David Young
Member
The standard interpretation is that it is speaking about Israel, the people, the prophets and all who kept to the Torah despite all the hardships they had faced and were going to face in the future.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Messiah: Quality not quantity
- Thread starter David Young
- Start date
Sand Dancer
Currently catless
Ah, yes, I do agree with that.
The servant is explicitly identified as Israel over and over in the book.
kaninchen
Member
The 'proof texts' problem is only really just a Christian problem - once it was decided that a man could be God a narrative needed to be established in order to prove it to be the case. Hence, after an awful lot of text mining, Jesus had an amazing ability, as Messiah, to fulfil 'prophesies' that can be arrived at by text manipulation rather than real world events that would surround the arrival of Messiah.
I've always found typology a very strange kind of exegesis and still cannot understand it. It's very easy to start seeing it everywhere. I think my main issue is with prophecies quoted out of context in the Christian writings or just misquoted, as Paul does at times. The explanation is they're using the LXX, but that doesn't sit right with me either.
kaninchen
Member
Long ago, I decided that the disadvantage one had in discussing religion with 'evangelising' Christians is that they expect you to operate within a framework that is entirely theirs - in other words, for the purposes of argument, you are expected to take the NT as a candidate 'scripture' which they will proceed to 'prove' by cascading proof texts which you're expected to accept or attempt to disprove.
Meanwhile, for those of us for whom the NT is a more, or less, interesting piece of literature/pious fiction, it's an awful lot of 'lit crit' effort to ceaselessly repetitive purpose.
For me, it's more interesting to understand things like "why is this piece of text here, what purpose did the author have in mind?"
Yup, when Mark mentions toiveling I was interested in that and the scenes that followed. It's that stuff that is intruiging.
74x12
Well-Known Member
Okay so can you show a pattern in the Tanakh that gentile kings are regarded as sheep as in Isaiah 53:6 going astray from God? Because I can only find one verse (Psalm 49:14) that seems to refer to both Jews and gentiles who die like sheep die because they aren't regarding God's ways but that's about it.
The rest of the time it's always Israelites that are referred to as sheep either going astray or being led by God, Moses, Aaron or kings of Israel. You can find that over and over in prophecy, Psalms etc.
The gentile kings themselves are pictured more like predators such as lions who come to attack and scatter the sheep like in Jeremiah 50:17. But it is always God that gathers the sheep together again after they're scattered. (Ezekiel 34:12)
So in that light I can only interpret Isaiah 53:6 as being about Israel that is scattered and Israel's sins that are laid on "him".
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
Finally, since they did go "astray" that implies at one time they were following God. So this again points to Israel rather than gentiles who haven't known God.
Even in the Christian new Testament gentiles are not really called sheep unless they repent and are "grafted" into the tree of Israel. Becoming Jews themselves in a certain since of meaning. Then they can be sheep of God.
So as far as I'm concerned the symbolism of sheep going astray is always about Israel.
kaninchen
Member
Once you start looking at the NT as a 'construct' and a 'means to an end' rather than getting bogged down in 'scripture/reportage' framing, it becomes more interesting, I think.
rosends
Well-Known Member
Instead of looking for patterns, why not look at the actual text and the pronouns.
Isaiah (what people call) 52 starts with God speaking in the first person and then talking about his people in the third person (“my people” 4 times). Then it talks of Israel, leaving bondage, in the first person (our God) and quickly shifts to God’s command about the people (the vessels, plural, of the Lord). God then makes an announcement about the people, speaking of them in the middle of “52” as “my servant”…
“Indeed, My servant shall prosper, [so the people are the “my servant”]
Be exalted and raised to great heights.
Just as the many were appalled at him— [the “him” others were appalled at]
So marred was his appearance, unlike that of man,
His form, beyond human semblance—
Just so he shall startle many nations.
