Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Isaiah 53 speaks about ISRAEL, and not about the messiah.
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 2260 days)
Posts: 288
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 16 of 176 (709052)
10-20-2013 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by jaywill
10-19-2013 10:42 PM


Re: The Focus is Chapter 53
And Israel is the most frequent called the servant of God.
The issue is not how frequently Israel is called the servant of God.
This does not negate that Isaiah and Cyrus the king of Persia are ALSO refered to God's servant.
Bs'd
And that does not negate the fact that the messiah is NEVER called the servant of God, not in Isaiah, and not in the rest of the Tanach.
How can God be His own servant??
And Isaiah 53 is an exception to the many places where Israel is the servant of God.
A statement for which you can not provide the slightest proof.
Wrong. That is an article of faith, without the slightest proof in the Tanach.
Of course it is a matter of faith. Contrary to what Isaiah 53:1 says, God HAS granted mercy that SOME have believed the report.
You are simply among those who have no believed the report because of no faith -
At least you admit that there is no proof whatsoever that JC is the servant.
And no, I have no faith in JC, just like I have no faith in Muhammed, (and you neither) and no faith in David Koresh.
The Muslims believe that the suffering servant is Muhammed. You can believe anything you want, also that you are abduct by little green men.
But is really ridiculous is that you would regard Israel as being an offering for sin on behalf of Israel. That is contrary to the whole tone of a substitutionary offering for sin provided by One who is innocent and righteous.
There is no "substitutionary offering" in Isaiah 53. What there is there is that Israel is punished for the sins of Israel. As usual. Like in all the rest of the Tanach.
The concept that God must let Himself be murdered by His creatures before He can forgive them THAT is totally ridiculous.
The proof for the servant being Israel is overwhelming.
No it is not overwhelming. And I will continue with reasons that Jesus Christ is by far the more logical interpretation of the prophecy of chapter 53.
Yes it is overwhelming. I'll repeat: We have the fact that Israel is many times called the servant of God in Isaiah. The messiah never.
We have the context speaking about Israel. The messiah is nowhere to be found in the context.
The concept that Israel suffers for the sins of Israel is all over the Tanach.
The concept of God Himself suffering for the sins of Israel is NOWHERE to be found in the Tanach.
Just doesn't exist.
So everything points to Israel.
NOTHING to the messiah.
"By the knowledge of Him, the righteous One, My Servant, will make the manuy righteous. And He will bear their iniquities." (v.11)
The bearing One Himself has to be without sins.
Please tell me where that is written in the Tanach. You are making things up which are nowhere in the Tanach.
Rather a righteous Messiah bearing the sins of many that by knowledge of Him they might be justified and made righteous, fits the facts of the new covenant.
The concept that the messiah must suffer and die in order to bear and erase the sins of the world just doesn't exist in the Tanach.
It is an excuse for your messiah not accomplishing anything, for him not fulfilling the messianic prophecies, and being killed like an ordinary criminal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by jaywill, posted 10-19-2013 10:42 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Eliyahu, posted 10-20-2013 12:11 AM Eliyahu has not replied
 Message 18 by GDR, posted 10-20-2013 7:59 AM Eliyahu has not replied
 Message 20 by jaywill, posted 10-20-2013 3:55 PM Eliyahu has replied

  
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 2260 days)
Posts: 288
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 17 of 176 (709053)
10-20-2013 12:11 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Eliyahu
10-20-2013 12:08 AM


Isaiah 53 speaks about ISRAEL
Bs'd
Somebody please explain to me: When Isaiah speaks about "the servant of God", is he then speaking about God Himself, or about somebody else??

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Eliyahu, posted 10-20-2013 12:08 AM Eliyahu has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 18 of 176 (709060)
10-20-2013 7:59 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Eliyahu
10-20-2013 12:08 AM


Eliyahu writes:
And that does not negate the fact that the messiah is NEVER called the servant of God, not in Isaiah, and not in the rest of the Tanach.
How can God be His own servant??
Good question but we can ask the same sort of question about the NT as well. How does Jesus pray to Himself? Jesus even says that the Father is greater than He. If we look at Jesus as being the incarnate Word of God that has existed eternally then it comes together as Jesus being wholly God and wholly man in a Trinitarian sense.
