suffering servant = Messiah = Jesus!

Metacrock · Post by **Metacrock** » Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:02 pm

Can we demonstrate that the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 is Jesus?

(1) we can demosntrate that he is the Messiah and not just Israel

(2) we can demonstrate that it fits Jesus better than anyone else.

by saying ss is not Isreael I am not excluding the possiblity that since Messiah comes out of Israel that it is both Isreal and an idnivudal person called "Messiah."

I. close reading of chatper will follow.

II. Messiah Will be Light to the Gentiles

A. Israel's Original Mission.

B. Israel cannot accomplish its mission without Messiah.

Messiah is contrasted with wayward Israel in several places Isaiah. Is 50:1-3 "Where is your mother's cirtificate of divorce withwhich I sent her away? OR to which of my creditors did I sell you? Becasue of your sins you were sold, because of your transgressions your mother was sent away....do I lack the strength to rescue you?

To which Messiah responds "...I have not been rebellious, I have not drawn back..." (v5)

1) Messiah to be covenant for Israel

"will keep you," God tells the Messiah "and will make you to be a covenant for the land." (Is 49:8-

2) Messiah to bring Israel back to God

Is 49:5

And now says the Lord, who formed Me from the womb to be His Servant, To bring Jacob back to Him, in order that Israel might be gathered to Him (For I am honored in the sight of the Lord, And My God is My strength)

C. Messiah to bring Israel back AND be light to Gentiles.

49:6

He says, "It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant To raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also make You a light of the nations So that My salvation may reach to the end of the earth."

D. What the Sevant does in 53 is exactly

what the book says Messiah will do.

1) Messaih emerges out of Israel

Is 43:10 "You are My witnesses," declares the Lord, "And My servant whom I have chosen, In order that you may know and believe Me, And understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me.

"My witnesses" is plural, "My servant" is signular. The servant is part of the witnesses, coming out of Israel, produced by the line of David. Edersheim documents that Rabbical authorites recognize this verse as pertianing to Messiah.

2) Messiah rejected

Is. 50:6 "I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard, I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting..." And we see a rejected servant in 53, a "man of sarrows accounted with greif." This is one who "was despised and rejected."

3) Messiah accomplishes his task

Is 41:4

"here is my servant whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight, I will put my Spirit on him and he will bring jutsice to the nations." Or chater 11: 1 which is clearly marked out as the Messiah: "A shoot will come up from the stump of Jessey; from his roots a branch will bear fruit...(4) but with rigtheousness he will judge the needy, with justice he will give decsions for the poor...(10) in that day the root of Jessey will stand as a banner for the people, the nations will raly to him and his place of rest will be glorious."

Is, 42:6 (established as Messiah on previous page) "I will keep you and make you to be a covenat for the people and a light for the gentiles."

Compare: "(2)" He grew up before him like a tener shoot, and like a root out of dry ground....(12) "because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the trasngressors. For he bore the sin of many and made intercession for the transgressors."

We see that clearly throughout the book of Isiah, Israel is in no shape to be a redeemer, but itself must be redeemed. It cannot be a light to the nations without one from among it's people, Messiah, brining it back to God. In that process Messiah will be a light to the Gentiles, and the covenant for the land. Chapter 11 sasy explicitly that Messiah (the Branch) will do do this, he will be the light to the gentiles. And that is just what we see happening in 53, the servant is marked by the same, or close epithet, Branch, shoot, and is redeeming many. In fact in 52 we see that he will draw the nations to himself. This chapter (53) fits everything it says about Messiah, his mission, and his function, it does not fit anything about Israel.

III. The functin of the Passage in the overall book (s) of Isaiah.

A. Dialectical pattern of the book

1) God condemns Israel for waywardness

2) God calls Israel back and encourages her to be faithful.

3) The Messiah as Intsurment of God's plan

punctuates the pattern of dialogue

B. Chapter 53 as Crucial pivot in God's plan

1) Servant takes the rap for the many and redeems

2) After 53 Israel is seen in the blessed Kingdom in peace and prosterity.

