The suffering servant of isaiah 53

[Charity]

Ben, my dear friend where are you getting some of your far out interpretation? Paul never claimed any Messiahship..... You are speaking of the same Paul that called himself a servant or slave to Jesus aren't you? That's quite a difference than putting yourself on the same level as the Messiah, don't you think?

 

[Muffled]

Do you know why you attribute the requirements of Isaiah 53 to Jesus? Because of
Paul. If he had not come up with his Christology to hide his - Paul's - Messiahship,
you would never be able to think of Jesus when reading Isaiah 53.

Ben

Prophecy does seem to be better understood after the events take place. I don't remember Paul speaking specifically about this but I do remember that the events described in Isaiah 53 are reported about Jesus in the Gospels.

I am not sure that this is the case. When Paul reached Rome there were already believers there to greet him. If he had never shown up the church might have grown just as well.

 

[Ben Masada]

Prophecy does seem to be better understood after the events take place. I don't remember Paul speaking specifically about this but I do remember that the events described in Isaiah 53 are reported about Jesus in the Gospels.

I am not sure that this is the case. When Paul reached Rome there were already believers there to greet him. If he had never shown up the church might have grown just as well.

Of course, the Gospels would apply to Jesus events described in Isaiah 53. What did you expect? But purely based on assumptions. And assumptions butter no bread.

Yes, the work of the Nazarenes in Rome was blooming as a result of Peter's work. When Paul reached Rome, he was put under house arrest. As his custom was to
fish his converts in the Synagogues of the Nazarenes, also in Rome, he tried to do the same and invited the Nazarenes to come over to hear about gospel. But
when they realized what Paul was up to, they started leaving. (Acts 28:25) Obviously, something was wrong between his gospel and the gospel preached by Peter.

I disagree with you that if Paul had not shown up the "Church" would have grown just as well. What there was in Rome before Paul was not Christianity but a branch
of the Sect of the Nazarenes. The Christian Church started with Paul. (Acts 11:26)

Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

Ben, my dear friend where are you getting some of your far out interpretation? Paul never claimed any Messiahship..... You are speaking of the same Paul that called himself a servant or slave to Jesus aren't you? That's quite a difference than putting yourself on the same level as the Messiah, don't you think?

Charity, Paul, as I said, was a genius. He knew about a few Jews before him from the Galilee, Egypt, Babylon, and some other places who had proclaimed themselves
the Messiah and had failed exactly for that reason: Self-proclaimed Messiahs. In his case, in order not to fail, he proclaimed a dead man the Messiah in order to hide
his own identity. Therefore, by proxy, he did.

Now, who would believe his gospel? For such, he had to build a Christology about Jesus to explain how a man dead for years could still be the Messiah: Because he had
been the son of God and had resurrected, according to his gospel. (II Tim. 2:8)


Charity, Paul was a Greek Jew. Where would he come up with such a Greek idea of a human son of God if not from his Hellenistic education? This was the only way he
found to sell his Christology about Jesus; but between him and himself, he was the real Messiah of Christianity. No wonder he was not allowed to join the Sect of the
Nazarenes. Because the Apostles of Jesus did not believe him. Much less in his story that he had met Jesus on the Road to Damascus. They knew he was either lying or
deranged, because the Apostles knew that Jesus had not gone in the direction of Damascus when he left Israel.


Ben :sorry1:

 

[Charity]

Heneni, Paul, as I said, was a genius. He knew about a few Jews before him from the Galilee, Egypt, Babylon, and some other places who had proclaimed themselves
the Messiah and had failed exactly for that reason: Self-proclaimed Messiahs. In his case, in order not to fail, he proclaimed a dead man the Messiah in order to hide
his own identity. Therefore, by proxy, he did.

Now, who would believe his gospel? For such, he had to build a Christology about Jesus to explain how a man dead for years could still be the Messiah: Because he had
been the son of God and had resurrected, according to his gospel. (II Tim. 2:8)


Heneni, Paul was a Greek Jew. Where would he come up with such a Greek idea of a human son of God if not from his Hellenistic education? This was the only way he
found to sell his Christology about Jesus; but between him and himself, he was the real Messiah of Christianity. No wonder he was not allowed to join the Sect of the
Nazarenes. Because the Apostles of Jesus did not believe him. Much less in his story that he had met Jesus on the Road to Damascus. They knew he was either lying or
deranged, because the Apostles knew that Jesus had not gone in the direction of Damascus when he left Israel.


