Isaiah 53 and Human Sin

[blü 2]

Yeah, I'm with you on that. Just wondered about the 'no tenses in ancient Hebrew'. Is it true or just another lame apologetic?

On matters of ancient Hebrew I'm in the hands of others. A quick look at the net yields me this, from Jeff A. Benner, "author, teacher and administrator", contextually speaking of biblical Hebrew with examples including Genesis:

"Ancient Hebrew language does not use past, present and future tenses for verbs. Instead they use two tenses, one for a complete action (manifested) and one for an incomplete action (unmanifested)."
​

So with biblical Hebrew, I leave it to those expert in biblical Hebrew. When they render the sense by use of English tenses, I begin by trusting them.

 

[Muffled]

I approach these things as I'd approach any other ancient document, to place them in history by looking at what, when where, who and why. In my view the text can't support the Christian claims made of it, since as I said, the Suffering Servant is the nation of Israel and the Suffering Servant has already suffered ─ the depressing events are already in the past. You could say that having looked and been informed by the scholarship, both Jewish and Christian, I see no reason to disagree with it.

So part of me is offended by the transparent falseness of the Christian take.

But your view is different, and works for you, so we may as well leave things there.

I do believe ignorance is bliss but I always hope for people who would rather have the truth.

 

[Muffled]

So he's your savior even when he tells you you're not saved, despite meeting the standards he defined as needed for salvation?

I believe I have learned not to question what God is doing in my life. His wisdom far exceeds mine.

 

[Muffled]

You believe incorrectly. I'm saying God's mind is not like a human mind so our expectation that he can change it whenever he feels like it is more an expression of what WE would do than what God is.

I believe one has to examine the evidence. The evidence appears to be that God does change His mind. God planned to eliminate the Jewish people and start again with Moses but changed his mind after Moses pleaded with Him.

 

[rosends]

I believe one has to examine the evidence. The evidence appears to be that God does change His mind. God planned to eliminate the Jewish people and start again with Moses but changed his mind after Moses pleaded with Him.

Then you are comfortable with a changeable deity. I'm not.

 

[blü 2]

I do believe ignorance is bliss but I always hope for people who would rather have the truth.

When it comes to reading the bible, truth ─ meaning making accurate statements about reality ─ doesn't seem to interest Christians much.

 

[Muffled]

Then you are comfortable with a changeable deity. I'm not.

I don't believe God changes who He is but He does change what He does. I believe what He does affects not what He is.

 

[Muffled]

When it comes to reading the bible, truth ─ meaning making accurate statements about reality ─ doesn't seem to interest Christians much.

I believe that may be true of others but not about me since I have the Truth in me and He speaks through me.

 

[rosends]

I don't believe God changes who He is but He does change what He does. I believe what He does affects not what He is.

You wrote that you believe that God "does change His mind." This is not about what he does, but about his thinking. That's not a type of change I can subscribe to.

 

[blü 2]

I believe that may be true of others but not about me since I have the Truth in me and He speaks through me.

I fear we're unlikely to agree.

I favor the "correspondence" definition of truth ─ that truth is a quality of statements, and a statement is true to the extent that it corresponds with / accurately reflects objective reality.

 

[Muffled]

You wrote that you believe that God "does change His mind." This is not about what he does, but about his thinking. That's not a type of change I can subscribe to.

I believe thinking is one of the things God does.

 

[Muffled]

I fear we're unlikely to agree.

I favor the "correspondence" definition of truth ─ that truth is a quality of statements, and a statement is true to the extent that it corresponds with / accurately reflects objective reality.

I believe then that the truth is not in you.

 

[wellwisher]

There seem to be two ways of understanding Isaiah 53 in the context of sin:

1) Jesus paid for human sin
2) A righteous remnant of Israel/Jewish people atones for sin

Is there a passage(s) in Tanakh that describes how sin may be atoned for without an animal sacrifice (not punishment or repayment but actual atonement)?

Is there a passage(s) in Tanakh that describes how a human may atone for another human's sin?

Thank you.

The suffering servant of Isaiah is about a righteous man being punished, from birth, for fake manmade sins. In other words, if it is deemed to be a sin to wear white after Labor Day, and you do it, you will be punished with peer pressure for your fashion sin. Or if you fail to say the correct pronouns in some schools you will sin against Liberalism and be given detention. These are not a real sins connected to truth and justice. They are fake manmade sins, that allow some people to become abusive ,while pretending to be righteous, relative to their clan.

The suffering servant was a person who did good by the Lord; 10 Commandments, but he was abused, constantly, based on the laws of man and its many artificial sins. He was not with the program and takes the abuse, since he could not compete with city hall. There is no good sacrifice for fake sin, other than to become fake; conformity. That will break God's 1st commandment; idol worship.

Jesus came up with forgiveness of sins, based on the life of the suffering servant. This forgiveness was more connected to forgiving fake sins that humans have created in way excess of the 10 commandments. These fake laws often are designed to creates cliques and exclude others. Jesus reduced the real working law to just love God and love your neighbor. The rest is optional. Now if you forget the correct pronouns or you wear white after Labor Day, do not worry, since your fake sins are forgiven.