I also think that it is a mistake for Christians to look for messianic proof texts in the OT. You are right that the writers of the OT probably didn’t look at it that way and that Israel was to be the servant of God.
The thing though is if we go back to the original Abrahamic promise it was to be for the nations and not just for Israel. As we can see in the Scriptures that wasn’t happening. It became all about Israel and not about the world.
The OT is a narrative that appears to be going somewhere and pointing to something. It is my belief that the narrative that runs throughout the Hebrew Scriptures in total pointed to Jesus. It is the story of God reaching out and touching the hearts and minds of His people. The laws become a fore shadowing or sign post of God’s perfect law of love which is to be written on our hearts. The Temple was a foreshadowing of the idea that our hearts were to become the Temple of God. The psalms tell of the pain and the suffering and about God returning to Zion. The prophets with all of their humanness, sometimes getting it right and sometimes wrong, encapsulate all of that.
The question then becomes about where is the narrative leading. From a Jewish perspective I suppose that it is still a case of waiting for the messiah and that it just hasn’t happened yet. I would point out that the last of the Jewish Scriptures ended about 2000 years ago. I suppose that you could say that present day Israel is a fulfillment of the prophesies, but frankly it doesn’t look like that to me. Israel exists by a political decision made by gentile nations. Israel is a very secular state.
However, keeping the original Abrahamic promise that it was to be for all nations, let us look at the idea of Jesus being the climax of that part of the narrative. Just about everything that Jesus as a devout Jew taught referred back to the Hebrew Scriptures. I think that Jesus tied together the idea of the coming messiah together with the theme that Yahweh would return to Zion. As messiah He led His people against the enemy, except that the enemy wasn’t just Rome but the evil the stood behind Rome. The enemy was fought with love and not with swords. He embodied Yhaweh’s return by being something of a counter Temple movement in that He could forgive sin and that He desired mercy, not sacrifice.
Jesus’ message is a Kingdom message. His Kingdom was to for the world but not of the world. We can see that the Christian church, with all of its human failings has spread to all nations as per the Abrahamic promise. Even with all of the evil done in the name of the church there has also been countless sacrificial acts of mercy and love done in the name of the church. Jesus taught that the laws were actually pointing to a simpler but more profound law in that it is all about love, and that it is all about that law being of the heart so that it becomes our natural habit.
I don’t believe however that Jesus ever envisioned that He was establishing a movement or church that would no longer be considered Jewish. I think that Christians should realize the Jewishness of our faith and the ties that bind us. Jesus was a devout Jew. I also think that we should truly pay attention to His message that in the end we are called to be one nation bound together by our care for one another.
So my point is that the Hebrew Scriptures in total were pointing to a conclusion and that Jesus was the fulfillment of that narrative. However, all of this hangs on the question of whether or not the resurrection is an actual historical event. If Jesus was not resurrected then Christianity is just an empty shell.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Eliyahu, posted 10-20-2013 12:08 AM Eliyahu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by arachnophilia, posted 12-31-2013 8:41 PM GDR has replied
 Message 60 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-17-2014 7:30 AM GDR has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 19 of 176 (709080)
10-20-2013 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Eliyahu
10-19-2013 11:51 PM


Re: The Focus is Chapter 53
Behold, my servant shall act wisely; You believe this is JC. You believe JC is god. So God is his own servant?
You are shifting the discussion now to the triune nature of God. God's nature is exceedingly mysterious.
In the book of Zechariah you have God sending God.
You have God as both the Sender and the Sent One.
This occurs in Zechariah chapter 2.
"For thus says Jehovah of hosts," (v.8a)
Jehovah is the speaker.
"After the glory He has sent Me against the nations which plunder you; ..." (v.8b)
Jehovah is the Sent One.
" For he who touches you touches the pupil of His eye. (v.8c)
Jehovah is the speaker.
"For I am waving now My hand over them, .." (v.9a)
Jehovah is the Sent One waving His hand as well as the speaker.
"and they will be plunder for those who served them;
and you will know that Jehovah of hosts has sent Me." (v.9b)

They will know that Jehovah of hosts has sent Jehovah of hosts.
"Give a ringing shout and rejoice, O daughter of Zion, for now I am coming ..." (v.10a)
Jehovah of hosts the speaker is coming.
" and I will dwell in your midst, declares Jehovah " (v.10b)
Jehovah the declarer will dwell in their midst.
