- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote No. What particular verse or phrase would lead to such an erroneous conclusion?
I guess you can ask the people who made the encyclopdia judaica.“By means of his knowledge the righteous one, my servant, will bring a righteous standing to many people;”–verse 11
“If you will set his soul as a guilt offering,” –verse 10
“the righteous one, my servant, will bring a righteous standing to many people; and their errors he himself will bear.” –verse 11
“for THE TRANSGRESSION OF MY PEOPLE he was stricken.” [nav]–verse 8
(Who is the “he”? It's not “my people.”)What people? God's people, Israel? We are told that because of the sins these people (Israel) this righteous servant was stricken.
Did you notice that it's talking about Israel and this person and connects them in this way. They cannot be the same.
How do you explain any of these verses? they all make sense with Jesus. How do you explain them to be Israel?
Can it be said of Israel that “he poured out his soul to the very death,”?
–verse 12None of this makes any sense of Israel.
As I said:
It is true that in some contexts Isaiah does speak of Israel as God’s “servant.” But he speaks of Israel as a wayward, sinful servant. (Isaiah 42:19; 44:21, 22) The Encyclopaedia Judaica thus draws this contrast: “The real Israel is sinful and the Servant [of Isaiah 53], free of sin.”
–Encyclopaedia Judaica, 1971, Volume 9, page 65This encyclopedia rightly points out that fleshly natural israel was sinful.
Again, looking at this verse: for the transgression of my people he was stricken. [nav]–verse 8In verse 12, we're told:
and for the transgressors he proceeded to interpose.Yes, Israel has been called God's servant:
ISAIAH 44:21-22
““Remember these things, O Jacob, and you, O ISRAEL, because you are my servant. I have formed you. You are a servant belonging to me. O Israel, you will not be forgotten on my part. I will wipe out YOUR TRANSGRESSIONS just as with a cloud, and YOUR SINS just as with a cloud mass. Do return to me, for I will repurchase you.”But note the their transgressions, the sins.
and for the transgressors he proceeded to interpose.–verse 12
Quote What particular verse or phrase would lead to such an erroneous conclusion? [meaning that Israel is sinful and the servant isn't.] Everything in Is 53 tells me that the “righteous servant” is not sinful, but rather, that he himself carried the very sin of many people,.
And if you know anything about the Hebrew scriptures, you know that fleshly Israel lapsed into sin over and over.
The encyclopedia judaica was therefore right, on that one point. I don't see how this is even disputable.david
Quote n the case of Matthew 21, a colt AND an ass. Yikes. Jesus should have been in cirque de soleil for his acrobatics. This is pathetic.
. Mark (11:7), Luke (19:35), and John (12:14, 15) indicate that Jesus rode upon a colt or a young ass, but they make no mention of the presence of an older ass. Yet Matthew (21:7) writes that the disciples “brought the ass and its colt, and they put upon these their outer garments, and he seated himself upon them.” Jesus obviously did not seat himself on the two animals, but upon the garments that were laid upon the colt. Evidently, since he did not ride the ass, but rather its colt, Mark, Luke, and John do not mention the presence of the parent ass in their accounts.
Yet, once again, for the 47th time, you make the mistake of believing that because one account (in this case Matthew) included an extra detail, something is wrong.
Actually, something is wrong here, and it is your very illogical unreasoning attacks on the Bible.
And then, connected to all this in Is 53 about ending transgression, we have the statment in Daniel which is definitely about “messiah the leader” which says: “There are seventy weeks that have been determined upon your people and upon your holy city, in order to terminate the transgression,
Again, this helps make the case even stronger for the servant of Is 53 as being the messiah. After all, they are doing the same thing.
“for the transgression of my people he was stricken.” [nav]–verse 8
In verse 12, we're told:
“and for the transgressors he proceeded to interpose.”Mat 22:2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,(Jesus)
One Higher judgement, One earthly judgement
Yes in a way he did bear our sins to death, for he made the call on the highway a narrow gate. In the which the Son is a servant sent, that dose not do the removing his guests, but his father chooses whom has come and his not his sons friend,
And by final judgment the King that made the Son (Jesus) his wedding feast is the highest authority.Mat 22:9
Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.
So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.
And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:
And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast [him] into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
For many are called, but few [are] chosen.
Mat 22:15
¶Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in [his] talk.The prophecy of “messiah the leader” includes these words:
“There are seventy weeks that have been determined upon your people and upon your holy city, in order to terminate the transgression, and to finish off sin, and to make atonement for error, –dan 9:24
Now, the “righteous servant of Isaiah 53:
“for the transgression of my people he was stricken.”–verse 8
“and for the transgressors he proceeded to interpose.”–verse 12Again, Is 53:
The chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his stripes we were healed. . . . as a lamb that is led to the slaughter, . . . he was cut off out of the land of the living.JP
And Dan 9:
“There are seventy weeks that have been determined upon your people and upon your holy city, in order to terminate the transgression, and to finish off sin, and to make atonement for error,. . . from the going forth of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Leader, there will be. . . . . and after the sixty-two weeks Messiah will be cut off, with nothing for himself.Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 27 2007,19:26) [/quote] Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 26 2007,20:48) david,Nov. wrote:Quote Ah, the ‘Suffering Servant’. Israel (Jacob), not Jesus. –Oct 30, tow
So you do believe that this is referring to Israel.
