Isaiah 53: A Contextual Discussion

[LittleLambofJesus]

Isaiah 52
13. Behold My servant shall prosper; he shall be exalted and lifted up, and he shall be very high.

Here's Rashi's commentary on this verse:

Behold My servant shall prosper Behold, at the end of days, My servant, Jacob, [i.e.,] the righteous among him, shall prosper.

Shalom. I would actually like to back up to 52:3.
What does YHWH mean by being "redeemed"? Redeemed by who or what?

This form of the hebrew word for "redeem" is only used here according to this hebrew interlinear.

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Isaiah 52:3 That thus He-says, YHWH, gratuiously you-are-sold, and-not in-silver you-will-be-redeemed.

01350 ga'al {gaw-al'} a primitive root; TWOT - 300; v
AV - redeem 50, redeemer 18, kinsman 13, revenger 7, avenger 6, ransom 2,
at all 2, deliver 1, kinsfolks 1, kinsman's part 1, purchase 1,
stain 1, wise 1; 104
1) to redeem, act as kinsman-redeemer, avenge, revenge, ransom, do the
part of a kinsman

in-silver/money used 28 times in 26 verses.

Last time used Micah 3:11

[Young LT] Micah 3:11 Her heads for a bribe do judge, And her priests for hire do teach, And her prophets in-silver/money divine, And on Jehovah they lean, saying, `Is not Jehovah in our midst? Evil doth not come in upon us.'

03701 keceph {keh'-sef} from 03700; TWOT - 1015a; n m
AV - silver 287, money 112, price 3, silverlings 1; 403

 

[peepnklown]

Isaiah 52:13-53:12

Isaiah [Deutero-Isaiah or Second Isaiah for the textual criticism bluffs like myself] makes it clear that he is talking about the “Messiah” by never mentioning the “Messiah” himself.

 

[muffler dragon]

Isaiah [Deutero-Isaiah or Second Isaiah for the textual criticism bluffs like myself] makes it clear that he is talking about the “Messiah” by never mentioning the “Messiah” himself.

Interesting. The majority of Jewish tradition holds that the Suffering Servant is not a Messianic passage.

 

[JoeWill]

Isaiah 52

13. Behold My servant shall prosper; he shall be exalted and lifted up, and he shall be very high.

Here's Rashi's commentary on this verse:

Behold My servant shall prosper Behold, at the end of days, My servant, Jacob, [i.e.,] the righteous among him, shall prosper.

Thanks Muffler Dragon. it is interesting to read a medieval interpretation of the Isaiah 53 Servant Song, even though I don't agree with it.

There do appear to be some problems with Rashi's interpretation don't there?


We talked a little bit about the description of the Servant in Isaiah 49 that precedes this passage didn't we? We both agreed that the description of the Servant in Isaiah 49 casts light upon who the Servant might be in Isaiah 53.

Isaiah 49:5-6 reads:

5 And now the LORD says—
he who formed me in the womb to be his servant to bring Jacob back to him
and gather Israel to himself,
I am honored in the eyes of the LORD
and my God has been my strength-

6 he says: "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth." (NIV)

Firstly, Isaiah tells us in these verses that the Servant will have a mission to bring Jacob (i.e. the nation of Israel) back to God. Therefore, it seems that the Servant must be someone other than Jacob.


Secondly, Isaiah's reference to the Servant being called from the womb, puts us in mind of the prophet Jeremiah who was also called from the womb.

In Jeremiah 1:5 God says of Jeremiah:

5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

Compare this verse with Isaiah 49:5 above. So there is reason to think that the Servant is an individual prophet, rather than the whole nation of Israel. Other details also cohere with the idea that the Servant is a prophet, such as the fact that he is given "words to sustain the weary" (Isaiah 50:4).


So these two points lend quite a lot of weight to a belief that the Servant of Isaiah 53 is not Israel itself but the person of Jesus Christ who had a prophetic ministry.


On Isaiah 53:13, Rashi identifies the Servant as Jacob. But how does he explain the next verse? Isaiah 53:14 reads:

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

Do you think that the "you" probably refers to the nation of Israel and the "him" to the Servant? This would mean that the Servant cannot be Jacob (i.e. Israel).


No wonder one of the greatest Jewish intellectuals of all time, Maimonides (1135 - 1204), warned against interpreting the Servant in Isaiah 53 as the Jewish nation.