In the end, the suffering servant gets his reward. He shares the booty with the strong, because he poured out his life being abused for fake sin, so the many who should have suffered by being abusive, based on their faith in fake sin, would be forgiven. An awareness appears, and in the end, things are made right for the suffering servant.

 

[BilliardsBall]

The suffering servant of Isaiah is about a righteous man being punished, from birth, for fake manmade sins. In other words, if it is deemed to be a sin to wear white after Labor Day, and you do it, you will be punished with peer pressure for your fashion sin. Or if you fail to say the correct pronouns in some schools you will sin against Liberalism and be given detention. These are not a real sins connected to truth and justice. They are fake manmade sins, that allow some people to become abusive ,while pretending to be righteous, relative to their clan.

The suffering servant was a person who did good by the Lord; 10 Commandments, but he was abused, constantly, based on the laws of man and its many artificial sins. He was not with the program and takes the abuse, since he could not compete with city hall. There is no good sacrifice for fake sin, other than to become fake; conformity. That will break God's 1st commandment; idol worship.

Jesus came up with forgiveness of sins, based on the life of the suffering servant. This forgiveness was more connected to forgiving fake sins that humans have created in way excess of the 10 commandments. These fake laws often are designed to creates cliques and exclude others. Jesus reduced the real working law to just love God and love your neighbor. The rest is optional. Now if you forget the correct pronouns or you wear white after Labor Day, do not worry, since your fake sins are forgiven.

In the end, the suffering servant gets his reward. He shares the booty with the strong, because he poured out his life being abused for fake sin, so the many who should have suffered by being abusive, based on their faith in fake sin, would be forgiven. An awareness appears, and in the end, things are made right for the suffering servant.

Luckily, Jesus ROSE FROM THE DEAD, verifying all His truth claims as true.

 

[blü 2]

I believe then that the truth is not in you.

It follows from my definition that truth has both a personal element ─ the speaker ─ and an objective element ─ the facts.

How do you define 'truth'? If I might respectfully note, defining truth doesn't appear to be something believers usually do.

 

[Muffled]

It follows from my definition that truth has both a personal element ─ the speaker ─ and an objective element ─ the facts.

How do you define 'truth'? If I might respectfully note, defining truth doesn't appear to be something believers usually do.

I believe the truth is Jesus.

 

[101G]

There seem to be two ways of understanding Isaiah 53 in the context of sin:

1) Jesus paid for human sin
2) A righteous remnant of Israel/Jewish people atones for sin

there is only ONE way to understand Isaiah chapter 53. #1. Jesus/God in flesh paid for the sins of the world.

A righteous remnant of Israel/Jewish people atones for sin? let's see,
OT First,
Isaiah 41:26 "Who hath declared from the beginning, that we may know? and beforetime, that we may say, He is righteous? yea, there is none that sheweth, yea, there is none that declareth, yea, there is none that heareth your words."

now NT,
Romans 3:10 "As it is written, (see above), There is none righteous, no, not one:" Romans 3:11 "There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God." Romans 3:12 "They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one."

well that took care of any remnant too.

101G.

 

[Firenze]

there is only ONE way to understand Isaiah chapter 53. #1. Jesus/God in flesh paid for the sins of the world.

A righteous remnant of Israel/Jewish people atones for sin? let's see,
OT First,
Isaiah 41:26 "Who hath declared from the beginning, that we may know? and beforetime, that we may say, He is righteous? yea, there is none that sheweth, yea, there is none that declareth, yea, there is none that heareth your words."

now NT,
Romans 3:10 "As it is written, (see above), There is none righteous, no, not one:" Romans 3:11 "There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God." Romans 3:12 "They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one."

well that took care of any remnant too.

101G.

Nonsense. Every Hebrew scholar and most honest Christian scholars understand that the Suffering Servant is the nation of ISRAEL. The fact that Romans eludes to it is just more evidence that the NT committed fraud and lied about the attributes of the Messiah. Decent people would be ashamed to repeat these lies. How about you?

 

[101G]

Nonsense. Every Hebrew scholar and most honest Christian scholars understand that the Suffering Servant is the nation of ISRAEL.

first thanks for the reply, second, THEY ARE WRONG. and yes, Christian scholars do lie. intently or not.

The fact that Romans eludes to it is just more evidence that the NT committed fraud and lied about the attributes of the Messiah.

HOW?

Decent people would be ashamed to repeat these lies. How about you?

101G is Decent person/people, and it's NO LIE. the Lord Jesus, God almighty, in a G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') state in NATURAL FLESH in the ECHAD of the ONE TRUE and LIVING GOD is that suffering servant, the "ARM of God" to suffer unto death for the sins of the WORLD.

101G.

 

[Muffled]

Nonsense. Every Hebrew scholar and most honest Christian scholars understand that the Suffering Servant is the nation of ISRAEL. The fact that Romans eludes to it is just more evidence that the NT committed fraud and lied about the attributes of the Messiah. Decent people would be ashamed to repeat these lies. How about you?

I believe people are quite often guilty of wishful thinking. There is no evidence for the Jewish position.