But notice what I said to you before:
Quote But does this explanation stand up to close scrutiny? It is true that in some contexts Isaiah does speak of Israel as God’s “servant.” But he speaks of Israel as a wayward, sinful servant. (Isaiah 42:19; 44:21, 22) The Encyclopaedia Judaica thus draws this contrast: “The real Israel is sinful and the Servant [of Isaiah 53], free of sin.”
–Encyclopaedia Judaica, 1971, Volume 9, page 65
DavidGood points.
I didnt realize he has now backed out of the Messiah being a suffering Messiah.
You said…
Quote
Where do you people get this? I never once supported such an idea. Is this your way of debating on this board, by putting words in peoples mouthes (virtually that is
)?Excuse me. Just going by Davids words, he usually is pretty accurate about what he reads. Surely I dont want to put words in your mouth, cause I am quite sure you have never done that on this board.
Quote I tried to point out that its obvious that Isaiah 52 and 53 dosnt mention Jocob and only mentions Israel in one verse which clearly shows that the context is speaking of someone else besides Israel/Jacob. I said…
Isa 52:12
For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight: for the LORD will go before you; and the God of Israel will be your reward.The God of Israel will be whose reward?
You said…
Quote
Not reward, rear guard. You seem to be purposely misleading because you changed the word in the KJV. See below.Sorry again. I forgot you are a Jew (HEHE) and you dont understand old english.
The word “Rereward” means…as you have pointed out “rear guard”.
Etymology: Middle English rerewarde, from Anglo-French rereguard, rerewarde rear guard
Date: 14th century
: rear; especially : the rear division (as of an army)
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/rearward.In your haste to make judgment you over look the point.
The point is verse 12 is speaking to someone else besides Israel/Jacob. You are simply doing what you accuse others of doing and that is reading into the text.
For you shall not go out with haste,
Nor go by flight;
For the LORD will go before you,
And the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
New King James Version © 1982 Thomas NelsonNLT – Isa 52:12 – You will not leave in a hurry, running for your lives. For the Lord will go ahead of you, and the God of Israel will protect you from behind.
New Living Translation © 1996 Tyndale Charitable TrustNIV – Isa 52:12 – But you will not leave in haste or go in flight; for the Lord will go before you, the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
New International Version © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible SocietyESV – Isa 52:12 – For you shall not go out in haste,
and you shall not go in flight,
for the Lord will go before you,
and the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway BiblesNASB – Isa 52:12 – But you will not go out in haste, Nor will you go as fugitives; For the LORD will go before you, And the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
New American Standard Bible © 1995 Lockman FoundationRSV – Isa 52:12 – For you shall not go out in haste, and you shall not go in flight, for the LORD will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
Revised Standard Version © 1947, 1952.ASV – Isa 52:12 – For ye shall not go out in haste, neither shall ye go by flight: for Jehovah will go before you; and the God of Israel will be your rearward.
American Standard Version 1901 InfoYoung – Isa 52:12 – For not in haste do ye go out, Yea, with flight ye go not on, For going before you [is] Jehovah, And gathering you [is] the God of Israel!
Robert Young Literal Translation 1862, 1887, 1898 InfoDarby – Isa 52:12 – For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight; for Jehovah will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rear-guard.
J.N.Darby Translation 1890 InfoWebster – Isa 52:12 – For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight: for the LORD will go before you; and the God of Israel [will be] your rear-ward.
Noah Webster Version 1833 InfoHNV – Isa 52:12 – For you shall not go out in haste, neither shall you go by flight: for the LORD will go before you; and the God of Yisra'el will be your rearward.
Hebrew Names Version 2000 InfoSo it seems you disagree with over 600 scholars.
Quote Seems like he is talking to someone besides Jacob. So now verse 13 as you show can not be referring to Israel because verse 12 clearly shows he is talking to someone else. You said…
Quote
Huh? Why? Because it says 'God of Israel'? Why would this be speaking of anyone else? And your bible version is flawed or you quoted it wrong. It appears the latter is true.[/quoted]Isa 52:12 [KJV] For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight: for the LORD will go before you; and the God of Israel will be your rereward.
Rereward – The rear guard of an army. (See http://www.answers.com/topic/rereward).
Here is the LXX version
Isa 52:12 [Apostles] For you shall not go forth with haste, neither go by flight; for the Lord shall go first in advance of you; and the God of Israel shall be the One that brings up your rear.
This pretty much agrees with the Judaica Press version
12. For not with haste shall you go forth and not in a flurry of flight shall you go, for the Lord goes before you, and your rear guard is the God of Israel.
Where do you get reward? Did you change the word on purpose? How intellectually dishonest of you.
Now I am a liar? Whats with all the name calling? Does that make you feel superior?
See above.
Fact is there is no proof in this verse that he is speaking to Israel.
So in a translation you can understand we see in the following verses who is this one that verse 12 speaks of..
Isa 52:12 NASB
But you will not go out in haste, Nor will you go as fugitives; For the LORD will go before you, And the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
13 Behold, My servant will prosper, He will be high and lifted up and greatly exalted.
14 Just as many were astonished at you, My people, So His appearance was marred more than any man And His form more than the sons of men.