" And many nations will join themselves to Jehovah in that day and will become My people ..." (v.10c)
Nations join themselves to Jehovah the speaker who will dwelling in the midst.
" and will know that Jehovah of hosts has sent Me to you." (v.10c)
Jehovah of hosts is both the sender and the one sent.
God therefore sends God. Jehovah God sends and they shall know that the One sent has been sent BY Jehovah of hosts.
Zechariah 2:8-10 is therefore one of the mysterious passages in the Tanach revealing the mysterious nature of God.
And in other places Jehovah and the Angel of Jehovah are virtually synonymous and their titles are used interchangeably.
Now not ALL the aspects of God are revealed in one passage.
And not all the aspects are revealed in one passage.
But when all the passages are considered together we see a triune God.
Therefore as eternal life He is not only endless in duration but limitless in other ways as well.
The Suffering Servant's deity is not that much stressed in Isaiah 53. However His death and resurrection is definitely seen.
DEATH - Isaiah 53:8b - " ... He was cut off from the land of the LIVING. And they assigned His GRAVE with the wicked, But with a rich man in HIS DEATH."
RESURRECTION - "He will see the fruit of the travail of His soul, And He will be satisfied " (v.11)
" Therefore I will divide to Him a portion with the Great, and He will divide the spoil with the Strong." (v.12a)
Death and Resurrection are indicate. And " the Great " is God. And "the Strong" is also God.
The eternal Great God and the eternal Strong God will divide the portion and the spoil with His Servant who is Righteous.
This God will do "Because He poured out His life [Lit soul] unto DEATH And was numbered with the transgressors, Yet He alone bore the sin of many and interceded for the transgressor." (v.12c)
Jesus Christ the Son of God and the Righteous One was guiltless. But he was erroneously numbered with the transgressors of which He was NOT. But in His death He bore alone the sin of the world. And He also interceded for their forgiveness -
" ... there they crucified Him ... And Jesus said, Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." (Luke 23:33,34)
The Righteous Suffering Messiah interceded for the sinners. And because of His intercession many are forgiven who believe into Him -
"By the knowledge of Him, the righteous One, My Servant, will make the many righteous, And He will bear their iniquities." (Isa. 53:11b)
He is resurrected from the dead for His act of obedience to the will of God. And with the Strong and Great eternal God His Father, the Son of God conquers and divides the spoil of the universe with Him as King of kings and Lord of lords.
I will continue below.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Eliyahu, posted 10-19-2013 11:51 PM Eliyahu has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 20 of 176 (709081)
10-20-2013 3:55 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Eliyahu
10-20-2013 12:08 AM


Re: The Focus is Chapter 53
When God speaks about "His servant", is God then speaking about himself or about somebody else?
He is speaking of One of the "Us" as in Genesis He said "Let US make man in Our image."
Then it says that "God created man in His own image"
God became incarnated as a man. And as the Father took up the emblem of Authority the Son took up the emblem of perfect Submission to Authority.
In such He was one of us - a genuine man yet God Himself incarnate. Isaiah 9:6 says that He is called WONDERFUL. We can see why.
Hint: A three year old can come up with the right answer.
Unless you turn and become as little children you will not enter the kingdom of God, says the Lord Jesus.
I don't think He meant that one has to become conversant in the Trinity.
I do think He means to recognize that deity of Christ and that He is the Lord.
Paul instructions about being saved is not that a man must be able to explain the Trinity. Rather it is the confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead. To that I would give immediate attention. There will always be mysterious aspects of the Bible that are difficult to explain. But we can confess Jesus as Lord and believe God raised Him from the dead -even down to a three year old -
"That if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart there is believing unto righteousness, and with the mouth there is confession unto salvation.
For the Scripture says, "Everyone who believes on Hims shall not be put to shame." "(Romans 10:9-11)
his appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance, and his form beyond that of the children of mankind
When did that happen to JC?
He was tortured horribly.
a man of sorrows, and acquainted with sickness When exactly was JC sick?
Being well acquainted with GRIEF means His own as well as others.
My English version says GRIEF not sickness in verse 3.
Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Wasn’t JC a very popular preacher who entered Jerusalem amongst a big crowd of followers?
That was after He began His ministry after 30 YEARS of just blending in with everyone else in Nazareth.
Though He was God incarnate as a man He made no particular stir. He simply lived a perfect human life for 30 years.