3) The Servant's work as redeemed Israel.

The editor/redactor has placed this passage in the central location. After all the interwoven messages of confonfation and comfort, punctuated by expecations of the Messiah as redeemer, the suffering servant takes the balme for transgressions, it punished on behalf of the people, and than we see the people livng in the blessings of God . The editor used this passage as a means to express the hope and promise that as a result of the Lord's work Israel would return to God and live in peace and abanundance. Although the edtor probably invisioned this as looking forward to the return form exile, the work of Messiah in accmplishing redeemption, it does not necessarily mean that it refurs to a chronological event in that day priror to return from exile. But it looks forward to an event that would transpire at some point in the futre.

C. Israel as redeemer of Itself and others doesn't fit the pivital function.

There is no sense of how Israel was redeemed. Without the work of the SS being that of Messiah the work is incomplete. Irael would go from being wayward and weak to suddenly being strong enough to serve as suffering redeemer with no sense of how it got there and the interwoven strands of Messianich promise for this function would just be loose ends that are never tired up.

Note: this view works even better if one is determined to see the final chapters as eschatological (end times, Messianich Kingdom).

einstein · Post by **einstein** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:34 pm

Is 53:1 (From you know who) Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?

Is 53:1 (from the Hebrew) -Who would have believed our report, and to whom was the arm of the Lord revealed?

The most likely speakers here are the Gentile kings and nations mentioned in 52:15 who are startled and dumfounded at what is to be revealed in the Messianic age in direct contradiction to the past history of the Jewish people in the past. While the Christian position is that it is the Jews speaking here there are no corroborative statements expressing surprise or incredulity of the Jewish nation at the end of days in the Tanach while there are numerous such passages which reflect the shock of the Gentile nations as they finally recognize the vindication of Israel as foretold in the Hebrew Bible. One example (there are several) is Is 41:1 "-Behold all those who were incensed against you shall be ashamed and confounded; they who quarrelled with you shall be as naught and be lost."

The phrase referring to the arm of the Lord is repeatedly used in the Tanach as an anthropormorphic expression of God's salvation of the Jewish people from oppression with many examples such as Deut 4:34.

53:2-He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

53:2-(Hebrew) And he came up like a sapling before it, and like a root from dry ground. He had no features and no splendour and we saw him that he had no appearance; and how could we desire him?

This type of imagery concerning Israel is captured in Ezek19.and is contrasted with the imagery of blossoming in the Messianic age in Hosea 14.The image of a young tree growing out of dry ground describing the Messiah is not found in the Tanakh. The "root of Jesse" does use the botanical term but is referring to a physical descendant. Furthermore the Greek Testament does not describe Jesus in the course of his ministry in such a lowly fashion. Luke 2:52 describes him as increasing in wisdom and stature and generally he is viewed as extremely popular.

53:1-He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with disease. Like a form whom men hide their faces, he was despised and we esteemed him not.

53:1 (Hebrew)-He was despised and forsaken by men;a man of pains and accustomed to illness;and as one from whom we would hide our faces, he was despised and we had no regard for him.

This is clearly applicable to Israel (Is 60:15, Ps 44:13, but does not conform with the GT where Jesus is described as being "praised by all" (Luke 4:14) and followed by multitudes (Mat 4:25). Ish machavot- a man of pains is an idomatic Hebrew expression indicating chronic and longstanding suffering which applies much better to Israel and its history of centuries of persecution rather than to the crucifixtion which as horrible as that would have been took place over the course of several hours according to the GT. (to be continued)

Post by **otseng** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:58 pm

Metacrock wrote:you are so dishonest

you liar I am reportting you! !biggot!!!!

einstein wrote: Recognizing that nothing I say will convince someone with a closed mind like meta, I would like to present an alternate scenario for the open-minded in this forum.

Why don't you shut up for a change and let me finish instead of cut and pasting the same crap you have been posting for last 3 pages. This post is for OTHERS on this forum to consider. It's not for you -you Jew-hating bastard

And while I am it-learn how to spell moron.

Moderator intervention.

