Bible Options Bible Study Software
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Isaiah 53
#1
I know this topic has been done probably ad nauseum, but a Christian friend came by my house over the passover weekend to save me, and the subject of course came up.

On its own I can see it as a very compelling argument for Jesus, but for me reading a paragraph without the context makes little sense. So I decided to read Isaiah from chapter 40 to the end.

During my study I found 4 things, A savior(or messiah), a forgiver of sins, A king, and a road for Gentiles to come to God.

My first thought turned to context. Why would God speak of Israel for 13 straight chapters, switch gears in 53, then go back to Israel? Is God trying to see if I'm paying attention? Or is it possible that at that point, reading in context, the subject matter never changed? Is it even possible that at that point Isaiah was actually talking about himself? He did that in several instances before, and we know Isaiah had two sons.

After I finished my study I asked myself several questions. Why do Christians accept the prophetic message of 53, but don't seem to accept ALL the rest? Did they not read that God himself named a messiah, a non Israelite Cyrus, who had not known God? Does that not change the perception of what a messiah is? What about the Savior? God very clearly states that he is the savior. He also clearly states he is King. Finally in chapter 56 God makes it clear that all are welcome to worship him, including the gentile with conditions that they adhere to the same rules He set for Jews. So I began to wonder, why don't Christians want to do as God said, and instead use their own path to God?

This is a good start for a discussion, and I am interested in other comments, both pro and con, to my thoughts Thanks for reading.


#2
Short answer.....Cyrus didn't die on a cross for anyone...and there are a lot more prophecies pointing to Yeshua than Isaiah 53 starting in Genesis and right through the scriptures.
#3
prophet

Thank you for your comment, Your short answer begs several questions though. I also am aware that there may be other scriptures from your point of view relating to Jesus but to simplify and stay focused I would like to confine this to Isaiah.

You answered about Cyrus but, didnt answer my thought on what a messiah actually is. I would also like to point out that I find no evidence in Isaiah about a cross.

If we agree that Isaiah is giving a prophecy, possibly an end time prophecy Then shouldn't all of Isaiah be considered in context with chapter 53? Please then explain what God is saying in chapter 56 specifically 56:6-8 6 (copied and pasted from Youngs Literal Translation)

6And sons of the stranger, who are joined to Jehovah, To serve Him, and to love the name of Jehovah, To be to Him for servants, Every keeper of the sabbath from polluting it, And those keeping hold on My covenant.
7I have brought them unto My holy mountain, And caused them to rejoice in My house of prayer, Their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices [Are] for a pleasing thing on Mine altar, For My house, `A house of prayer,' Is called for all the peoples.
8An affirmation of the Lord Jehovah, Who is gathering the outcasts of Israel: `Again I gather to him -- to his gathered ones.

I read this a path to all nations and peoples. The Messiah has a job,but the path to God seems clear in this passage. Am I wrong?
One last quote from Isaiah that I think is important Isaiah 48:11 For my sake, My own sake, do I act lest (my name) be dishonored! I will not give My glory to another.




#4
Which is what God did when He came in the form of a man....the man Jesus which fulfilled that scripture.
#5
Thank you again prophet for your response.

It appears unfortunatly that you can't stay on topic, but that's fine I'll bite.

I find no evidence in the Tanakh that God would turn himself into a man. The messiah or annointed one has and had only been a man as Moses said "Like me" Also Jesus himself called himself "Son of man" which all scholars agree is translated into Human being. If Jesus is God than he is not human. He only appears human. Is God or Jesus being less than truthful? While were at it I might as well get to the next point. If God planted a "seed" into Mary which would have been God's seed, Jesus then becomes either God in the form of a man or, he fertilized her egg with his seed. If the first is true he is not son of man, if the latter is true he is 1/2 man and in Genesis God had a name for those type of beings. I believe in miracles but its highly doubtful that a mere woman could contain God's seed or essence. If that were possible God would have performed a miracle for Moses so he could look at God but God had to shield his eyes and Moses face still turned very white.