Here is an interpretation of Isaiah 52:13 that competes with Rashi's:

Yahweh's Servant (Jesus Christ) dealt prudently throughout His earthly ministry. He was exalted in Resurrection, lifted up in Ascension, and made very high in glory at God's right hand.


Take care,

Joe

 

[JoeWill]

Interesting. The majority of Jewish tradition holds that the Suffering Servant is not a Messianic passage.

Not all that surprising, given that from the time of the early church, a messianic interpretation of the Isaiah 53 passage was used as evidence for the Christian faith.

Muffler Dragon, you talk about us seeing from the Jewish perspective. You need to remember that you only have a Jewish perspective. Messianic Jews, early Jewish commentators, and I think the truth be told, Isaiah himself had a different Jewish perspective - that the Isaiah 53 passage is to be given a messianic interpretation.

 

[muffler dragon]

Thanks Muffler Dragon. it is interesting to read a medieval interpretation of the Isaiah 53 Servant Song, even though I don't agree with it.

Just so we're clear. Jewish tradition has always held that the Suffering Servant is Israel. In midrash aggadah, it can be anyone. However, in the manner in which we are discussing, the singular POV is that it is Israel.

We talked a little bit about the description of the Servant in Isaiah 49 that precedes this passage didn't we? We both agreed that the description of the Servant in Isaiah 49 casts light upon who the Servant might be in Isaiah 53.

Yes, just as explicitly as v. 3 can make it:

3. And He said to me, "You are My servant, Israel, about whom I will boast."

5 And now the LORD says—
he who formed me in the womb to be his servant to bring Jacob back to him
and gather Israel to himself,
I am honored in the eyes of the LORD
and my God has been my strength-
6 he says: "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth." (NIV)

Firstly, Isaiah tells us in these verses that the Servant will have a mission to bring Jacob (i.e. the nation of Israel) back to God. Therefore, it seems that the Servant must be someone other than Jacob.

And, as I've already explained to you, there is a difference between Jews in the Land of Israel and those of the Diaspora. There is also a difference between Jews who are observant of Torah and those who are not.

Thus, the Servant can be Israel while attempting to reconcile those Jews who are either in another land OR are not Torah observant.

I will also state unequivocally that your avoidance of v. 3 (which is only two verses previous) does not help your case.

Secondly, Isaiah's reference to the Servant being called from the womb, puts us in mind of the prophet Jeremiah who was also called from the womb.

In Jeremiah 1:5 God says of Jeremiah:

5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

Compare this verse with Isaiah 49:5 above. So there is reason to think that the Servant is an individual prophet, rather than the whole nation of Israel. Other details also cohere with the idea that the Servant is a prophet, such as the fact that he is given "words to sustain the weary" (Isaiah 50:4).

When Israel came out of Egypt, all the Jews were prophets. Thus, it's not always a singular entity. The role of Israel, in general, is to be "light to the nations". Therefore, I would say that you're picking and choosing.

So these two points lend quite a lot of weight to a belief that the Servant of Isaiah 53 is not Israel itself but the person of Jesus Christ who had a prophetic ministry.

Joe:

You have to make a decision on something, and this will determine whether we continue in this thread or consider something else. I'm going to be blunt in where I'm coming from: are you wanting to discuss how Jesus fits into this passage OR do you want to discuss whether it's a Messianic passage? The two are exclusive. If you want to discuss Jesus as the "fulfillment" of this passage; then you are going to have a two-fold amount of substantiation. First, you will have to prove that the passage is Messianic. Second, you'll have to prove that Jesus fits the bill better than anyone else. If you want to discuss how Jesus fits into this; then I suggest we go to another thread. Because I assure you that this thread has NOTHING to do with Jesus.

Let me know how you want to proceed. I'll await your answer before discussing your claim above.

On Isaiah 53:13, Rashi identifies the Servant as Jacob. But how does he explain the next verse? Isaiah 53:14 reads:

I haven't gotten to the next section yet. I wanted to go in singularities.

Regarding v. 13, do you have any rebuttal?

Considering this passage is talking about a future that has not come to pass yet (from the Judaic POV), do you have anything to add?

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

Do you think that the "you" probably refers to the nation of Israel and the "him" to the Servant? This would mean that the Servant cannot be Jacob (i.e. Israel).

Feel free to bring this up again when we discuss the passage.