At the age of 30 He did begin His public ministry which attracted attention.
Isaiah 53 is not intended to be an exhaustive biography of Jesus in every yearly detail.
And even if it DID refer to Israel it would be unreasonable to expect within 12 verses EVERYTHING concerning the history of Israel would be covered in detail. To demand all details in the case of Jesus but generalize in the case of Israel would be to have a double standard.
Cont. latter
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Eliyahu, posted 10-20-2013 12:08 AM Eliyahu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Eliyahu, posted 12-30-2013 11:49 PM jaywill has not replied
 Message 24 by arachnophilia, posted 12-31-2013 8:29 PM jaywill has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 21 of 176 (709082)
10-20-2013 4:15 PM


He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth;
He didn’t open his mouth? "When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby struck him in the face. "Is this the way you answer the high priest?" he demanded. "If I said something wrong," Jesus replied, "testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?" John 18:22
I count this as your grasping at straws. This is seeking a little technicality to disprove a great prophecy.
For the most part Christ opened not His mouth. We are told that He could have called twelve legions of angels to protect and defend Him.
When he was hanging at the cross he accused God, that is himself; he cried out: Why did I forsake myself?
Your are grasping at straws. Beside you hypocritically display a double standard. You do not object to the prophecy pertaining to Israel when the people of Israel opened their mouths in protest PLENTY.
If the issues you nit - pick disqualify Christ as the Suffering Servant they would also disqualify Israel as the interpretation.
I don't think further comment on this line of reasoning is necessary.
This is a very clear proof it speaks about the Jewish people being punished for their own sins. The plague was upon THEM. Plural. So this is not about a singular person, so this is not about the messiah.
There is no argument that Israel has suffered. Suffering alone is not the most significant aspect of the prophecy. Rather that one who was righteous and without transgression bore those of others. This could not be said about Israel.
Neither is death and resurrection yet applicable to Israel but it is applicable to Jesus the Son of God.
Besides the Bible says that NO MAN can pay to God the ransom for his brother's soul that he should continue to live forever.
Psalm 49:7 - "None can by any means redeem his brother or give to God the ransom for him ( For the redemption of their soul is costly and must be given up forever ) that he would yet live always and not see corruption."
Sinners cannot redeem sinners before God.
Sinners cannot offer to God a ransom to redeem another sinner.
The price is too costly. Jesus Christ had the value before God to do so.
He can redeem man unto eternal life.
But Israel as sinners cannot redeem themselves and cannot pay the ransom for their own souls. The sacrifice of Jesus though has eternal efficacy and can redeem Israelites and all men unto eternal life (John 3:16)
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

  
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 2260 days)
Posts: 288
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 22 of 176 (714996)
12-30-2013 11:49 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by jaywill
10-20-2013 3:55 PM


Re: The Focus is Chapter 53
He is speaking of One of the "Us" as in Genesis He said "Let US make man in Our image."
Then it says that "God created man in His own image"
Bs'd
Genesis 1:26; "Let us make man" If anybody finds in a text the word "us", would any normal person assume that it refers to one person with a multi-personality disorder? Of course not.
But why then, when Christians see the word "us" in the Bible, do they think that?
Gen 1:26 is used as a 'proof' that there is more than one God, or one God who is not one, eventhough the Bible clearly teaches that there is only one God who is one. and despite the fact that there are several other valid explanations for the plural word "us". One explanation is that it is a majestic plural as used by kings. Another possible explanation is that God was talking to the angels.
Some Christians try to refute the last argument by saying that the angels didn't create. They point to Genesis 1:1; "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." They say: 'God was the creator, and not the angels.' However, it is a given in Jewish law that an emissary is equal to the one who sends him. When a Jewish man marries a woman through an agent, the legal effect is the same as when he marries her personally. A good Biblical example of this is to be found in Genesis 19 where is spoken about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. God sent two angels to destroy the cities, the angels said to Lot in verse 13: "For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the LORD, and the LORD has sent us to destroy it." Upon this Lot says to his sons in law: "Up, get out of this place; for the LORD is about to destroy the city." Lot didn't say: "The angels are going to destroy the city" He said: "The LORD (Y-H-W-H in the Hebrew text) is going to destroy the city". And in verse 29 it is written: "So it was that, when God destroyed the cities of the valley...." So the angels were send by God to destroy the cities, but God is considered to be the one who did it, because He was the one who sent them. So why shouldn't the same hold true for the creation?