Metacrock, may I remind you that you are already under probation. And einstein, I'm issuing you a formal warning. Next time, if someone attacks you, use the report button and do not attack back. Otherwise, more serious consequences will result.

einstein · Post by **einstein** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:05 pm

duly noted.

einstein · Post by **einstein** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 6:41 pm

53:4-Surely he took up our infirmities, and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, afflicted.
53:4-(HEB)-Indeed, he bore our illnesses, and our pains- he has carried them yet we regarded him plagued smitten by God and oppressed.

This is exactly what Jer 30:17 says about Israel-for I will bring healing to you,and of your wounds I will heal you. says the Lord, for they called you an outcast, "she is Zion for whom no one cares."

Keeping in mind the general Christian belief that Jesus is God, how can God be smitten by himself?

53:5- But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities, the punishment that brought us peace was upon him and by his wounds we are healed.
53:5- But he was wounded FROM our transgressions, crushed FROM our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon himand with his wounds we WERE healed.

The hebrew says "mi-" which properly translated means from. In other words, the prophet is saying that the actions of the Gentile nations , their sinful acts hurt the servant. The Christian rendition which usually use "for" indicate the concept of human vicarious atonement ie the servant took on the iniquities of others causing their sins to be atoned through his suffering. The hebrew word for is "li-" or "beglal" and that is not used here. Furthermore this concept of human vicarious atonement is totally antithetical to what we find in the rest of the Tanach eg Ezek 18:4.20 and Ps 49:7-8 ("a brother cannot redeem a man, he cannot give his ransom to God")

The healing of the Gentile nations is an expression of hope that in the Messianic Age, when all this comes about there will be an end to the sickness of anti-semitism and the disdain that the Jewish people have suffered for centuries at the hands of their oppressors. More to come.

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:02 pm

einstein wrote:53:4-Surely he took up our infirmities, and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, afflicted.
53:4-(HEB)-Indeed, he bore our illnesses, and our pains- he has carried them yet we regarded him plagued smitten by God and oppressed.

This is exactly what Jer 30:17 says about Israel-for I will bring healing to you,and of your wounds I will heal you. says the Lord, for they called you an outcast, "she is Zion for whom no one cares."

Keeping in mind the general Christian belief that Jesus is God, how can God be smitten by himself?

53:5- But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities, the punishment that brought us peace was upon him and by his wounds we are healed.
53:5- But he was wounded FROM our transgressions, crushed FROM our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon himand with his wounds we WERE healed.

The hebrew says "mi-" which properly translated means from. In other words, the prophet is saying that the actions of the Gentile nations , their sinful acts hurt the servant. The Christian rendition which usually use "for" indicate the concept of human vicarious atonement ie the servant took on the iniquities of others causing their sins to be atoned through his suffering. The hebrew word for is "li-" or "beglal" and that is not used here. Furthermore this concept of human vicarious atonement is totally antithetical to what we find in the rest of the Tanach eg Ezek 18:4.20 and Ps 49:7-8 ("a brother cannot redeem a man, he cannot give his ransom to God")

The healing of the Gentile nations is an expression of hope that in the Messianic Age, when all this comes about there will be an end to the sickness of anti-semitism and the disdain that the Jewish people have suffered for centuries at the hands of their oppressors. More to come.

In addition to the 'he was pierced from out iniquities, there is the little matter of past tense. The author of Isaiah 52 was speaking in the past tense, in 500 bce.
You don't speak in the past tense of something that is going to happen 500 years or more in the future.

Easyrider · Post by **Easyrider** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:44 pm

goat wrote:
In addition to the 'he was pierced from out iniquities, there is the little matter of past tense. The author of Isaiah 52 was speaking in the past tense, in 500 bce.
You don't speak in the past tense of something that is going to happen 500 years or more in the future.

Hebrew does not have past and future tenses as English does. It has perfect and imperfect verbs. Perfects express action that is complete or thought of as complete. Imperfect is incomplete, repeated, or continuous. Perfect can express something in the past or something in the future which is thought of as complete, as good as done. When this certain future involves prophecy, this verb is sometimes called the prophetic perfect.