No wonder one of the greatest Jewish intellectuals of all time, Maimonides (1135 - 1204), warned against interpreting the Servant in Isaiah 53 as the Jewish nation.

Okay, Joe. This is the second time that you've tried to slip something in regarding Jewish tradition. I warned you the first time that you need to substantiate, and I'll do it again. Either substantiate the claim you make or don't bring it up. I know for a fact that the above is false. I want you to show me otherwise.

Here is an interpretation of Isaiah 52:13 that competes with Rashi's:

Yahweh's Servant (Jesus Christ) dealt prudently throughout His earthly ministry. He was exalted in Resurrection, lifted up in Ascension, and made very high in glory at God's right hand.


Take care,

Joe

What's your point? I can provide an interpretation that the Suffering Servant is Moses, Jeremiah, Hezekiah, Isaiah (himself) and potentially anyone else in existence. Does that mean that is correct in the plain sense of the verse/passage? Not in the slightest.

 

[muffler dragon]

Shalom. I would actually like to back up to 52:3.
What does YHWH mean by being "redeemed"? Redeemed by who or what?

This form of the hebrew word for "redeem" is only used here according to this hebrew interlinear.

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Isaiah 52:3 That thus He-says, YHWH, gratuiously you-are-sold, and-not in-silver you-will-be-redeemed.

01350 ga'al {gaw-al'} a primitive root; TWOT - 300; v
AV - redeem 50, redeemer 18, kinsman 13, revenger 7, avenger 6, ransom 2,
at all 2, deliver 1, kinsfolks 1, kinsman's part 1, purchase 1,
stain 1, wise 1; 104
1) to redeem, act as kinsman-redeemer, avenge, revenge, ransom, do the
part of a kinsman

in-silver/money used 28 times in 26 verses.

Last time used Micah 3:11

[Young LT] Micah 3:11 Her heads for a bribe do judge, And her priests for hire do teach, And her prophets in-silver/money divine, And on Jehovah they lean, saying, `Is not Jehovah in our midst? Evil doth not come in upon us.'

03701 keceph {keh'-sef} from 03700; TWOT - 1015a; n m
AV - silver 287, money 112, price 3, silverlings 1; 403

To be honest, LLoJ, I haven't spent an ounce of time studying what redemption means in Judaism. I'm sorry that I can't help you on this one.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

To be honest, LLoJ, I haven't spent an ounce of time studying what redemption means in Judaism. I'm sorry that I can't help you on this one.

Shalom. No problem, but I do have a rather extensive study on that, but it is tedious as I study on practically every word used in passages and how they are used in the rest of the Old Testament.

I do highly recommend this interlinear to any religion that studies the Bible.

For example, is the "cornerstone" in Isaiah 28 a "messianic" prophecy? Peace.

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Isaiah 28:15 Because ye-say: `We-cut/karath a-Covenant/b@riyth with Death, And-with Sh@'owl we-made a seer/02374 chozeh, a-scourge overflowing that passeth-over, not he-shall-enter-in-to-us. That we set a-lie/kazab as a-refuge-of-us/machaceh, and in-falsehood/sheqer we-are-concealed/cathar.'

Reve 1: 18 and the living-One! And I became dead, and behold, I am living into of-the Ages to-the Ages; Amen. And I-am-having the Keys of the Hades and of the Death

Isaiah 28:17 And-I-place judgement for-tape and-righteousness for-plummet and-he-shall-shovel hail refuge-of lie and-concealment waters, and-they-shall-overflow.
18 And-shall-be-atoned/kaphar, Covenant-of-you with death, and-seer with Sh@'owl , not she-shall-be-rise,........

 

[JoeWill]

Hello again.

You wrote that:

"Jewish tradition has always held that the Suffering Servant is Israel."

Well this is not the impression I get, because I looked at some ancient Jewish comments at a Messianic Jewish website here:

http://www.jesusplusnothing.com/messiah/messiah.htm

(Look under the section titled "Messiah will suffer".)

And it seems clear enough that these commentators saw the Servant in Isaiah 53 as the Messiah. For example, Rabbi Moishe Alshekh, a famous rabbinic scholar who lived in 16th century Sfat said:

"Our Rabbis with one voice, accept and affirm the opinion that the Prophet (Isaiah) is speaking of [is] King Messiah."

