I know I have been writing more than one article responding to Uri, but some of his points I do need to get into depth, especially with the number of NT verses that I need to address.
He brings up Romans 5:18-19 and John 10:14-18:
"The first of the two New Testament cross-referenced passages to this verse,
John 10:14-18, alludes to (the divine) Jesus claiming equality with the Father
and carrying out his ordained mission by laying down his life and being
satisfied, and how he will be satisfied as the shepherd. The second passage,
Romans 5:18-19, conveys the message that mankind, which became infected
with sin by what Adam had done, is justified through the work of Jesus.
These references reflect the Christian mistranslation and misinterpretation of
this verse, which are not consistent with the Hebrew text and its context.
In addition to the fact that the servant cannot be an individual, and contrary to
Christian theology, this verse explains how the people will be vindicated by
the servant's knowledge and not through his suffering, shed blood, and death."
Paul was quoting from the Septiugant, as did many of the NT writers. Even if one believes that Israel is the suffering servant, which in the historical context is possible, but this doesn't refute the Messianic application given by not only Christians, but also by the Rabbis, despite the difference in interpretation we have. The question is, what knowledge did the Messiah have? and who did he give it to? The knowledge that can be spoken of here is having our sins washed away by the blood of the Messiah, as well as the knowledge of God been taken to the Gentile nations.
" The various New Testament cross-references again reflect Christian
misinterpretations of the Hebrew text, some of which have already
demonstrated that certain verses cannot apply to Jesus.
The Hebrew word ללָשָׁ (shaLAL), booty, which appears in this verse, is used
throughout the Hebrew Bible exclusively to describe the spoils of war in a
literal sense, i.e., taking possession of material goods that belong to others.
Attempting to apply the phrase "… and with the mighty he shall share booty …" to
Jesus raises some poignant questions: Did Jesus ever fight in any war?
Whom did he defeat? What were his spoils? With, or of, whom will Jesus be
sharing the spoils of war?
Lastly, since Jesus was allegedly sacrificed and gave up his human body,
how then could he intercede for anyone? After his crucifixion, was he not up in heaven as “one with the Father”? Should not he himself be the one to forgive?"
The texts in particular were Matthew 26:38-39 and 42, Mark 15:28, Luke 22:37, 2 Corinthians 5:21 and Philippians 2:9-11.
In the last point which is very easy, Jesus died and he was resurrected, thus he can intercede for us, and is still doing so to this day. There isn't a problem here. Jesus does have the authority to forgive sins, but how is this an objection to Isaiah 53 I do not understand, simply because I am unfamiliar with this point.
John Fausset-Brown in his commentary speaks on the subject of spoils in his commentary which can be read here: http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/jamieson-fausset-brown/isaiah/isaiah-53.html:
"12. divide--as a conqueror dividing the spoil after a victory ( Psalms 2:8 , Luke 11:22 ).
him--for Him.
with . . . great--HENGSTENBERG translates, "I will give Him the mighty for a portion"; so the Septuagint. But the parallel clause, "with the strong," favors English Version. His triumphs shall be not merely among the few and weak, but among the many and mighty.
spoil . . . strong--( Colossians 2:15 ; compare Proverbs 16:19 ). "With the great; with the mighty," may mean, as a great and mighty hero.
poured out . . . soul--that is, His life, which was considered as residing in the blood ( Leviticus 17:11 , Romans 3:25 ).
numbered with, &c.--not that He was a transgressor, but He was treated as such, when crucified with thieves ( 15:28 , Luke 22:37 ).
made intercession, &c.--This office He began on the cross ( Luke 23:34 ), and now continues in heaven ( Isaiah 59:16 , Hebrews 9:24 , 1 John 2:1 ). Understand because before "He was
numbered . . . He bare . . . made intercession." His meritorious death and intercession are the cause of His ultimate triumph. MAURER, for the parallelism, translates, "He was put on the same footing with the transgressors." But English Version agrees better with the Hebrew, and with the sense and fact as to Christ. MAURER'S translation would make a tautology after "He was numbered with the transgressors"; parallelism does not need so servile a repetition. "He made intercession for," &c. answers to the parallel. "He was numbered with," &c. as effect answers to cause, His intercession for sinners being the effect flowing from His having been numbered with them."
Now let us move on.
"According to the accounts in the Gospels, the disciples never anticipated a dying
Messiah. Peter acknowledges that Jesus was the Messiah:
Matthew 16:16(KJV) – And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of
the living God.
Yet, when Jesus informs his disciples that he will be going to Jerusalem where he
will be killed (Matthew 16:21), this is Peter's response:
Matthew 16:22(KJV) – Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from
thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
Peter did not appear to have had the expectation that Jesus, as the Messiah, was
to fulfill "Isaiah 53". In fact, Jesus taught his disciples about what is to happen to
him:
Mark 9:31(KJV) – For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is
delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall
rise the third day.
The following account in the New Testament describes their reaction:
Mark 9:32(KJV) – But they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him.
These accounts leave no doubt that the disciples did not expect Jesus to fulfill
“Isaiah 53” according to the common Christian interpretation of it as the scenario for
his suffering, crucifixion, and resurrection. Rather, it appears that the common
Christian interpretation of "Isaiah 53" is a later invention by the Church."
Incorrect, The apostles may of been ignorant of Isaiah 53 speaking of Christ before his mission was complete but just because they were ignorant, that doesn't mean they are automatically wrong. Furthermore, when Christ rose from the dead, he opened their minds to understand the scriptures which can be found in Luke 24:44-48 of the NT. I have written a brief article on this issue of the context of that passage which can be found here: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/luke-2444-48-forgery.html
I hope I have addressed the points adequately. Thanks for reading.
Answering Judaism.
No comments:
Post a Comment