But one way or the other, no plural created man. Look in Genesis 5:1; "When God created man ..." In Hebrew this is: "bara Elohiem adam" Here the verb "to create", in Hebrew "bara", is in the singular, indicating clearly that Elohiem who created man is one. The same goes for the very first verse of the Bible: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." The word created is here written in the singular; it says "bara". If God was a plural, it should have been "baru".
BUT, back to the pronouns, Y-H-W-H says the following:
Isaiah 44:6 This is what Y-H-W-H says- Israel's King and Redeemer, Y-H-W-H Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.
It says "I" am Y-H-W-H. And, as we all know, "I" is singular, and not plural, and therefore no three persons in Y-H-W-H. Otherwise He would have said: "WE are Y-H-W-H."
But no such thing, God says: "I am Y-H-W-H".
No trinity.
Another example of a pronoun:
Nehemiah 9:6 You alone are Y-H-W-H.
As we see, it says that YOU, in the Hebrew singular, not plural are Y-H-W-H.
Again, no YOU, plural, are Y-H-W-H, but YOU singular, are Y-H-W-H.
So no three persons in God.
Another one:
Isaiah 44:6 This is what Y-H-W-H says- Israel's King and Redeemer, Y-H-W-H Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.
Clear what? It doesn't say: This is what Y-H-W-H says- Israel's King and Redeemer, Y-H-W-H Almighty: WE are the first and WE are the last; apart from US there is no God.
No such a thing, it is all SINGULAR.
Another one:
Joel 2:27 Then you will know that I am in Israel, that I am Y-H-W-H your God, and that there is no other;
Again, God says: "I am Y-H-W-H", and not "WE are Y-H-W-H" Such a thing simply doesn't exist.
I can go on and on with this, but these examples suffice. There is NO plurality in God.
And the word "us" when God speaks to the angels, does not imply otherwise.
.
.
In the service of Y-H-W-H,
Eliyahu, light unto the nations
"Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4
"All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but as for us; we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God forever and ever!" Micah 4:5
.
.
God became incarnated as a man. And as the Father took up the emblem of Authority the Son took up the emblem of perfect Submission to Authority.
God is not a man. Saying a man is God is like saying a golden calf is God.
In such He was one of us - a genuine man yet God Himself incarnate. Isaiah 9:6 says that He is called WONDERFUL. We can see why.
Isaiah 9:2-7 "2 The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who dwelt in a land of deep darkness, on them has light shined. 3 Thou hast multiplied the nation, thou hast increased its joy; they rejoice before thee as with joy at the harvest, as men rejoice when they divide the spoil. 4 For the yoke of his burden, and the staff for his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, thou hast broken as on the day of Mid'ian. 5 For every boot of the tramping warrior in battle tumult and every garment rolled in blood will be burned as fuel for the fire. 6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government will be upon his shoulder, and his name will be called "Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace". 7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David, and over his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and for evermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this."
Please take notice of the fact that Isaiah is talking in the past tense: "The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who dwelt in a land of deep darkness, on them has light shined.|
"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government is upon his shoulder, and his name was called "Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."
These are things which had happened already in the days of Isaiah.
If, despite these facts, you still want to apply these verses to JC, than read verse 5, 6, and 7, and see that JC didn't do any of those things. He never ruled on the throne of David, he never had any government on his shoulders, and there never was endless peace over his kingdom.
The same holds true for the verses 6 and 7: "For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government will be upon his shoulder, and his name will be called "Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace". 7 Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David, and over his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and for evermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this."
All of this doesn't hold true for JC; he never had any government on his shoulder. And also here is spoken in the past tense: "A child is born, a son is given. But most translations give it in the future tense. For instance the RSV, NIV, NAS, ESV, KJV, NIRV, the all say; "His name will be called ....", future tense. However, in the Hebrew text this too is past tense: "His name was called ...." The Hebrew expression here is "wayikra". That is the first word in the book of Leviticus. And all the previously mentioned translations there say: "And the Lord called Mozes ..." Past tense. Exactly the same the word. Isn't that weird? Exactly the same word is used in Genesis 5:1; "And God called the light 'day'" Called. Past tense. Nobody argues with that one. But why then, in Isaiah 9, is it suddenly changed to future tense? The answer is simple: The past tense doesn't fit with the Christian theology, and therefore the Bible translations are corrupted and twisted to fit the Christian religion. Just like that. There is only one solution for this problem: Take a course in Biblical Hebrew. It is more easy then it looks. Then your eyes will be opened and the Christian deception will stare you in the face. And yes, I do sympathize with the poor misguided Christians whom are being led astray by their clergy by means of twisted and corrupted Bible translations. That's the reason why I fulfill my duty of being a light unto the nations and uncovering the Christian deception.
"Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end" "There will be no end", future tense. And this too is WRONG. It is in the Hebrew present tense. I found only one translation which is correct here, and that is Young's Literal Translation.
Why all this stress on the tenses? Isaiah spoke about a king who was living in his days, and therefore JC is out. The king that Isaiah speaks about is Hezekiah, the son of Achaz who got from Isaiah the sign about the young woman (no, not the virgin) who was pregnant and gave birth to the son Immanuel.
The Talmud explains that under the rule of the God fearing Hezekiah the Jewish kingdom rose to great heights, and that's why he was entitled to those impressive titles.
Because of the fact that the name of the son is "Mighty God", (or "God is Mighty", both are possible translations) and "Eternals Father", the Christians deduce that the boy spoken about must have been God.
HOWEVER, a name is only that; a name. A name is not a description of the bearer of that name. An example: Buffalo Bill was not a buffalo. The indian chief Sitting Bull was not a bull.
Many times people in the Bible have in their name the word "God", or the name of God, but that doesn't mean that those people are God. For instance; in Exodus 6:23 is spoken about a man called "Elazar". That means "God is helper", or "Helping God". But that doesn't mean that that man was God.
Exodus 6:24; "Elkanah", that means "God acquired", or "acquiring God". II Samuel 22:19; "Elchanan"; "God is merciful", or "Merciful God". But these men were not God, just like the the child in Isaiah 9 wasn't God.
Apart from that, the Hebrew words "El gibor", in Christian Bibles translated with "Mighty God", can have a different meaning. "El" can mean "God", but it can also mean "judge", "leader", or "mighty man". In Exodus 4:16 God says to Moses that he will be of an elohiem for his brother Aharon. ("elohim" is the longer form of the word "el") This doesn't mean that Moses was a God for Aharon and Aharon started to worship his brother, it meant that Moses would be the leader of Aharon.
In Exodus 21:1-6 is spoken about a slave who after the normal period of servitude ended, doesn't want to leave his master. In that case the owner has to take him to court, where the slave will make a statement that he doesn't want to leave his master, and that he will serve his master until his death. The Hebrew text there says that his master must take him to the "elohim". There the NAS, ASV, ESV, NRSV, RSV, YLT, they all say that his master must take him "to God". However, his master doesn't take him for a ride to heaven, but takes him to the courthouse. Therefore the NIV, KJV, TNIV, and the NIRV, they all say that the master must take him to "the judges".
Even so in Isaiah 9 the word "El" does not necessarily mean "God". Therefore the text in Isaiah 9 is in no way a proof that the child spoken about was God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by jaywill, posted 10-20-2013 3:55 PM jaywill has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by arachnophilia, posted 12-31-2013 8:19 PM Eliyahu has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 23 of 176 (715054)
12-31-2013 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Eliyahu
12-30-2013 11:49 PM


plurals
Eliyahu writes:
Genesis 1:26; "Let us make man" If anybody finds in a text the word "us", would any normal person assume that it refers to one person with a multi-personality disorder? Of course not.
but it doesn't contain the word "us". it contains the verb נַעֲשֶׂה, which is עשה ("make") in an imperfect, first person, plural tense. why does it use this verb this way? i honestly have no idea. but i can tell you some reasons why it probably doesn't mean very much at all.
the first of which should be obvious. the next verse says,
quote:
וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת-הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ
that god created (single, third person) mankind in his (single, masculine) image. it then goes on to say that this image is both male and female. whoever wrote genesis 1 is mixing gender and number all over the place.