Kings shall be silenced because of him, [note, the kings of other nations]
For they shall see what has not been told them, [“they” is those kings]
Shall behold what they never have heard.” [“they” react to what they have never seen]
1“Who can believe what we have heard? [“we” starts the reaction of the kings]
Upon whom has the arm of the LORD--a been revealed?
2For he has grown, by His favor, like a tree crown, [the kings look at the “he” – the people]
Like a tree trunk out of arid ground.
He had no form or beauty, that we should look at him: [more singular speaking about the people]
No charm, that we should find him pleasing.
3He was despised, shunned by men, [the kings keep talking about “him]
A man of suffering, familiar with disease.
As one who hid his face from us, [the “us” continues to be the kings]
He was despised, we held him of no account. ["we" didn't care that he suffered]
4Yet it was our sickness that he was bearing, [the sickness/sins of the kings ("our") that the people bore]
Our suffering that he endured. [“our” is still the first person reaction of the kings]
We accounted him plagued,
Smitten and afflicted by God;
5But he was wounded because of our sins, [the kings realize that Israel suffered because of them]
Crushed because of our iniquities. [“our” being the kings and their nations]
He bore the chastisement that made us whole, [“we” (kings and nations) thrived because of him/Israel]
And by his bruises we were healed.
6We all went astray like sheep, [“we” sinned but…]
Each going his own way;
And the LORD visited upon him [God put our/kings’ punishment in him/Israel]
The guilt of all of us.”
7He was maltreated, yet he was submissive, [He/Israel suffered through it]
He did not open his mouth;
Like a sheep being led to slaughter,
Like a ewe, dumb before those who shear her,
He did not open his mouth.
8By oppressive judgment he was taken away,
Who could describe his abode?
For he was cut off from the land of the living
Through the sin of my people, who deserved the punishment. [the kings see that their people’s sins caused it]
9And his grave was set among the wicked,
And with the rich, in his death
Though he had done no injustice [Israel hadn’t done wrong]
And had spoken no falsehood.
10But the LORD chose to crush him by disease, [but God crushed Israel – same pronoun]
It continues like that. If we start with “my servant” as Israel (which is explicitly stated in the text) then the rest of the pronouns fall into place. Again – this isn’t the thread for it. I don’t wish to derail someone’s thread and this has been written up in many other places, but text should be taken as a whole, not by snipping three verses from the middle.
DNB
Christian
That's my take on the matter. Give them only an inch, and they'll take it a mile, convinced that they've assessed the entire issue. And, like you said, with so much audacity that they dare to call the theists absurd. It's true what is written, '...the fool says in his heart...'
DNB
Christian
Sorry, just for brevity, here's the list at the top of my head (I didn't read Wikipedia)
T = Torah (the Law - 1st 5 Books of Moses)
N = Nev'im (the Prophets - Latter, Former (major, minor)
K = Ketuvim (the Writings)
Nothing left really.
Brian2
Veteran Member
Usually Protestant Churches use the same books in the OT as the Jews use in the Tanakh.
The Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches use additional books, the Apocrypha in their canon.
These books come from the time between the last books that the Jews use and the time of Jesus and I think they are in the LXX.
Apocrypha - Wikipedia
Brian2
Veteran Member
Yes the text should be taken as a whole but when we do look at the text in parts it is plain to me that it might be about Israel in a non literal way but is about Jesus in a literal way.
There have been Jews also who have seen it as Messianic and about a Messiah suffering in atonement for sins.
Well, I have long known what the Apocrypha is, hence making the post you replied to. My knowledge on the Apocrypha itself is far from limited to Wikipedia. My knowledge on Christian canons is more limited, mostly because I never saw (and still don't) any importance in that particular subject.
rosends
Well-Known Member
But it is about Israel in a literal way in that it names the people explicitly. Jesus, who is not in the text, has to be read in by taking only parts and inferring, so if anything it would be about Jesus in a non-literal way.
If we start snipping it so that we find what we are looking for, then we could make the argument that it is about anyone. Those Jewish commentators who see it as a messianic reference do not deny that it is about the people primarily.