Prophecies fulfilled by Jesus?

[Poisonshady313]

The first thing that comes to mind is the fact the tense changes at Isaiah 52:13 from plural to singular. That's precisely the time Christian's interpret the prophecy of Jesus to begin and continue through the end of Isaiah 53.

No. I went over this already. The servant mentioned in 52:13 is Israel, whom God has been speaking to throughout the chapter, and 53 is a continuation of the thought.

"Just as multitudes were astonished over you, saying, "His appearance is too marred to be a man's...", so will the many nations exclaim about him... "Who would believe what we have heard?"

The fact that Christians interpret this otherwise is just plain wrong.

Now my question to you is, if "he" is the nation of Israel then who's sins are they suffering wrath for?

I already spoke to this. Not "for", but "because of". The world, for its own seflish purposes, brought suffering upon the Jews. Israel suffered the wrath of the sinful behavior of the nations of the world.

Again, from the Messiahtruth site:

Firstly, saying that the servant is wounded "for our transgressions" can be a little misleading, unless you truly understand the meaning. For this reason, Artscroll’s translation is more accurate in saying, "because of our rebellious sins." One must keep in mind that it is not biblical sound to say that one man can atone for another’s sins. The Torah takes and completely destroys this concept.

It sounds pretty clear that they're being punished for someone elses sins as if it was a punishment they didn't even earn or deserve.

Not "for"... because of. And you're right, the Jews were (and in some cases are still) persecuted for no good reason.

Keep in mind that the idea of human sacrifice for purposes of sin atonement is utterly abhorrent. Human sacrifice for any purpose is utterly abhorrent. This is made clear throughout the Torah, and I have a feeling there's something in Ezekiel 18 that makes it clear that people will not die for the sins of others.


Oh yes, here it is:

20. The soul that sins, it shall die; a son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, and a father shall not bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.


So this bit about the servant dying FOR the transgressions of others couldn't even hope to be correct. It only makes sense when it is understood that Israel suffered because of the sins of the world (including but not limited to killing Jews and exiling them from their homes).

 

[Pegg]

20. The soul that sins, it shall die; a son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, and a father shall not bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.


So this bit about the servant dying FOR the transgressions of others couldn't even hope to be correct. It only makes sense when it is understood that Israel suffered because of the sins of the world (including but not limited to killing Jews and exiling them from their homes).

there is a huge difference between being held accountable for the sins of another and what Jesus did.

Ezekiel shows that each will die for their own sins because they are held accountable to God for their sins. But Jesus was not being held accountable to God for the sins of others. He willingly carried the burden of their sins... God did not make him accountable for them.

 

[Poisonshady313]

But Jesus was not being held accountable to God for the sins of others. He willingly carried the burden of their sins... God did not make him accountable for them.

All very warm and fuzzy sounding... but all absolutely blasphemous, i.e. not in accordance with God's law. And most certainly would not have been called for in a prophecy by Isaiah.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Psalms 49:8 yet a man cannot redeem a brother, he cannot give his ransom to God.

 

[Poisonshady313]

I like the answer given by the Jews for Judaism website, so I'll share it with you:

There is no indication in verse 8 that the servant of the Lord suffers to atone for the sins of others. What this verse states is that he suffers as a result of the misdeeds of others, who treat him unfairly and unjustly. Hence, the conclusion of the verse, in which the enemies of the servant admit responsibility for the cruel treatment they have meted out to him.

This is the confession of the Gentile spokesperson, who now expresses the Gentile realization that it was they and their people who deserved to suffer the humiliation inflicted on the servant of the Lord, as admitted in verses 4-6. In short, the servant's enemies admit that his suffering stemmed from their own sinful imposition of hardships upon him: "From the transgression of my people there has been affliction to them." The servant of the Lord suffers not on behalf of others' sins but because of the things that sinful men do to him.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Jungle... I have a question... the site you provided... did you mean to derive 48 separate prophecies from that website? Or were you just using it for the first one on your list?

 

[Poisonshady313]

And on that list of 48, how many have to do with Isaiah 53?

 

[Poisonshady313]

BTW, Pegg, and anyone else who might be interested, the number 48 I keep tossing around, and indeed the very purpose of this thread, comes from the following exchange Jungle and I had in another thread:

Did you know Jesus fulfilled all 48 prophecies of the Messiah. Including the town he was born, when he was born, the 30 pieces of silver he was sold out for.