Ben :sorry1:

Ben I have but one question, why are you calling me Heneni? The name is C-h-a-r-i-t-y Good Glory your as screwed up with us women as you are the scriptures...

 

[Ben Masada]

Ben I have but one question, why are you calling me Heneni? The name is C-h-a-r-i-t-y Good Glory your as screwed up with us women as you are the scriptures...

Oh Charity, now you can beat me dead. I did it again. I think I should take a break
from the Scriptures and dedicate myself a little to women. When a man spends too
long without them he does get screwed up. I apologize again to you.

Ben :sad4:

 

[Charity]

Oh Charity, now you can beat me dead. I did it again. I think I should take a break
from the Scriptures and dedicate myself a little to women. When a man spends too
long without them he does get screwed up. I apologize again to you.

Ben :sad4:

Have you a preference in your beating? Does a leather whip sound like it would work? You might be surprised at what a break would do for you....Gosh Ben I think we are mellowing in our relationship, you even apologized to me....:flirt: I'm getting giddy in the absence of our sarcasm with each other....

 

[Ben Masada]

Have you a preference in your beating? Does a leather whip sound like it would work? You might be surprised at what a break would do for you....Gosh Ben I think we are mellowing in our relationship, you even apologized to me....:flirt: I'm getting giddy in the absence of our sarcasm with each other....

You are right Charity... Charity? Let me see. Yes. We have been taking things too seriously.
I am not masochist but I trust you will be charitable by not being too hard on that beating.


Ben

 

[Charity]

You are right Charity... Charity? Let me see. Yes. We have been taking things too seriously.
I am not masochist but I trust you will be charitable by not being too hard on that beating.


Ben

I promise to be very gentle, you will like it I promise....Sorry I'm being naughty, but it is a change, a lot nicer than harsh words

 

[Ben Masada]

I promise to be very gentle, you will like it I promise....Sorry I'm being naughty, but it is a change, a lot nicer than harsh words

Really! Have we been too harsh with each other? You see? That's what argueing
Religion and Politics takes two to: Harsh communications. But that's okay. Once
out of the arena, we can be even better than friends.

Ben :drool:

 

[Charity]

Really! Have we been too harsh with each other? You see? That's what argueing
Religion and Politics takes two to: Harsh communications. But that's okay. Once
out of the arena, we can be even better than friends.

Ben :drool:

:faint:.....My kind of man.....

 

[Muffled]

Of course, the Gospels would apply to Jesus events described in Isaiah 53. What did you expect? But purely based on assumptions. And assumptions butter no bread.

Yes, the work of the Nazarenes in Rome was blooming as a result of Peter's work. When Paul reached Rome, he was put under house arrest. As his custom was to
fish his converts in the Synagogues of the Nazarenes, also in Rome, he tried to do the same and invited the Nazarenes to come over to hear about gospel. But
when they realized what Paul was up to, they started leaving. (Acts 28:25) Obviously, something was wrong between his gospel and the gospel preached by Peter.

I disagree with you that if Paul had not shown up the "Church" would have grown just as well. What there was in Rome before Paul was not Christianity but a branch
of the Sect of the Nazarenes. The Christian Church started with Paul. (Acts 11:26)

Ben

There is nothing in the text that says that Paul was preaching that they should be called Christians or that Paul had anything to do with it. The text says simply "And it came to pass." There is no derivative sense to that at all. If Paul's presence and the new label for church members seems co-incidental to you there is still no evidence to tie them together.

What is your evidence for that? Some things become pretty obvious like the thirty peices of silver used in betraying Jesus given for a potters field. Granted Isaiah 53 is not that specific and certainly the evidence for Jesus as Messiah is stronger from other prophecies but it doesn't take a genius to see that Jesus fits the bill.

There is no Biblical evidence that Peter was ever in Rome. Granted the church has a myth that Peter was there to found their church in order to promulgate the myth of Apostolic Succession. Most likely the church there was founded by Aquila and Priscilla who were disciples of Paul at Corinth but originally from Italy.

The chiefs of the synagogue that he invited to hear him were not called Nazarenes but Jews. As usual some Jews believed Paul's message and some did not.