15 Thus He will sprinkle many nations, Kings will shut their mouths on account of Him; For what had not been told them they will see, And what they had not heard they will understand.How can the Nation/Israel be marred more than any man?
You are simply closing your eyes to the truth.
Quote Of course I asked him to show me how it can be Israel/Jacob the nation that is spoke of in Isa 53… You said…
Quote
I have by showing who YHVH's servant is according to many more passages in Isaiah. I can't help you choose to ignore those in your effort to make Is 53 fit Jesus.Again, does YHWH have only one servant? No you apparantly do not understand prophesy, and you choose to be blind and not believe in Yeshua.
Quote I said…
But since you insist on your interpretatiion of Isa 53, then tell us when or how by “Israels” stripes “Israel” will be healed? Isa 53:5
How will Israels soul be an offering for sin. Isa 53:10
How will Israel bear the sins of many? Isa 53:12You said..
Quote
Israel has been the most persecuted people of history. Name me another. Besides that Is 53:10 is a very poor translation of the Hebrew. Or a purposely Christian one. Here is Judaica Press 10. And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution, he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God's purpose shall prosper in his hand.Israel was only persecuted when they sinned and rebelled against YHWH by following other Gods or rebelling against the word of the Lord.
So you are saying that through their suffering for their sins, that they will bear the sins of many?
No, Isa 53:10 is not a poor translation…
Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put [him] to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong [his] days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
King James Version 1611, 1769NKJV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,
And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand.
New King James Version © 1982 Thomas NelsonNLT – Isa 53:10 – But it was the Lord's good plan to crush him and fill him with grief. Yet when his life is made an offering for sin, he will have a multitude of children, many heirs. He will enjoy a long life, and the Lord's plan will prosper in his hands.
New Living Translation © 1996 Tyndale Charitable TrustNIV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it was the Lord's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.ESV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him;
he has put him to grief;
when his soul makes an offering for sin,
he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days;
the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway BiblesNASB – Isa 53:10 – But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting {Him} to grief; If He would render Himself {as} a guilt offering, He will see {His} offspring, He will prolong {His} days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.
New American Standard Bible © 1995 Lockman FoundationRSV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it was the will of the LORD to bruise him; he has put him to grief; when he makes himself an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring, he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand;
Revised Standard Version © 1947, 1952.ASV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it pleased Jehovah to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand.
American Standard Version 1901 InfoYoung – Isa 53:10 – And Jehovah hath delighted to bruise him, He hath made him sick, If his soul doth make an offering for guilt, He seeth seed — he prolongeth days, And the pleasure of Jehovah in his hand doth prosper.
Robert Young Literal Translation 1862, 1887, 1898 InfoDarby – Isa 53:10 – Yet it pleased Jehovah to bruise him; he hath subjected [him] to suffering. When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see a seed, he shall prolong [his] days, and the pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand.
J.N.Darby Translation 1890 InfoWebster – Isa 53:10 – Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put [him] to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong [his] days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
Noah Webster Version 1833 InfoHNV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he has put him to grief: when you shall make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
As David has pointed out, only a “sinless soul” could be made an offering for sin. Only Jesus could fit this bill. Israel the Nation, has proven that not to be. But, then so has all of mankind. For all have sinned.
You said…
Quote
Israel has born the sin of many indeed. How many Jews have been killed because of your own bible? How many Jews were killed by Hitler?My Bible? Did you ever think that Hitler had the tanakh, and that he read when Israel was in sin God used other nations to punish them and kill them and rape them because of their own sin?
The New Testament dosnt show Christians killing Jews, does it. In fact the New Testament is a book about the Love of God.
And just how was Israel made an offering for sin? Through their rebellion? You
are yet to explain this.Quote He has not explained this but evaded it. I still have to answer him on his post and when I feel like it I will. 
You said…Quote
Have fun with this one thenYou really do think highly of yourself Tow. Lets see you also said…
Quote Really? Seems my presence here has rocked this board like no other. People are voting on things on this board because of me. You could say Stu too but he was here long before I came. People are scared. I do not bring lies I bring Tanakh.
“People are scared?” Since you know so much Tow, did you ever read this one…
Proverbs 16:18
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.Your favorite guy Paul under the unction of the Holy Spirit said…
1 Cor 8:2
And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.
Quote (david @ Nov. 27 2007,23:04) Quote n the case of Matthew 21, a colt AND an ass. Yikes. Jesus should have been in cirque de soleil for his acrobatics. This is pathetic.
. Mark (11:7), Luke (19:35), and John (12:14, 15) indicate that Jesus rode upon a colt or a young ass, but they make no mention of the presence of an older ass. Yet Matthew (21:7) writes that the disciples “brought the ass and its colt, and they put upon these their outer garments, and he seated himself upon them.” Jesus obviously did not seat himself on the two animals, but upon the garments that were laid upon the colt. Evidently, since he did not ride the ass, but rather its colt, Mark, Luke, and John do not mention the presence of the parent ass in their accounts.
Yet, once again, for the 47th time, you make the mistake of believing that because one account (in this case Matthew) included an extra detail, something is wrong.
Actually, something is wrong here, and it is your very illogical unreasoning attacks on the Bible.
Haha, you wish. I will use your own NWT to reveal the little comedy act set up by Matthew====================================
Mat 21:2 saying to them: “Be on YOUR way into the village that is within sight of YOU, and YOU will at once find an ass tied, and a colt with her; untie them and bring them to me.