I hate to burst your bubble, but read this very closely.


Not even one.

If that felt a little too anticlimactic for you, then here's what we can do.

You open up a new thread on the topic of Jesus' fulfillment of prophecy, and you list them one by one, giving me a chance to respond to each one before you move on to the next, and I'll show you exactly why you're wrong about this 48 prophecies fulfilled stuff.

And do it proper. Give me old testament prophecy and its corresponding new testament fulfillment, provide book, chapter, and verse.

Now you're talkin'

. It's a fun, long debate we're talking about so just give me a bit of time to get the verses. I promise it's coming though

We're still on # 1 out of 48... but if Jungle can tell me how many of the 48 prophecies are from Isaiah 53, we can move along this list that much quicker.

 

[Pegg]

All very warm and fuzzy sounding... but all absolutely blasphemous, i.e. not in accordance with God's law. And most certainly would not have been called for in a prophecy by Isaiah.

Perhaps the law as you see it today, was understood differently back in the first century?

Have you considered ‘the goat for Azazel’ The Jewish Septuagint translators called it a goat ‘For escape’ The goat was a feature of the annual Atonement Day of ancient Israel and according to one Jewish lawyer, the Apostle Paul, when speaking about the sacrificial victims of the Atonement Day, Hebrews 13:11-14 says:
“The bodies of those animals whose blood is taken into the holy place by the high priest for sin are burned up outside the camp. Hence Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered outside the gate. Let us, then, go forth to him outside the camp, bearing the reproach he bore, for we do not have here a city that continues.”

The practice of freeing one goat and making the other the 'scapegoat' continued until the temple was destroyed...so its not like the Torah gave no hint that sin could be carried by one and relieved of the other.
Leviticus 16:5-10 "And [Aaron] shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering. And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which is for himself, and make an atonement for himself, and for his house. And he shall take the two goats, and present them before the LORD at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other lot for the scapegoat. And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the LORD’S lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering. But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness.

And when he hath made an end of reconciling the holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat: And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness: And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Perhaps the law as you see it today, was understood differently back in the first century?

Have you considered ‘the goat for Azazel’ The Jewish Septuagint translators called it a goat ‘For escape’ The goat was a feature of the annual Atonement Day of ancient Israel and according to one Jewish lawyer, the Apostle Paul, when speaking about the sacrificial victims of the Atonement Day, Hebrews 13:11-14 says:
“The bodies of those animals whose blood is taken into the holy place by the high priest for sin are burned up outside the camp. Hence Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered outside the gate. Let us, then, go forth to him outside the camp, bearing the reproach he bore, for we do not have here a city that continues.”

The practice of freeing one goat and making the other the 'scapegoat' continued until the temple was destroyed...so its not like the Torah gave no hint that sin could be carried by one and relieved of the other.
Leviticus 16:5-10 "And [Aaron] shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering. And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which is for himself, and make an atonement for himself, and for his house. And he shall take the two goats, and present them before the LORD at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other lot for the scapegoat. And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the LORD’S lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering. But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness.

And when he hath made an end of reconciling the holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat: And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness: And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.

A man is not a goat. Isaiah would not have prophesied about a man who would be used as a sacrificial animal.

And the goats were never made to suffer at all, much less the sort of way Isaiah describes.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Poison I've yet to find a website that has all 48 conveniently listed. I figured I go down the list of the ones on the website I gave and then worry about the other prophecies.

 

[Pegg]

A man is not a goat. Isaiah would not have prophesied about a man who would be used as a sacrificial animal.

And the goats were never made to suffer at all, much less the sort of way Isaiah describes.

and what did the blood of animals have to do with human sin?

What better way to demonstrate spiritual matters by demonstrating them in physical realities.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Poison I've yet to find a website that has all 48 conveniently listed. I figured I go down the list of the ones on the website I gave and then worry about the other prophecies.

Oh. I thought you already had a list in mind.

Kind of silly to assert the fulfillment of 48 prophecies when you don't have such a list in mind.


Why 48? Why not 45? Or 37? Or 200?

Would you like to just go down the list provided by Pegg?

Or do you actually have 48 but require different sources in order to get to them all?

 

[Poisonshady313]

and what did the blood of animals have to do with human sin?

What better way to demonstrate spiritual matters by demonstrating them in physical realities.