The proof you have is supposition and I am assuming you believe in the trinity also which appears no where in either testaments. The only way the trinity can be explained is through volumns of books larger than both Old and New testaments combined which leaves the subject of a trinity suspect. One thing I do know for sure is that God does not try to trick us, He is fairly straight forward and BOTH Jews and Christians have distorted God's word.

Please prophet try to stay on topic. Please re read my original post and specifically the last paragraph where my questions are asked,
#6
fair enough....as for the trinity thing...anyone who has read y posts knows I
am a believer in One God..whose name is Jesus/Yeshua.

Gen 22:8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.

Now the Holy Spirit(God) overshadowed Mary and created a vessel in which His Spirit would dwell...being born of a woman the child would be a Son of Man....but unlike us Jesus was born a living Spirit we are born a living soul.

David was filled with God's Spirit managed to still operate as a man just as Jesus did however the healing was done by the Spirit in Him.

#7
OK prophet no Trinity but a 2 in 1 scenario I get it.

Gen22:8 I could only fine that translation in 2 places all the rest have it mainly as" for himself", but lets take your interpretation, Are you saying that God turned himself into a Ram for Abrahams sacrifice? I think your now cherry picking to prove your point.

I was looking for your vessel scenario couldn't find that either, but David filled with Gods spirit is fine along with most of the prophets But again if Jesus had a pre exsistence he's not Human he only appears Human. and if he is God he most definantly isn't a man. Again I believe in miracles but that one steps over the line.

Please back on topic Isaiah 56 gives a way for the foreigner (and also a eunich) a way to God. Why isn't this accepted? Ruth found it. Also throughout Isaiah God tells us that he is the Redeemer,he is the savior,he is the King,he forgives sin. Isn't that enough? God never mentions the need for a human sacrifice to forgive sin. God himself forgives sin and only God for he is one. Not 2 in 1, not 3 in 1 but all throughout the Tanakh he reminds us that he is one.

Try to think for a minute, We know God prophecies and or tells the future we know that because he said he does. If God see's the future don't you think he was well aware that at some point in time people would turn him into more than a singular God? Ask yourself why does God seem to need to drive the point throughout the Tanakh that he is one? Jesus spoke in parables God tells it like it is. Oh and BTW don't pull out the occasional parable in the Tanakh it's not God's theme that's Jesus's thing.

One final question, Does God every say or act in a matter as humans do? For instance does God ever say Do as I say not as I do? If the answer is no (I hope) please consider this verse from Jeremiah19:5.

From the Wycliffe Bible:
5 and builded high things to Baalim, to burn their sons in fire, into burnt sacrifice to Baalim (and built the high places, or the hill shrines, to Baal, to burn their children in the fire, for burnt sacrifices to Baal); which things I commanded not, neither spake, neither those (things) ascended into mine heart.
#8
Gen22:8 I could only fine that translation in 2 places all the rest have it mainly as" for himself", but lets take your interpretation, Are you saying that God turned himself into a Ram for Abrahams sacrifice? I think your now cherry picking to prove your point.



Why is no one reads what the scripture actually says?

He said He would provide a LAMB..for the sacrifice He provided a RAM...
The Lamb was Jesus whom He indwelt from His conception.

One final question, Does God every say or act in a matter as humans do? For instance does God ever say Do as I say not as I do? If the answer is no (I hope) please consider this verse from Jeremiah19:5.

Yes but as a man He was subjected Himself as the Son of Man to the vagaries of human nature and man thinking they were doing God a favour
sacrificed Him on the cross the sacrifice that took away ALL SINS so that there would never have to be sin offerings again...and He also reconciled Himself to man. As a man Jesus could have said no at any point but chose to be obedient to His Father just as those of us filled with the Spirit of Jesus aka Holy Ghost try our best to be obedient unto death if it be required of us.