Mat 21:3 And if someone says anything to YOU, YOU must say, 'The Lord needs them.' At that he will immediately send them forth.”
Mat 21:4 This actually took place that there might be fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet, saying:
Mat 21:5 “TELL the daughter of Zion, 'Look! Your King is coming to you, mild-tempered, and mounted upon an ass, yes, upon a colt, the offspring of a beast of burden.'”
Mat 21:6 So the disciples got on their way and did just as Jesus ordered them.
Mat 21:7 And they brought the ass and its colt, and they put upon these their outer garments, and he seated himself upon them.
====================================Yes you are quite correct that the other writers were smart enough to realize that Zec 9:9 did not mean two animals but that the mention of colt was a clarification of the youth of the animal.
====================================
Zec 9:9 “Be very joyful, O daughter of Zion. Shout in triumph, O daughter of Jerusalem. Look! Your king himself comes to you. He is righteous, yes, saved; humble, and riding upon an ass, even upon a full-grown animal the son of a she-ass.
====================================Oh and I'd like to point out that the NWT has again mistranslated the Hebrew. A foal, more specifically a colt, would not be classified as a 'full grown animal'. A colt is a male foal and is one year or younger. The NWT translators should have stuck to Greek only.
And why did Jesus not sit on both animals? Even your NWT says he did: 'and he seated himself upon them' (Mat 21:7b). The other gospels did not mention the other animal because they were smart enough not to muff the whole 'prophecy' up but mentioning two animals when it was only one.
But let's get into detail. First of all Jesus was not a king. He never ruled anything or anyone unless you count his kingdom of 12 disciples. The only time he was called a king was on the cross. In fact that is why Jesus was crucified: sedition. He claimed he was a king in the presence of Pilate and that is all Pilate needed to hear. Rome frowned upon such declarations and insurrectionists were crucified. At the last moment Jesus tried to play off this claim by saying his kingdom was other-worldly but Pilate had all of his evidence.
Now let's look at Zec 9:10 to see if this could be talking about Jesus.
====================================
Zec 9:10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river even to the ends of the earth.
====================================Well what do you know. For one thing he had no dominion much less from sea to sea. Also, since Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 CE it seems that war did indeed follow after him instead of his presence ending war. That will happen when the true Moshiach comes.
Maybe I will get a donkey and ride it into Jerusalem. Can I call myself messiah if I do? What a prophecy.
Quote (david @ Nov. 27 2007,22:53) Quote No. What particular verse or phrase would lead to such an erroneous conclusion?
I guess you can ask the people who made the encyclopdia judaica.“By means of his knowledge the righteous one, my servant, will bring a righteous standing to many people;”–verse 11
“If you will set his soul as a guilt offering,” –verse 10
“the righteous one, my servant, will bring a righteous standing to many people; and their errors he himself will bear.” –verse 11
“for THE TRANSGRESSION OF MY PEOPLE he was stricken.” [nav]–verse 8
(Who is the “he”? It's not “my people.”)What people? God's people, Israel? We are told that because of the sins these people (Israel) this righteous servant was stricken.
Did you notice that it's talking about Israel and this person and connects them in this way. They cannot be the same.
How do you explain any of these verses? they all make sense with Jesus. How do you explain them to be Israel?
Can it be said of Israel that “he poured out his soul to the very death,”?
–verse 12None of this makes any sense of Israel.
As I said:
It is true that in some contexts Isaiah does speak of Israel as God’s “servant.” But he speaks of Israel as a wayward, sinful servant. (Isaiah 42:19; 44:21, 22) The Encyclopaedia Judaica thus draws this contrast: “The real Israel is sinful and the Servant [of Isaiah 53], free of sin.”
–Encyclopaedia Judaica, 1971, Volume 9, page 65This encyclopedia rightly points out that fleshly natural israel was sinful.
Again, looking at this verse: for the transgression of my people he was stricken. [nav]–verse 8In verse 12, we're told:
and for the transgressors he proceeded to interpose.Yes, Israel has been called God's servant:
ISAIAH 44:21-22
““Remember these things, O Jacob, and you, O ISRAEL, because you are my servant. I have formed you. You are a servant belonging to me. O Israel, you will not be forgotten on my part. I will wipe out YOUR TRANSGRESSIONS just as with a cloud, and YOUR SINS just as with a cloud mass. Do return to me, for I will repurchase you.”But note the their transgressions, the sins.
and for the transgressors he proceeded to interpose.–verse 12
Quote What particular verse or phrase would lead to such an erroneous conclusion? [meaning that Israel is sinful and the servant isn't.] Everything in Is 53 tells me that the “righteous servant” is not sinful, but rather, that he himself carried the very sin of many people,.
And if you know anything about the Hebrew scriptures, you know that fleshly Israel lapsed into sin over and over.
The encyclopedia judaica was therefore right, on that one point. I don't see how this is even disputable.david
Is 53:8 was butchered by Christian translations. Here is the proper translation from Judaica Press==================================
8. From imprisonment and from judgment he is taken, and his generation who shall tell? For he was cut off from the land of the living; because of the transgression of my people, a plague befell them.
==================================Likewise here is 53:10-11
==================================
10. And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution, he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God's purpose shall prosper in his hand.