The site also concurs with my own sources that Maimonides warned against interpreting the Suffering Servant as Israel, as well as giving us an insight into Rashi's interpretation. I understand that it was Rashi's bias against Christianity that caused him to interpret the Suffering Servant as Israel, as he admitted...

Rashi: “Since Christians interpret Isaiah 53 as being a prophecy concerning Jesus, we maintain that this is a prophecy concerning the people of Israel.”


Now, concerning the verses in Isaiah 49:5-6, here they are again:

5 And now the LORD says—
he who formed me in the womb to be his servant to bring Jacob back to him
and gather Israel to himself,
for I am honored in the eyes of the LORD
and my God has been my strength-

6 he says: "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob
and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles,
that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth."

I argued that the Servant cannot be Jacob (Israel) because the Servant is given a mission to Israel in the above verses.

With regard to your counter-argument... these verses suggest to me that the Servant is sent to the whole of Israel, because of the reference to the different tribes. This is set alongside the reference to the Gentiles who are also treated as a whole people i.e. not as a group of people with some faction or race left out. Moreover, the fact that all Jews are descended from "Jacob", also suggests that Isaiah's use of this term encompasses all Jewish people. Therefore your explanation that the Servant can be Jacob as some fragment of the Jewish people trying to reach the others is, at best, a doubtful one.

Isaiah 49:5 depicts the Servant as being called from the womb (as Jeremiah was) and not from a multitude of wombs, casting further doubt over whether the Servant can be the nation of Israel. The language better describes a single prophet.


What do I intend to do with this thread? I will be arguing that the Isaiah 53 passage is about Jesus in the same way that you have argued from your first post that it is about Israel. Do you think I'm going to discuss these verses without any reference to Jesus? You must be joking! You have a competing interpretation of Isaiah 53 that sits more naturally with the content to reckon with.

I have no problem with the Servant being called Israel in Isaiah 49:3. As McDowell explains it:

Israel (Jacob) had gone astray, especially from the commission God gave to him: "In you and your descendants shall all the families of the earth be blessed" (Genesis 28:14). The Servant (Messiah) was now to stand in Israel's place to do two things: 1) to bring the nation of Israel back to God 2) to be a light to the nations. The Messiah therefore becomes true Israel.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Well this is not the impression I get, because I looked at some ancient Jewish comments at a Messianic Jewish website here:

Hi. Well we all know how the Orthodox Jews view the Messianics even though some of the stuff they write can be fairly good.
I especially like this one and though I do not agree with his "eschatological" views, he was pretty much "dead on" with this commentary.

http://users.aristotle.net/~bhuie/lazarus.htm
CONCLUSION

The parable of Lazarus and the rich man, long used by mainstream ministers to teach the reality of "hell," really has nothing to say about punishment or reward in the afterlife. Christ used this story, which fit the common misconception about life after death in his day, to show the fate that awaited the Jewish nation because of the unbelief and faithlessness which led them to reject him as the Messiah. They still suffer from that fate to this very day.

http://www.kingdombiblestudies.org/abraham/abrahams_bosom.htm

The story of the rich man and Lazarus is without doubt one of the most misunderstood of all the stories in the Bible. Is it a parable, or an actual statement of facts concerning life beyond the grave? It is strenuously denied by most evangelists that this story, as told by Christ, could be a parable. They hold that this is not a parable because it starts out in narrative form.

It is argued, because it reads, "there was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day," that Christ is speaking here of an actual incident that took place. But in the parable of the prodigal son, in the fifteenth chapter of Luke, the narrative introduction is found also, for it says, "A certain man had two sons..." Yet it is generally conceded that the story of the prodigal son is a parable and all the fundamentalist preachers love to preach from its beautiful figures, thus applying it as a parable.

 

[JoeWill]

Hi

My understanding is that the story of Lazarus and the rich man was probably not meant to be taken too literally, because it is preceded by two other parables that are not supposed to be taken literally.

I see you've gone over to a large font like me. All they do is copy - sigh...

 

[muffler dragon]

Not all that surprising, given that from the time of the early church, a messianic interpretation of the Isaiah 53 passage was used as evidence for the Christian faith

According to what? Not even the GT makes so blatant of a statement.

Muffler Dragon, you talk about us seeing from the Jewish perspective. You need to remember that you only have a Jewish perspective. Messianic Jews, early Jewish commentators, and I think the truth be told, Isaiah himself had a different Jewish perspective - that the Isaiah 53 passage is to be given a messianic interpretation.