#9
Ok prophet quote honestly your rambling and also it appears that YOU are reading from a bible that fits your view.

Why is no one reads what the scripture actually says?

After much research the word lamb appears in most Christian translations but most literal translation have SHEEP for sacrifice Not lamb and after God stops Abraham from sacrificing Isaac he provides a RAM. Obviously in both cases the sacrifice was to be an adult sacrifice. Please stop reinterpreting what the bible says. Its the same with the exodus sacrifice either a yearling lamb or kid not just a lamb. Always amazing how that's forgotten yet I find no one saying that Jesus is the Kid of God, (slight pun intended) he's always the lamb, you guys like the lamb scenario much better.

Yes but as a man He was subjected Himself as the Son of Man to the vagaries of human nature and man thinking they were doing God a favour
sacrificed Him on the cross the sacrifice that took away ALL SINS so that there would never have to be sin offerings again...and He also reconciled Himself to man. As a man Jesus could have said no at any point but chose to be obedient to His Father just as those of us filled with the Spirit of Jesus aka Holy Ghost try our best to be obedient unto death if it be required of us.

What a bunch of gobelty gook. That makes no sense and is totally incoherent. God as a man? REALLY? Find anywhere in the Tanakh where God says a human sacrifice would forgive sin. God does not NEED a sacrifice to forgive sin and considering he clearly states to not do as the nations about you do why would God accept or require a human sacrifice. God gave us a mind to think. Think man.

Finally I'm still waiting for the answer to my question. Please go back to post#7 Please answer the 2 paragraphs before my Final question.
#10
(04-10-2012, 08:29 AM)Maglorix Wrote: On its own I can see it as a very compelling argument for Jesus, but for me reading a paragraph without the context makes little sense. So I decided to read Isaiah from chapter 40 to the end.

Why just from Isaiah 40?

(04-10-2012, 08:29 AM)Maglorix Wrote: My first thought turned to context. Why would God speak of Israel for 13 straight chapters, switch gears in 53, then go back to Israel?

Is God trying to see if I'm paying attention? Or is it possible that at that point, reading in context, the subject matter never changed? Is it even possible that at that point Isaiah was actually talking about himself? He did that in several instances before, and we know Isaiah had two sons.

It is this way in a lot of the Tanach though concerning Prophecy. Take the Prophecy of Immanuel, this name is only mentioned twice by the Prophet Isaiah. A lot of Prophecy was to Israel of things present, and things into the future. If those things into the future include Messiah, or some other event, then he or it, has to be mentioned at some point.

(04-10-2012, 08:29 AM)Maglorix Wrote: After I finished my study I asked myself several questions. Why do Christians accept the prophetic message of 53, but don't seem to accept ALL the rest?

That seems a bit of a generalization, there is probably a billion Christians worldwide, I don't think you can lump them all into one spot of not accepting the rest of Isaiah 53. For example I most certainly do.

(04-10-2012, 08:29 AM)Maglorix Wrote: Did they not read that God himself named a messiah, a non Israelite Cyrus, who had not known God?

Cyrus doesn't fit with Isaiah 11, Isaiah 53, nor Daniel 9:26 for that matter.

(04-10-2012, 08:29 AM)Maglorix Wrote: Does that not change the perception of what a messiah is?

It might with some Christians. It doesn't to me, Cyrus doesn't fit with Psalm 22, nor does King David.

(04-10-2012, 08:29 AM)Maglorix Wrote: What about the Savior? God very clearly states that he is the savior. He also clearly states he is King. Finally in chapter 56 God makes it clear that all are welcome to worship him, including the gentile with conditions that they adhere to the same rules He set for Jews. So I began to wonder, why don't Christians want to do as God said, and instead use their own path to God?

It may interest you that a lot of Christians believe Jesus is God the Father.

Personally I don't. I believe Jesus Christ is the Anointed, the Messiah Immanuel the Son of the living God.



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)