11. From the toil of his soul he would see, he would be satisfied; with his knowledge My servant would vindicate the just for many, and their iniquities he would bear.
==================================None of the verses make sense with Jesus. When was he crushed? When was he ill? And as far as him being a sin offering, let's look to the LXX
==================================
(Apostles) The Lord also is pleased to purge Him from His stroke. If you give an offering for sin, Your soul shall see a long-lived seed;
==================================This does not agree with the Christian bible translations of Is 53:10 but comes very close to the Judaica Press translation. It speaks of Israel making atonement for their own sins. If they do so the promises of the balance of Is 53 are in store.
Plus Jesus has no seed, no offspring. He never married so he could not have any seed. When used of mankind 'zera', the word for 'seed' always means physical offspring. Jesus was called a brother not a father.
So if Isaiah 53 is speaking of a servant free from sin why would Israel need to atone for their own sins in 53:10? And note that the only time 'righteous' is used of the servant is in 53:11 AFTER the atonement of sin. There is nothing that would lead to a righteous servant before that point.
End of story.
Quote (david @ Nov. 27 2007,23:09) And then, connected to all this in Is 53 about ending transgression, we have the statment in Daniel which is definitely about “messiah the leader” which says: “There are seventy weeks that have been determined upon your people and upon your holy city, in order to terminate the transgression, Again, this helps make the case even stronger for the servant of Is 53 as being the messiah. After all, they are doing the same thing.
“for the transgression of my people he was stricken.” [nav]–verse 8
In verse 12, we're told:
“and for the transgressors he proceeded to interpose.”
Daniel 9 has not been shown to be Jesus by anyone. Please give your interpretation of Daniel 9. I think you did but your math was off if I remember correctly.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 28 2007,01:43) Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 27 2007,19:26) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 26 2007,20:48) Quote (david @ Nov. 27 2007,13:25) Quote Ah, the ‘Suffering Servant’. Israel (Jacob), not Jesus. –Oct 30, tow
So you do believe that this is referring to Israel.
But notice what I said to you before:
Quote But does this explanation stand up to close scrutiny? It is true that in some contexts Isaiah does speak of Israel as God’s “servant.” But he speaks of Israel as a wayward, sinful servant. (Isaiah 42:19; 44:21, 22) The Encyclopaedia Judaica thus draws this contrast: “The real Israel is sinful and the Servant [of Isaiah 53], free of sin.”
–Encyclopaedia Judaica, 1971, Volume 9, page 65
DavidGood points.
I didnt realize he has now backed out of the Messiah being a suffering Messiah.
You said…
Quote
Where do you people get this? I never once supported such an idea. Is this your way of debating on this board, by putting words in peoples mouthes (virtually that is)?Excuse me. Just going by Davids words, he usually is pretty accurate about what he reads. Surely I dont want to put words in your mouth, cause I am quite sure you have never done that on this board.
Quote I tried to point out that its obvious that Isaiah 52 and 53 dosnt mention Jocob and only mentions Israel in one verse which clearly shows that the context is speaking of someone else besides Israel/Jacob. I said…
Isa 52:12
For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight: for the LORD will go before you; and the God of Israel will be your reward.The God of Israel will be whose reward?
You said…
Quote
Not reward, rear guard. You seem to be purposely misleading because you changed the word in the KJV. See below.Sorry again. I forgot you are a Jew (HEHE) and you dont understand old english.
The word “Rereward” means…as you have pointed out “rear guard”.
Etymology: Middle English rerewarde, from Anglo-French rereguard, rerewarde rear guard
Date: 14th century
: rear; especially : the rear division (as of an army)
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/rearward.In your haste to make judgment you over look the point.
The point is verse 12 is speaking to someone else besides Israel/Jacob. You are simply doing what you accuse others of doing and that is reading into the text.
For you shall not go out with haste,
Nor go by flight;
For the LORD will go before you,
And the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
New King James Version © 1982 Thomas NelsonNLT – Isa 52:12 – You will not leave in a hurry, running for your lives. For the Lord will go ahead of you, and the God of Israel will protect you from behind.
New Living Translation © 1996 Tyndale Charitable TrustNIV – Isa 52:12 – But you will not leave in haste or go in flight; for the Lord will go before you, the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
New International Version © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible SocietyESV – Isa 52:12 – For you shall not go out in haste,
and you shall not go in flight,
for the Lord will go before you,
and the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway BiblesNASB – Isa 52:12 – But you will not go out in haste, Nor will you go as fugitives; For the LORD will go before you, And the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
New American Standard Bible © 1995 Lockman FoundationRSV – Isa 52:12 – For you shall not go out in haste, and you shall not go in flight, for the LORD will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
Revised Standard Version © 1947, 1952.ASV – Isa 52:12 – For ye shall not go out in haste, neither shall ye go by flight: for Jehovah will go before you; and the God of Israel will be your rearward.
American Standard Version 1901 InfoYoung – Isa 52:12 – For not in haste do ye go out, Yea, with flight ye go not on, For going before you [is] Jehovah, And gathering you [is] the God of Israel!
Robert Young Literal Translation 1862, 1887, 1898 InfoDarby – Isa 52:12 – For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight; for Jehovah will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rear-guard.
J.N.Darby Translation 1890 InfoWebster – Isa 52:12 – For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight: for the LORD will go before you; and the God of Israel [will be] your rear-ward.