I present the Jewish position of nominal Judaism. Feel free to prove me wrong by substantiating it. This is something you've yet to do. All you've presented so far is what you "think". That doesn't provide substance.

 

[muffler dragon]

Well this is not the impression I get, because I looked at some ancient Jewish comments at a Messianic Jewish website here:

Messianic "Judaism" is a 20th century movement that has no credibility on Jewish tradition. Sorry.

http://www.jesusplusnothing.com/messiah/messiah.htm

from the front page of the site:

Welcome to Jesus Plus Nothing! This site is dedicated to the centrality of Jesus in the Christian life.

Next time, try to argue using a JEWISH website.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Hi

My understanding is that the story of Lazarus and the rich man was probably not meant to be taken too literally, because it is preceded by two other parables that are not supposed to be taken literally.

Actually that Parable explains the symbolic "Lake of Fire" in Revelation if I am not mistaken.

Hebrews 7:12 for the Priesthood being changed, of necessity also, of Law a change doth come,

Reve 14:11 And the Smoke of the Tormenting of Them into Ages of Ages is ascending. And not they are having rest of Day and of Night the Ones worshipping the Wild Beast, and the Image of it, and if anyone is getting the image ofthe Name of it.

eiV <1519> {INTO} aiwnaV <165> aiwnwn <165>

 

[JoeWill]

Shalom,

Messianic "Judaism" is a 20th century movement that has no credibility on Jewish tradition. Sorry.

Muffler Dragon can you see how inadequate this answer is? You wrote that:


"Jewish tradition has always held that the Servant in Isaiah is Israel."


Yet the Messianic Jewish site I mentioned gives referenced examples of ancient Jewish reflections on Isaiah that contradict your statement. Note that these are not Christian reflections.


Read Isaiah 53:4-5:

4 Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.

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. (NIV)


Now read some ancient Jewish thoughts that give a messianic interpretation to Isaiah 53:

1. Sanhedrin 98b:The rabbis say: &#8220;The Leprous of the House of study is his name, as it is said, verily he has borne our diseases and our pains - he carried them and we thought him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted.&#8221;


2) Midrash Rabbah on Ruth 2:14: He is speaking of the King Messiah: &#8220;Come hither&#8221; draw near to the throne and &#8220;dip thy morsel in the vinegar,&#8221; this relates to the chastisements as it is said, &#8220;But he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities.&#8221;


3) According to a Jewish legend, Elijah will take the head of the dead Messiah Ben David, placing it on his lap and say: &#8220;Endure the suffering and the sentence of your Master who makes you suffer because of the sin of Israel.&#8221;

The story then concludes with a quotation from Isaiah 53:5: &#8220;&#8230; he was wounded for our transgressions.&#8221; (Patai, The Messiah Texts, p.115)


4) Jewish educator Herz Homberg (1749-1841) states: According to Ibn Ezra, it relates to Israel at the end of their captivity. But if so, what can be the meaning of the passage, &#8220;He was wounded for our transgressions?&#8221; Who was wounded? Who are the transgressors? Who carried out the sickness and borne the pain? The fact is that it refers to the King Messiah.


Isaiah 52:13 reads:

13 See, my servant will act wisely;
he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.

You gave us Rashi's interpretation that the servant in this verse is the nation of Israel. However, other Jewish interpretors have thought that it refers to the Messiah.

5) Midrash Tanhuma, Parasha Toldot, (end of section), states: &#8220;Who art thou, O great mountain?&#8221; (Zech. 4:7) This refers to King Messiah. And why does he call him the &#8220;great mountain?&#8221; Because he is greater than the patriarchs, as it is said, &#8220;My servant shall be high, and lifted up, and lofty exceedingly.&#8221;


6) The Karaite Yefeth ben Ali (10th c.) states: As to myself, I am inclined, with Benjamin of Newahend to regard it as alluding to the Messiah... that the Messiah will only reach his highest degree of honour after long and severe trials...


7) Midrash Tanhuma and Yalkut, vol. 2, par. 338 on Isaiah 52:13 states that the expressions "exalted, and extolled and be very high" indicates that, &#8220;Messiah shall be more exalted than Abraham... more extolled than Moses... and be very high; that is higher than the ministering angels...&#8221;


From the website Jesus Plus Nothing at: http://www.jesusplusnothing.com/messiah/messiah.htm


Why should your Jewish perspective based on Rashi be the correct one, and all these other Jewish perspectives be wrong?