The Followers of the Way were listed by Paul as "brethren" and I thought that some of them had come from Rome but It appears they came from the suburbs of Rome: The Market of Appius and The Three Taverns.
Acts 28:13 And from thence we made a circuit, and arrived at Rhegium: and after one day a south wind sprang up, and on the second day we came to Puteoli;
14 where we found brethren, and were entreated to tarry with them seven days: and so we came to Rome.
15 And from thence the brethren, when they heard of us, came to meet us as far as The Market of Appius and The Three Taverns; whom when Paul saw, he thanked God, and took courage.

 

[tomspug]

THE SUFFERING SERVANT OF ISAIAH 53

The whole chapter 53 of Isaiah is about the dramatic epic of two Messiahs: Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David. The drama that culminated in the "death" of Messiah ben Joseph for the sins of Messiah ben David. Properly speaking, Messiah ben Joseph is Ephraim or Israel, the Ten Tribes of the Northern Kingdom. And Messiah ben David is Judah, the Southern Kingdom.

The sins of Judah had filled the Divine cup, and in God's judgment, the day had arrived for the removal of Judah. (Isa. 9:8) But according to I Kings 11:36, God had promised David that Judah, whose Tribe he had come from, would stay forever as a Lamp in Jerusalem. Therefore, according to Isaiah 9:8, the final judgment that was supposed to come to Judah fell upon Israel instead, and Messiah ben Joseph had to go instead of Judah.

But Isaiah says in 53:9 that the Suffering Servant was without guile, and sinless. That's exactly what Israel was: Pure of the sins he died for, since they were the sins of Judah and not his. Messiah ben Joseph therefore, did not die for his sins but for the sins of Messiah ben David. Therefore, Israel was removed because of the sins of another. He was pierced so to speak, by the sins of Judah. The sacrifice of Israel or Messiah ben Joseph meant the salvation of Judah or Messiah ben David. That's why Zechariah in 12:10 says that they (Judah) shall look upon him (Israel) whom they (Judah) had pierced with their sins, and mourn for him (Israel).

Now, let me explain by way of an analogy how Israel or Messiah ben Joseph who is the Suffering Servant died innocently of the sins of Judah or Messiah ben David:
"A" and "B". "A" has committed a crime punishable with death, and "B", by mistake was condemned for that crime. It doesn't matter how evil is "B" in his life or how bad are his sins. The point is that he was condemned to die for the crime of "A". Therefore "B" was killed innocent and pure of the crimes and sins of "A". "A" got saved by the death of "B". So, "B" was the Suffering Servant that brought salvation to "A". Now matching the analogy to reality, "A" was Judah that pierced "B" with his crimes and sins.

Now, with the removal of Messiah ben Joseph, Messiah be David occupied the place of the Suffering Servant with reference to the rest of Mankind because of God's promise to Noah that humanity would never be destroyed again in an universal manner. (Gen. 8:21) The People-redeemer was the pledge and on his way in the near future with the choice of Abraham through Isaac. That's what sustains the world and allows it to keep going.

Ben )(

OK, am I the only one seeing the obvious Christ analogy here? Suffering Servant A = Israel. Suffering Servant B...

 

[Ben Masada]

OK, am I the only one seeing the obvious Christ analogy here? Suffering Servant A = Israel. Suffering Servant B...

Suffering Servant B = Judah. That's the one that survived.

Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

There is nothing in the text that says that Paul was preaching that they should be called Christians or that Paul had anything to do with it. The text says simply "And it came to pass." There is no derivative sense to that at all. If Paul's presence and the new label for church members seems co-incidental to you there is still no evidence to tie them together.

What is your evidence for that? Some things become pretty obvious like the thirty peices of silver used in betraying Jesus given for a potters field. Granted Isaiah 53 is not that specific and certainly the evidence for Jesus as Messiah is stronger from other prophecies but it doesn't take a genius to see that Jesus fits the bill.

There is no Biblical evidence that Peter was ever in Rome. Granted the church has a myth that Peter was there to found their church in order to promulgate the myth of Apostolic Succession. Most likely the church there was founded by Aquila and Priscilla who were disciples of Paul at Corinth but originally from Italy.