Noah Webster Version 1833 InfoHNV – Isa 52:12 – For you shall not go out in haste, neither shall you go by flight: for the LORD will go before you; and the God of Yisra'el will be your rearward.
Hebrew Names Version 2000 InfoSo it seems you disagree with over 600 scholars.
How does any of this disagree? Are you reading the same translations I just read that you listed? Where is there a change? Please read this verse again because you seem to be missing something. Actually Is 52:12 is Isaiah speaking to the people, who are by the way, Israelites! Sheesh.
Quote Quote Seems like he is talking to someone besides Jacob. So now verse 13 as you show can not be referring to Israel because verse 12 clearly shows he is talking to someone else. You said…
Quote
Huh? Why? Because it says 'God of Israel'? Why would this be speaking of anyone else? And your bible version is flawed or you quoted it wrong. It appears the latter is true.[/quoted]Isa 52:12 [KJV] For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight: for the LORD will go before you; and the God of Israel will be your rereward.
Rereward – The rear guard of an army. (See http://www.answers.com/topic/rereward).
Here is the LXX version
Isa 52:12 [Apostles] For you shall not go forth with haste, neither go by flight; for the Lord shall go first in advance of you; and the God of Israel shall be the One that brings up your rear.
This pretty much agrees with the Judaica Press version
12. For not with haste shall you go forth and not in a flurry of flight shall you go, for the Lord goes before you, and your rear guard is the God of Israel.
Where do you get reward? Did you change the word on purpose? How intellectually dishonest of you.
Now I am a liar? Whats with all the name calling? Does that make you feel superior?
See above.
Yes you are dishonest because you purposely said 'reward'. No version has 'reward' so since you changed it that makes you dishonest.
Quote Fact is there is no proof in this verse that he is speaking to Israel. Who is Isaiah talking to, a women's convention?
Quote So in a translation you can understand we see in the following verses who is this one that verse 12 speaks of.. Isa 52:12 NASB
But you will not go out in haste, Nor will you go as fugitives; For the LORD will go before you, And the God of Israel will be your rear guard.
13 Behold, My servant will prosper, He will be high and lifted up and greatly exalted.
14 Just as many were astonished at you, My people, So His appearance was marred more than any man And His form more than the sons of men.
15 Thus He will sprinkle many nations, Kings will shut their mouths on account of Him; For what had not been told them they will see, And what they had not heard they will understand.How can the Nation/Israel be marred more than any man?
I guess you don't know the history of Israel? The millions of Jews who have been killed and persecuted? Or are you a revisionist who believes the holocaust never took place?
Quote You are simply closing your eyes to the truth. Quote Of course I asked him to show me how it can be Israel/Jacob the nation that is spoke of in Isa 53… You said…
Quote
I have by showing who YHVH's servant is according to many more passages in Isaiah. I can't help you choose to ignore those in your effort to make Is 53 fit Jesus.Again, does YHWH have only one servant? No you apparantly do not understand prophesy, and you choose to be blind and not believe in Yeshua.
Show me all of the times servant is mention in Isaiah and then show me a singular instance of it speaking of King Messiah. I will not hold my breath.
Quote Quote I said…
But since you insist on your interpretatiion of Isa 53, then tell us when or how by “Israels” stripes “Israel” will be healed? Isa 53:5
How will Israels soul be an offering for sin. Isa 53:10
How will Israel bear the sins of many? Isa 53:12You said..
Quote
Israel has been the most persecuted people of history. Name me another. Besides that Is 53:10 is a very poor translation of the Hebrew. Or a purposely Christian one. Here is Judaica Press 10. And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill; if his soul makes itself restitution, he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God's purpose shall prosper in his hand.Israel was only persecuted when they sinned and rebelled against YHWH by following other Gods or rebelling against the word of the Lord.
So you are saying that through their suffering for their sins, that they will bear the sins of many?
No, Isa 53:10 is not a poor translation…
Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put [him] to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong [his] days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
King James Version 1611, 1769NKJV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,
And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand.
New King James Version © 1982 Thomas NelsonNLT – Isa 53:10 – But it was the Lord's good plan to crush him and fill him with grief. Yet when his life is made an offering for sin, he will have a multitude of children, many heirs. He will enjoy a long life, and the Lord's plan will prosper in his hands.
New Living Translation © 1996 Tyndale Charitable TrustNIV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it was the Lord's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the Lord makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.ESV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him;
he has put him to grief;
when his soul makes an offering for sin,
he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days;
the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway BiblesNASB – Isa 53:10 – But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting {Him} to grief; If He would render Himself {as} a guilt offering, He will see {His} offspring, He will prolong {His} days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.
New American Standard Bible © 1995 Lockman FoundationRSV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it was the will of the LORD to bruise him; he has put him to grief; when he makes himself an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring, he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand;
Revised Standard Version © 1947, 1952.ASV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it pleased Jeho
vah to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand.
American Standard Version 1901 InfoYoung – Isa 53:10 – And Jehovah hath delighted to bruise him, He hath made him sick, If his soul doth make an offering for guilt, He seeth seed — he prolongeth days, And the pleasure of Jehovah in his hand doth prosper.