I'm going to leave that one alone. I don't have the knowledge required to explain the whats, wheres, whys, and hows of the animal sacrifice system in Judaism.

I'll just leave it at this: The belief that a person would be put to death to atone for the sins of mankind is utterly abhorrent and has no place in any respectable discussion about messianic prophecy.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Poison, I took this off a Jewish apologetic website. I wanted to show you that I think you're not making as big a deal out of the shift from singular to plural. I got it from the link below. I agree that it's FATAL. It needs to be addressed. I'll return

ANALYSIS​

​

​

​

​

: Isaiah’s switch from him to them (lamo) is a fatal problem for the
Christian claim that it applies to one man, Jesus. Christian missionaries can
plausibly claim that “he” applies to Jesus but they cannot plausibly claim that
“them” applies to Jesus. The New King James and the NIV versions of the
Christian Bible dealt with this monumental problem by merely mistranslating​

“lamo” as him, fraudulently translating the plural as the singular.

JESUS WAS NOT THE "SUFFERING SERVANT” OF ISAIAH 53 ...

 

[-Peacemaker-]

The general Jewish charge is mistranslation and deliberate altering of the translation in order to fit Jesus into it. The more I read from Jewish apologetic websites the more I see this will be the root of basically every debate we have on the individual verses. I've been trained on one Bible, the Christian translation. I can argue verses all day with that resource but you've exposed me to something I've never knew existed: that of a Hebrew version that often has a completely different take on the verses. One thing is certain SOMEBODY isn't interpretting things faithfully. Who that is, I have to find out for myself. I'll be back

 

[Poisonshady313]

Also if there is a rebuttal, it has to be based on a mistranslation of the Hebrew so I'm going to have to dig a little. There are a lot more resources on the translation of the greek NT available to me than there are Hebrew OT resources. Give me time

Let's assume, for a moment, that the word really is "him" instead of "them".

The fact is, the context of the chapter doesn't allow it to be about anything besides the collective nation of Israel.

When you understand that "we" is the gentile nations of the world, and that "he" is Israel, you could rightly understand every instance of the word "he" to be plural. i.e. the people of Israel.

Do I need to get into the various times that Isaiah refers to Israel as the servant?

 

[-Peacemaker-]

Let's assume, for a moment, that the word really is "him" instead of "them".

The fact is, the context of the chapter doesn't allow it to be about anything besides the collective nation of Israel.

When you understand that "we" is the gentile nations of the world, and that "he" is Israel, you could rightly understand every instance of the word "he" to be plural. i.e. the people of Israel.

Do I need to get into the various times that Isaiah refers to Israel as the servant?

It's more than that. It's "Pierced for our transgressions" . It's verse 6 "the Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all". I've you have my translation there's NO WAY the Lord has laid on nation of Israel ANYBODY'S iniquity. It's downright ridiculous to fit the nation of Israel into "him" based on that context

 

[-Peacemaker-]

"By his wounds we are healed" Nobody's wounds heal anybody unless you allow Jesus to fit into it. How can the Gentile nation be healed because of Israel's wounds. How often does the Gentile Nation even speak to Israel like that?
Even your version says

He was pained because of our rebellious sins and oppressed through our iniquities; the​

chastisement upon him was for our benefit, and through his wounds, we were healed

 

[Poisonshady313]

It's more than that. It's "Pierced for our transgressions" . It's verse 6 "the Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all". I've you have my translation there's NO WAY the Lord has laid on nation of Israel ANYBODY'S iniquity. It's downright ridiculous to fit the nation of Israel into "him" based on that context

Do away with the word pierced. It's not there.

"...and the Lord inflicted upon him the iniquity of us all"

Footnote to 53:6 We sinned by inflicting punishment upon Israel. Such oppression is often described as the Lord's punishment (see 10:5, Habakkuk 1:12) for He decreed that it should happen.

This is all the same suffering and oppression spoken of in verse 5. You making this about sin atonement is out of line. It doesn't fit with the context of the passage.

BTW... Isaiah 10:5 Woe to Assyria, the rod of My anger; My wrath is a staff in their hand.

So... 53:6, in simpler terms, "God punished Israel by inflicting our sinfulness on him/them."

"iniquity of us all" = the sinfulness of the nations (consider moments in history like the holocaust, the Spanish Inquisition, and various times when countries harassed, tortured, murdered, and/or exiled their Jewish populations for one reason or another)