch Wrote:
HonestAbe Wrote:Like I said in my first response.....the nation is not going to be resored with sinful people.  The nation will be restored with ransomed people.

What do you make of the final wrap-up, where I mention why specific issues in the verses cannot be references to Jesus?

I will respond, soon. In the mean time. What about my questions?
#18
HonestAbe Wrote:It seems you look singularly at scripture.  Clearly Isaiah speaks about the nation, but the nation is made up of individuals.

"Made up of individuals" does not mean "Messiah." That's where we disagree, of course.

HonestAbe Wrote:You surely understand the sacrifice rituals were a requirement for the individaul sins of the people. Thw shedding of blood was required. And you surely know they did not remove sin or they would not have to be done over and over. The blood of goats and cows does not remove sin.

They atoned for sins that were already committed, but they didn't atone for sins that were yet to be committed. This is a perspective that's apparently lacking in your position.

HonestAbe Wrote:Here is our delema, You read Is. as only the restoration of the nation. But do not account for the restoration the people of the nation. It is sinners and disobedient people who went into exile.  And you think God is going to restore the nation with sinful people?

Of course, the people will be brought back to repentance and to the proper service of God. Have you ever read a non-Messianic Jewish perspective of the Messianic Age (Yemot haMashiach)?

HonestAbe Wrote:In the language of Is. it is easy for you to read one way and only one way .....nation only , not the individual, if one desires to read only one way.  I have a problem with that. You seem to not see the need for personal redemption from sin. If the people are not ransomed, the nation is not redeemed.

You mistake me. The problem is that Christians generally do not read it nationalistically. For that reason, this perspective needs to be brought forward and emphasized. This doesn't mean that I don't believe that people need to repent individually and turn to Torah observance.

HonestAbe Wrote:My questions, are you a sinner?  Do you think you can stand before a Just and Holy God on your own merit?

My personal relationship with God is my own business. Do you have a need to get involved there? I am perfectly at ease in terms of our relationship, and I'm not at all afraid that God is going to send me to hell.

HonestAbe Wrote:It would be a shame for you, who undoubtedly are looking forward to the future Kingdom , established in righteousness, to miss it because you yourself are not worthy.  If you think you would be worthy, on what basis do you think you are?   How would you have been ransomed?

This hyper-individualistic train of thought would be completely foreign to the ancient Prophets. They said - turn around and stop sinning! They did not say - "What is the basis for your righteousness before God?" We turn from sin and do what God says - and he'll make up the difference. I'm not afraid to take him at his word.

Baruch
#19
SMR, and Baruch, I opened up the article and read through parts of it, but I did not comment for the simple reason that I never have considered the personal pronouns a big part of the argument. I did not see anything there that seems to refute my belief in Isaiah 53 being a picture of Jesus. Furthermore, to really evaluate the validity of that argument, I would have to do a lot of study in Hebrew grammar, and I am busy doing other studies right now. I participated heavily in other discussions on Isaiah 53 and you can peruse those to see my point of view.
#20
baruch Wrote:
MessianicJew Wrote:Nope, I didn't read your presentation....

'Nuff said. Guess it doesn't matter that I explained the use of the feminine in those chapters within the essay. If you don't want to read it, why even respond? I was asking for responses to the essay, not your opinion of the type of article it is.

Enough said? If you didn't want to read and quote my entire response then why respond? Ha, ha, just kidding. But you do see the parallel?

Anyway from your rather overly long 27 pages man, you couldn't just type up one thread worth of a page?

Isaiah 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the
chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Here are your words: "So, what does this mean? Israel suffered for two reasons: (1) because the nations were unjustly
heaping punishment upon the Jewish people; and, (2) because by suffering more than what their
sins deserved, and doing so while continuing to serve God and to make intercession for the nations
of the world and maintaining their prayers for peace in the world, Israel was suffering also in order
to bring justice to the world."

So God punished Israel because nations were heaping punishment on the Jewish people? Why would God do this?

As it is written, God said to Abraham, I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you. God did not say I will bless those that curse you.

And so how then by Israels stripes are we then healed?

Isaiah 52:14 you say "The New Testament indicates
that Jesus was an attractive person who drew multitudes to
himself."

Where is this in the New Testament?





Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)