I want to go back to the Isaiah 49:5-6 verses that precede Isaiah 53, because I think you tend to dismiss an argument by way of some terse response without giving it sufficient thought. So here they are again:

5 And now the LORD says&#8212;
he who formed me in the womb to be his servant to bring Jacob back to him
and gather Israel to himself,
for I am honored in the eyes of the LORD
and my God has been my strength-

6 he says:
"It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob
and bring back those of Israel I have kept.
I will also make you a light for the Gentiles,
that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth." (NIV)


Note that the Servant is sent to Jacob. Since Jacob is the ancestor of all Jewish people, the best interpretation would be that the term "Jacob" denotes all Jewish people. Obviously this would mean that the Servant is someone other than the Jewish people because he is sent to them. Therefore the Servant would not be the nation of Israel.

This is supported by the fact that Isaiah refers to the "tribes of Jacob" and not to "some tribes", or "the Jews that believe the Torah". The suggestion is that he is referring to the whole Jewish race. So again, the fact that the Servant is sent to "the tribes of Jacob" implies that the Servant is someone other than Jacob i.e. he is the Messiah.


As I have said before, the Servant is called from the womb in the above verses, as was Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:5). God says to Jeremiah:

5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." (NIV)

Note that the Servant is not brought forth from a multitude of wombs. So the language of the Servant Songs seems to describe the ministry of a single prophet.


Like it or not, there is a case for saying that the central figure described in the Servant Songs is the Messiah. The nation of Israel went astray and failed in the task given them by God. The Messiah stood in their place and became true Israel.

 

[JoeWill]

I wrote that the early church used the Isaiah 53 passage as an evidence for the Christian faith. You said:

According to what? Not even the GT makes so blatant of a statement.

In I Corinthians 15:3, Pauls states that "...Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures..." Scholars believe from the linguistic structure of the complete verse, that Paul is reciting a legalistic creed formulated by the early church to explain and defend their position. Almost certainly the Isaiah 53 passage is one of the scriptures they had in mind.

In Acts 8:32-33, part of Isaiah 53 is quoted to show that Christ fulfilled these verses.

In Matthew's Gospel, which was written primarily for a Jewish audience, part of Isaiah 53 is quoted to substantiate Jesus' healing ministry (Matthew 8:17).

And so on.

No wonder modern Judaism has come to reject the Messianic interpretation of Isaiah chapter 53.

You said:

I present the Jewish position of nominal Judaism.

Sounds interesting. What exactly is "the Jewish position of nominal Judaism"? Do Jews that believe in Yeshua present the Jewish position of Christianity?

 

[muffler dragon]

Muffler Dragon can you see how inadequate this answer is? You wrote that:

What I "see", Joe, is that you don't read a single thing I write EXCEPT WHAT YOU WANT TO ADDRESS.

The site you presented is a CHRISTIAN SITE that doesn't have a clue about Jewish tradition.

I've written to you before about midrash. Midrash aggadah and midrash halacha. You haven't a clue what these two phrases mean, but yet, you want me to answer a CHRISTIAN website that interprets these two things according to the CHRISTIAN POV. How ridiculous is that? Furthermore, do you see the word "Karaite" below? Go do a word search on what that means. Then get back to me.

You've tested my patience a few too many times on this junk, and it all comes down to the FACT that you don't absorb or attempt to comprehend what I have written. Why waste my time? Furthermore, it's evident that you ARE an advocate of Replacement Theology (a.k.a. Supersessionism). I despise that theology, and will have nothing to do with it.

I'm done.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Furthermore, it's evident that you ARE an advocate of Replacement Theology (a.k.a. Supersessionism). I despise that theology, and will have nothing to do with it.

Shalom MF.

I beleve the Muslims also do that if I am not mistaken [Muhammad Final Seal of Prophets], so it looks like the Jews are kind of in the middle of both Christ-ianity and Islam.

I am sorry this thread turned into this type of RT theology as I certainly didn't want it to go into that direction.

Thanks for the dialogue and perhaps I will post more on the "Ranson/Redeem" of Isaiah and the OT. Peace.