The chiefs of the synagogue that he invited to hear him were not called Nazarenes but Jews. As usual some Jews believed Paul's message and some did not.

The Followers of the Way were listed by Paul as "brethren" and I thought that some of them had come from Rome but It appears they came from the suburbs of Rome: The Market of Appius and The Three Taverns.
Acts 28:13 And from thence we made a circuit, and arrived at Rhegium: and after one day a south wind sprang up, and on the second day we came to Puteoli;
14 where we found brethren, and were entreated to tarry with them seven days: and so we came to Rome.
15 And from thence the brethren, when they heard of us, came to meet us as far as The Market of Appius and The Three Taverns; whom when Paul saw, he thanked God, and took courage.

Paul was in Tarsus when Barnabas was nominated by the Headquarters of the Nazarenes in Jerusalem to go and take charge of the Nazarene Cause in Antioch.
Then, Barnabas decided to go to Tarsus after Paul and invite him to work together because they had always been good friends from yourth. The text says that
after a year the disciples in that Synagogue started being called Christians because Paul would preach that Jesus was Christ. Read Acts 11:26. Why were they
not called Christians before? Because it's only obvious that the Nazarenes never preached about Jesus as Christ.


About those thirty pieces of silver for the betraying of Jesus never happened. It was an interpolation by the writer of the Gospel as an antisemitic attempt to
accuse the Jews with the death of Jesus. Just like the slaughtering of the innocent children by Herod with the intent to catch Jesus. It never happened.
The purpose was to match Jesus with that Prophet like Moses of Deuteronomy 18:15.


Regarding Biblical evidence for Peter in Rome, please read I Peter 5:13, when Peter sends greetings from Rome. The New Living version of the Bible mentions Rome,
and the KJV mentions Babylon, which was the name common among the Nazarenes for Rome.


The Nazarenes were called simply Jews because there was no difference between them and main stream Judaism as they would make converts even among the Pharisees.
(Acts 21:20)


Yes, I know that the "Followers of the Way" were listed by Paul as brethrens but before or during the process when Paul was dealing with them in terms of conversion.
But the same brethrens who were sent by James in Judea to recover the Nazarenes Synagogues taken over by Paul, this would call them false brethren and Judaizers.
(Acts 15:1; Gal. 2:4)

Ben

 

[Charity]

Ben Sweetie, why do you think the 30 pieces of silver given to Judas never happened? Would it have been against Jewish law to have done this? If it did happen I still never really felt like the Jewish people were responsible for the death of Jesus. I always thought that ever thing just worked according to God's plan.
I do see it as strange that Jesus appeared to go against so much of the Jewish tradition yet say that he came not to change the law, but that it might be fulfilled. I could see where they would consider him to be a heretic.

 

[AK4]

Ben, i will show how Jesus is the suffering servant from the foundation of the world hopefully later today if not it will be tomorrow. But will you see it? I doubt it.

 

[Ben Masada]

Ben Sweetie, why do you think the 30 pieces of silver given to Judas never happened? Would it have been against Jewish law to have done this? If it did happen I still never really felt like the Jewish people were responsible for the death of Jesus. I always thought that ever thing just worked according to God's plan.
I do see it as strange that Jesus appeared to go against so much of the Jewish tradition yet say that he came not to change the law, but that it might be fulfilled. I could see where they would consider him to be a heretic.

Charity, when the writers of the NT wrote the gospels, they had the Tanach before them to plagiarize at their hearts content.
Then, they copied the case of Joseph being sold by his brothers, and the innocent children being slaughtered in Egypt in order to catch Moses.
You find hard to catch these things because you are too sweet and not cunny enough. Sometimes we have to be a little malicious to catch the crook at his malice.

Ben :sorry1:

 

[Ben Masada]

Ben, i will show how Jesus is the suffering servant from the foundation of the world hopefully later today if not it will be tomorrow. But will you see it? I doubt it.

I can hardly wait!

Ben :clap

 

[tomspug]

Suffering Servant B = Judah. That's the one that survived.

Ben

It also is a really obvious metaphor for the relationship between Jesus Christ and the world (which was included in Israel's covenant). Now, MAYBE everything that happened to Jesus was simply made up to parallel everything you just drew out of that passage. But I actually find that you have incredibly increased my understanding of the relationship between Messianic prophecy and Christianity.