Robert Young Literal Translation 1862, 1887, 1898 InfoDarby – Isa 53:10 – Yet it pleased Jehovah to bruise him; he hath subjected [him] to suffering. When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see a seed, he shall prolong [his] days, and the pleasure of Jehovah shall prosper in his hand.
J.N.Darby Translation 1890 InfoWebster – Isa 53:10 – Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put [him] to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong [his] days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
Noah Webster Version 1833 InfoHNV – Isa 53:10 – Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he has put him to grief: when you shall make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
As David has pointed out, only a “sinless soul” could be made an offering for sin. Only Jesus could fit this bill. Israel the Nation, has proven that not to be. But, then so has all of mankind. For all have sinned.
The people of Israel are not an offering for sin. That is not what the verse is saying. It is saying that if Israel atones for their sins then they will receive the promises found in the balance of Is 53. Even another Christian translation agrees with the Judaica Press version
Isa 53:10 [ESV] Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
See? It speaks of the servant making an offering for his sin NOT being an offering for sin. What is the result? Israel will prolong his days.
Quote You said… Quote
Israel has born the sin of many indeed. How many Jews have been killed because of your own bible? How many Jews were killed by Hitler?My Bible? Did you ever think that Hitler had the tanakh, and that he read when Israel was in sin God used other nations to punish them and kill them and rape them because of their own sin?
You are naive indeed if you believe that. I think you need to read some history.
Quote The New Testament dosnt show Christians killing Jews, does it. In fact the New Testament is a book about the Love of God. No it has Jews killing Christians and Jesus. That is all people for centuries needed to label Jews guilty of deicide.
Quote And just how was Israel made an offering for sin? Through their rebellion? You are yet to explain this. They are not an offering for sin, they must atone for their sins.
Quote Quote He has not explained this but evaded it. I still have to answer him on his post and when I feel like it I will.
You said…Quote
Have fun with this one thenYou really do think highly of yourself Tow. Lets see you also said…
Quote Really? Seems my presence here has rocked this board like no other. People are voting on things on this board because of me. You could say Stu too but he was here long before I came. People are scared. I do not bring lies I bring Tanakh.
“People are scared?” Since you know so much Tow, did you ever read this one…
Proverbs 16:18
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.Your favorite guy Paul under the unction of the Holy Spirit said…
1 Cor 8:2
And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.
Hey just look around. You have your answer.Quote And why did Jesus not sit on both animals? Even your NWT says he did: 'and he seated himself upon them' (Mat 21:7b). Again, my calling this argument “pathetic” stands.
For the verse in full:
And they brought the ass and its colt, and they put upon these THEIR OUTER GARMENTS, and he seated himself upon them. [THAT IS, THE OUTER GARMENTS.]Obviously, sitting on more than one animal at the same time is ridiculous. But he can sit on more than one garment at the same time. Is this the sort of argumentation you are reduced to?
Quote A foal, more specifically a colt, would not be classified as a 'full grown animal'. A colt is a male foal and is one year or younger. The NWT translators should have stuck to Greek only. If you're saying that the expression a “full grown colt” makes no sense to you, I suggest you google it and find that it occurs 989 times (an not in reference to the Bible.)
Quote (david @ Nov. 28 2007,18:34) Quote And why did Jesus not sit on both animals? Even your NWT says he did: 'and he seated himself upon them' (Mat 21:7b). Again, my calling this argument “pathetic” stands.
For the verse in full:
And they brought the ass and its colt, and they put upon these THEIR OUTER GARMENTS, and he seated himself upon them. [THAT IS, THE OUTER GARMENTS.]And what where the outer garments on? Both of the animals. So he was still sitting on both animals. Either way he's straddling to animals. You can call it 'pathetic' all day long but its still funny as can be to see Matthew make this blunder.
Quote Obviously, sitting on more than one animal at the same time is ridiculous. But he can sit on more than one garment at the same time. Is this the sort of argumentation you are reduced to?
Nah its just funny. Almost as funny as how hard you try to defend it.Quote (david @ Nov. 28 2007,18:41) Quote A foal, more specifically a colt, would not be classified as a 'full grown animal'. A colt is a male foal and is one year or younger. The NWT translators should have stuck to Greek only. If you're saying that the expression a “full grown colt” makes no sense to you, I suggest you google it and find that it occurs 989 times (an not in reference to the Bible.)
“Results 1 – 17 of 17 for “full grown colt”. (0.09 seconds)”
Let's see, one was about popular Scandinavian Yule stories, another was from mythfolklore.net, another from popular Norse tales, etc. Yeah those are some great examples since they are all fictional. Hey there was one from a Charles Darwin book though!
From http://www.equine-world.co.uk/about_horses/equine_gender.htm
Filly – A female horse or pony not yet full grown.
Colt – A male horse or pony not yet full grown or gelded (castrated).
Mare – A fully grown female horse or pony.
Stallion – A fully grown male horse or pony that has not been gelded (castrated). Stallions are also known as “Entire”.
Also from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donkey
A male donkey or ass is called a jack, a female a jenny, or less correctly, a jennet, and offspring less than one year old, a foal (male: colt, female filly).
Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 29 2007,12:18) Quote (david @ Nov. 28 2007,18:34) Quote And why did Jesus not sit on both animals? Even your NWT says he did: 'and he seated himself upon them' (Mat 21:7b). Again, my calling this argument “pathetic” stands.