Another factor is prophetic perspective. Since the prophets were witnessing the scenes as actions they were seeing, they could describe them as things they had already witnessed in progress. (wels.net)

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:31 pm

Easyrider wrote:
goat wrote:
In addition to the 'he was pierced from out iniquities, there is the little matter of past tense. The author of Isaiah 52 was speaking in the past tense, in 500 bce.
You don't speak in the past tense of something that is going to happen 500 years or more in the future.
Hebrew does not have past and future tenses as English does. It has perfect and imperfect verbs. Perfects express action that is complete or thought of as complete. Imperfect is incomplete, repeated, or continuous. Perfect can express something in the past or something in the future which is thought of as complete, as good as done. When this certain future involves prophecy, this verb is sometimes called the prophetic perfect.

Another factor is prophetic perspective. Since the prophets were witnessing the scenes as actions they were seeing, they could describe them as things they had already witnessed in progress. (wels.net)

That is partly true. There is the perfect and imperfect tenses, and the prefect tense corrosponds to the past tense.

from http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_language

. In Biblical Hebrew there are no tenses but only two aspects: imperfect and perfect. The imperfect corresponds approximately to the future and the present tenses. The perfect corresponds to the past tense.

Metacrock · Post by **Metacrock** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 12:15 pm

einstein wrote:53:4-Surely he took up our infirmities, and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, afflicted.
53:4-(HEB)-Indeed, he bore our illnesses, and our pains- he has carried them yet we regarded him plagued smitten by God and oppressed.

This is exactly what Jer 30:17 says about Israel-for I will bring healing to you,and of your wounds I will heal you. says the Lord, for they called you an outcast, "she is Zion for whom no one cares."

those are two totally different things. Isaiah is saying innocent guy who has NOT sinned takes punishment for sinners. Jeremiah is saying God heals wayward Isreael. he says nothing about Isreal healing itself or anyone esle. The next chapter he says Isreal broke the covenant so there will be a new one.

Keeping in mind the general Christian belief that Jesus is God, how can God be smitten by himself?

he had divine nature and human nature. he was a seperate human person in history not God in heaven.

53:5- But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities, the punishment that brought us peace was upon him and by his wounds we are healed.
53:5- But he was wounded FROM our transgressions, crushed FROM our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon himand with his wounds we WERE healed.

The hebrew says "mi-" which properly translated means from. In other words, the prophet is saying that the actions of the Gentile nations , their sinful acts hurt the servant.

gentile is not speaking. Israel is spaeking, Isreal says "he took our iniquities" wayward sinful Israel had sins, the servant took them.

you haven't made it clear what different "mi" makes in that sentence.

The Christian rendition which usually use "for" indicate the concept of human vicarious atonement ie the servant took on the iniquities of others causing their sins to be atoned through his suffering. The hebrew word for is "li-" or "beglal" and that is not used here. Furthermore this concept of human vicarious atonement is totally antithetical to what we find in the rest of the Tanach eg Ezek 18:4.20 and Ps 49:7-8 ("a brother cannot redeem a man, he cannot give his ransom to God")

you are quibeling. besides it's there in th LXX. the LXX is the supiorior text and its' the one the Chruch used.

The healing of the Gentile nations is an expression of hope that in the Messianic Age, when all this comes about there will be an end to the sickness of anti-semitism and the disdain that the Jewish people have suffered for centuries at the hands of their oppressors. More to come.

Isaiah is not abut a Messianich age. The stuff at the end is not end times. It's a projection of Israel when they return from the exile.

the Messianic age is now. But you are right we need to get rid of anti-semitism.

Metacrock · Post by **Metacrock** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 12:17 pm

goat wrote:
einstein wrote:53:4-Surely he took up our infirmities, and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, afflicted.
53:4-(HEB)-Indeed, he bore our illnesses, and our pains- he has carried them yet we regarded him plagued smitten by God and oppressed.

This is exactly what Jer 30:17 says about Israel-for I will bring healing to you,and of your wounds I will heal you. says the Lord, for they called you an outcast, "she is Zion for whom no one cares."