Originally Posted by muffler dragon To be honest, LLoJ, I haven't spent an ounce of time studying what redemption means in Judaism. I'm sorry that I can't help you on this one.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Genesis 6:14 is interesting and if you do a translation of the words in it you can actually see the words "atone/ransom", and if you click on the Hebrew word in that interlinear it will show you where that form of the word is used in other places.

http://www.scripture4all.org/


Genesis 6:14 Make for you an Ark/tebah of woods/`ets of pitch/01613 gopher, nests/07064 qen you shall make * the Ark. And you shelter/03722 kaphar her from house and from outside in pitching-coat/03724 kopher.

01613 gopher {go'-fer}
from an unused root, probably meaning to house in; TWOT - 374; n m
AV - gopher 1; 1

03722 kaphar {kaw-far'}
a primitive root; TWOT - 1023,1024,1025,1026; v
AV - atonement 71, purge 7, reconciliation 4, reconcile 3, forgive 3,
03724 kopher {ko'-fer}

03724 kopher {ko'-fer}
from 03722; TWOT - 1025b; n m
AV - ransom 8, satisfaction 2, bribe 2, camphire 2, pitch 1, sum of

 

[JoeWill]

Hello again,

You get a bit hot under the collar for someone who invited us to a discussion of Isaiah chapter 53. Discussion involves hearing perspectives that differ to your own, even if you don&#8217;t like them. On your first post you broadcast that the Servant in Isaiah chapter 53 is Israel. You have to expect some counter-argumentation to that view because of its implications &#8211; you are not going to get it all your own way.

Nevertheless, feelings run high and I understand your anger.


Here is what I gleaned about Karaism and the styles of Jewish writing you mentioned. I&#8217;m sure you&#8217;ll tell me where I am wrong.


Midrash can basically be seen as Jewish interpretation of the Tanaach / Old Testament

"In simple terms, Midrash is the oldest form of Bible interpretation." (Jacobs, The Midrashic Process, p.3)

"&#8230;the overwhelming use of Midrash is for interpretation and enlisting of a verse or verses of Scripture." (Hammer, Classic Midrash: Tannaitic Commentaries on the Bible, p.2)


Most Midrash is Midrash Aggadah, exploring the meaning of non-legalistic scriptures

&#8220;Most midrash explores ethical ideas, biblical characters, or narrative moments, and is known as midrash aggadah.&#8221; (MyJewishLearning.com)


Some Midrash is Midrash Halakah dealing with legalistic issues

&#8220;Some midrashic writing deals with practical matters of Jewish law and behavior (halakhah), and is known as midrash halakhah&#8221; (MyJewishLearning.com)


Midrash aggadah has produced multiple interpretations of verses, with no attempt to resolve the differences

&#8220;&#8230; it neither could nor would limit itself to the simple interpretation of Scripture, but included in its ever-widening circle of discussions and reflections on the Scripture text.&#8221; (JewishEncyclopedia.com)

&#8220;Since the advent of printing, Jewish study Bibles have presented multiple interpretations of each verse on the same page with no attempt at resolution&#8230;

...Through the legacy of midrash aggadah, Torah (Jewish learning) continues to serve not as a closed system of doctrine and dogma, but as a perennial spark for ethical and spiritual thinking.&#8221; (Ibid)


Karaite Judaism is a Jewish movement that relies upon the Tanaach / Old Testament and rejects rabbinic tradition

&#8220;Karaite Judaism or Karaism is a Jewish Movement characterized by the sole reliance on the Tanakh as scripture, and the rejection of the Oral Law&#8221; (Wikipedia).

&#8220;At one time Karaites were a significant portion of the Jewish population. However today there are approximately 30,000 Karaites in the world, with 20,000-25,000 of them living in Israel&#8221; (Ibid).


All of this tells me that:

1) It is a mistake to state that &#8220;The Servant in Isaiah has never been seen as the Messiah in Jewish tradition&#8221;. Some Midrashic interpretations of Isaiah 53 have indeed seen the Servant as the Messiah. These sit alongside alternative interpretations.

2) Your resistance to the idea that a Messianic interpretation of Isaiah can be a Jewish perspective is unwarranted. As the JewishEncyclopedia.com points out, the legacy of the differing interpretations is that Jewish thinking is not a &#8220;closed system&#8221;. You should be more open to the alternative understanding of Isaiah 53.

3) That a proponent of Karaite Judaism gave a Messianic interpretation to Isaiah 53 simply goes to show that such an understanding can be a Jewish perspective. Why should he be wrong because of his version of Judaism and you be right because of yours?


Go steady.