For the verse in full:
And they brought the ass and its colt, and they put upon these THEIR OUTER GARMENTS, and he seated himself upon them. [THAT IS, THE OUTER GARMENTS.]And what where the outer garments on? Both of the animals. So he was still sitting on both animals. Either way he's straddling to animals. You can call it 'pathetic' all day long but its still funny as can be to see Matthew make this blunder.
Quote Obviously, sitting on more than one animal at the same time is ridiculous. But he can sit on more than one garment at the same time. Is this the sort of argumentation you are reduced to?
Nah its just funny. Almost as funny as how hard you try to defend it.
DavidI agree. This is proof he will go to any extreme to try and prove his rediculous points.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 28 2007,19:45) Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 29 2007,12:18) Quote (david @ Nov. 28 2007,18:34) Quote And why did Jesus not sit on both animals? Even your NWT says he did: 'and he seated himself upon them' (Mat 21:7b). Again, my calling this argument “pathetic” stands.
For the verse in full:
And they brought the ass and its colt, and they put upon these THEIR OUTER GARMENTS, and he seated himself upon them. [THAT IS, THE OUTER GARMENTS.]And what where the outer garments on? Both of the animals. So he was still sitting on both animals. Either way he's straddling to animals. You can call it 'pathetic' all day long but its still funny as can be to see Matthew make this blunder.
Quote Obviously, sitting on more than one animal at the same time is ridiculous. But he can sit on more than one garment at the same time. Is this the sort of argumentation you are reduced to?
Nah its just funny. Almost as funny as how hard you try to defend it.
DavidI agree. This is proof he will go to any extreme to try and prove his rediculous points.
But I note neither of you have any good defense for it rather than to call it 'pathetic' or 'ridiculous'. Wow you've convinced me.Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 29 2007,12:58) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 28 2007,19:45) Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 29 2007,12:18) Quote (david @ Nov. 28 2007,18:34) Quote And why did Jesus not sit on both animals? Even your NWT says he did: 'and he seated himself upon them' (Mat 21:7b). Again, my calling this argument “pathetic” stands.
For the verse in full:
And they brought the ass and its colt, and they put upon these THEIR OUTER GARMENTS, and he seated himself upon them. [THAT IS, THE OUTER GARMENTS.]And what where the outer garments on? Both of the animals. So he was still sitting on both animals. Either way he's straddling to animals. You can call it 'pathetic' all day long but its still funny as can be to see Matthew make this blunder.
Quote Obviously, sitting on more than one animal at the same time is ridiculous. But he can sit on more than one garment at the same time. Is this the sort of argumentation you are reduced to?
Nah its just funny. Almost as funny as how hard you try to defend it.
DavidI agree. This is proof he will go to any extreme to try and prove his rediculous points.
But I note neither of you have any good defense for it rather than to call it 'pathetic' or 'ridiculous'. Wow you've convinced me.
TowI think the readers behind the scenes can see that your point is moot.
Obviously, when you compare the scriptures its evident what Matherw meant.
Matt 21:7 NLT
They brought the animals to him and threw their garments over the colt, and he sat on it.NASB
and brought the donkey and the colt, and laid their coats on them; and He sat on the coats.RSV
they brought the ass and the colt, and put their garments on them, and he sat thereon.Proper exegesis of scriptures is comparing scripture with scripture.
Davids point is Unambiguous, yours is laughable.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 28 2007,20:26) Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 29 2007,12:58) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 28 2007,19:45) Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 29 2007,12:18) Quote (david @ Nov. 28 2007,18:34) Quote And why did Jesus not sit on both animals? Even your NWT says he did: 'and he seated himself upon them' (Mat 21:7b). Again, my calling this argument “pathetic” stands.
For the verse in full:
And they brought the ass and its colt, and they put upon these THEIR OUTER GARMENTS, and he seated himself upon them. [THAT IS, THE OUTER GARMENTS.]And what where the outer garments on? Both of the animals. So he was still sitting on both animals. Either way he's straddling to animals. You can call it 'pathetic' all day long but its still funny as can be to see Matthew make this blunder.
Quote Obviously, sitting on more than one animal at the same time is ridiculous. But he can sit on more than one garment at the same time. Is this the sort of argumentation you are reduced to?
Nah its just funny. Almost as funny as how hard you try to defend it.
DavidI agree. This is proof he will go to any extreme to try and prove his rediculous points.
But I note neither of you have any good defense for it rather than to call it 'pathetic' or 'ridiculous'. Wow you've convinced me.
TowI think the readers behind the scenes can see that your point is moot.
Obviously, when you compare the scriptures its evident what Matherw meant.
Matt 21:7 NLT
They brought the animals to him and threw their garments over the colt, and he sat on it.New Living? A 'correctors' bible if I ever saw one.
Quote NASB
and brought the donkey and the colt, and laid their coats on them; and He sat on the coats.Coats? Plural, as in both animals. Sheesh.
Quote RSV
they brought the ass and the colt, and put their garments on them, and he sat thereon.Agrees with what i have been saying dude.
Quote Proper exegesis of scriptures is comparing scripture with scripture. Yes that would be the way but Matthew forgot to do that. Maybe you should dig him up and inform him?
Quote Davids point is Unambiguous, yours is laughable.
What a weak ploy to cover the gospel of Matthew and its multitude of blunders.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