Keeping in mind the general Christian belief that Jesus is God, how can God be smitten by himself?

53:5- But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities, the punishment that brought us peace was upon him and by his wounds we are healed.
53:5- But he was wounded FROM our transgressions, crushed FROM our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon himand with his wounds we WERE healed.

The hebrew says "mi-" which properly translated means from. In other words, the prophet is saying that the actions of the Gentile nations , their sinful acts hurt the servant. The Christian rendition which usually use "for" indicate the concept of human vicarious atonement ie the servant took on the iniquities of others causing their sins to be atoned through his suffering. The hebrew word for is "li-" or "beglal" and that is not used here. Furthermore this concept of human vicarious atonement is totally antithetical to what we find in the rest of the Tanach eg Ezek 18:4.20 and Ps 49:7-8 ("a brother cannot redeem a man, he cannot give his ransom to God")

The healing of the Gentile nations is an expression of hope that in the Messianic Age, when all this comes about there will be an end to the sickness of anti-semitism and the disdain that the Jewish people have suffered for centuries at the hands of their oppressors. More to come.
In addition to the 'he was pierced from out iniquities, there is the little matter of past tense. The author of Isaiah 52 was speaking in the past tense, in 500 bce.
You don't speak in the past tense of something that is going to happen 500 years or more in the future.

yea you do, we already covered this.

besides that contradicts your posistion of it being Israel that would have to be in the future too.

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:00 pm

Metacrock wrote:
einstein wrote:53:4-Surely he took up our infirmities, and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, afflicted.
53:4-(HEB)-Indeed, he bore our illnesses, and our pains- he has carried them yet we regarded him plagued smitten by God and oppressed.

This is exactly what Jer 30:17 says about Israel-for I will bring healing to you,and of your wounds I will heal you. says the Lord, for they called you an outcast, "she is Zion for whom no one cares."

those are two totally different things. Isaiah is saying innocent guy who has NOT sinned takes punishment for sinners. Jeremiah is saying God heals wayward Isreael. he says nothing about Isreal healing itself or anyone esle. The next chapter he says Isreal broke the covenant so there will be a new one.

You appear to be trying to avoid the point. Although the context is a bit different, in both cases, you see Israel being wounded, as a metaphore. It appears that you are purposely avoiding the point.

Keeping in mind the general Christian belief that Jesus is God, how can God be smitten by himself?

he had divine nature and human nature. he was a seperate human person in history not God in heaven.

That sounds like a very psychotic explaination. Something is god, or somethign isn't god. Something can't be god and not god at the same time.

53:5- But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities, the punishment that brought us peace was upon him and by his wounds we are healed.
53:5- But he was wounded FROM our transgressions, crushed FROM our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon himand with his wounds we WERE healed.

The hebrew says "mi-" which properly translated means from. In other words, the prophet is saying that the actions of the Gentile nations , their sinful acts hurt the servant.
gentile is not speaking. Israel is spaeking, Isreal says "he took our iniquities" wayward sinful Israel had sins, the servant took them.

you haven't made it clear what different "mi" makes in that sentence.

I would have thought that was well explained. One is that a person was
wounded because of our actions... the other one is 'wounded' for us , but not because of us.

An example. Someone pushes you out of the way of a car, but gets hit themselves, they got hurt FOR you.

You were driving the car and hit somesone.. They got hurt FROM you.

The Christian rendition which usually use "for" indicate the concept of human vicarious atonement ie the servant took on the iniquities of others causing their sins to be atoned through his suffering. The hebrew word for is "li-" or "beglal" and that is not used here. Furthermore this concept of human vicarious atonement is totally antithetical to what we find in the rest of the Tanach eg Ezek 18:4.20 and Ps 49:7-8 ("a brother cannot redeem a man, he cannot give his ransom to God")
you are quibeling. besides it's there in th LXX. the LXX is the supiorior text and its' the one the Chruch used.

Unsubstantiated claim. A mistranslation is a mistranslation is a mistranslation.