But why then, when Christians see the word "us" in the Bible, do they think that?
because they want to. they worship a man who is clearly not yahweh (that jealous god that there's only one of) but they clearly want to get around the rules of monotheism.
the real truth, though, is that this is nothing new. when judaism was going through its rough formative years, there was apparently some debate about how to rectify the canaanite el(ohim) and baal with the possibly midianite yahweh. the northern kingdom (israel) was evidently much more in line with the polytheistic cult of el-whatever (elyon, shaddai, etc) and his son (baal) hadad, while the southern kingdom (judah) worshiped a god named yahweh, and post about 700 BCE, yahweh exclusively.
the solution that J and E proposed was that yahweh and el were the same god, though they debated about when this fact was revealed. this is seemingly new information to E, who has the name revealed to his moshe, where as J's patriarchs had been yahwists all along. this may reflect that E is a more northern tradition.
the god of the bible exhibits facets of multiple of canaanite and midianite gods. he is a bit more integrated than big-g "god" and jesus, but the principle is largely the same: multiple deities are being intentionally conflated under the pressure of remaining monotheistic. religion is fluid, and does this kind of stuff.
One explanation is that it is a majestic plural as used by kings. Another possible explanation is that God was talking to the angels.
i'm not especially satisfied by either of these explanations. i think it's just a simple idiom. we use a similar one in english all the time. talking to ourselves, we might say, "let's get started" or some other phrase. but who is the other person in "let us"? are we using a specific concept of ourselves as royals? are we speaking to anybody at all? or are we just talking to ourselves?
there are few instances in the bible where god talks to himself, but in another case, he also uses plural:
quote:
הָבָה, נֵרְדָה, וְנָבְלָה שָׁם, שְׂפָתָם--אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִשְׁמְעוּ, אִישׁ שְׂפַת רֵעֵהוּ
in genesis 11. "come, let us go down," etc. he then does the actions in the singular. i'm not aware of any other cases, but i haven't really looked too hard. these two are both in the future tense, and both potential actions god might do. i think it might be expressing that god is of two minds about the action (creating humans caused a lot of trouble), but it could just as easily be an idiom we lack the cultural knowledge of.
i do not think it's a royal "we" because god does not use this plurality elsewhere. whenever he talks to humans about himself, or his intended actions, the verbs are always singular. in the first thing he says to mankind, where he mentions himself:
quote:
הִנֵּה נָתַתִּי לָכֶם אֶת-כָּל-עֵשֶׂב זֹרֵעַ זֶרַע אֲשֶׁר עַל-פְּנֵי כָל-הָאָרֶץ, וְאֶת-כָּל-הָעֵץ אֲשֶׁר-בּוֹ פְרִי-עֵץ, זֹרֵעַ זָרַע: לָכֶם יִהְיֶה, לְאָכְלָה
note that "i have given", a simple, singular past perfect. not "we have given". so i do not think a "royal we" is quite the right analogy.
nor do i think he is talking to angels. mostly because no angels are mentioned at all previously. you have to understand something important about genesis 1: it is the most intensely monotheistic text in the torah. J especially doesn't particularly care about other gods, and portrays a yahweh who seemingly doesn't either, except that after moshe brings the law to israel, they're not to worship any other god. but it stands to reason, reading J, that there could well be other gods. even D, written to drive on josiah and hilkiah's monotheistic revolution in judah, slips once and proclaims (at least in the older septuagint) that the elder god, el elyon (head of canaanite pantheon) numbered the kingdoms of the earth according to his sons (the benay elohim) and gave israel to yahweh. yeah. weird, right?
P, however, is revisionist, post-revolution. and P is working from J's original account, which we no longer have. but we have hints at the missing text. job in particular contains strong allusions to the original myth, and it includes the morning stars (angels), and leviathan, which are conspicuously missing from P's account. P was written for the express purpose of excluding the heresies of J, and we can see this where J and P overlap. J has yahweh fail at creating a partner for the man, and creates man's better. J has yahweh lying, and being revealed by a serpent. P has god making man and woman equal, and making them (complete) in his image instead of becoming like gods by stealing from him. P has god give man and woman every plant, and leaves out the business about the tree of knowledge. and so these elements of creation, told in job and elsewhere in the bible, were intentionally left out by P.
the dragon was left out because it implies god is non-universal, and not omnipotent. the angels were left out because they imply that there are other supernatural powers.
Some Christians try to refute the last argument by saying that the angels didn't create. They point to Genesis 1:1; "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."
that's also not what it says. בְּרֵאשִׁית is a construct, a complex preposition. and that makes the word that follows it, בָּרָא, a noun -- an infinitive construct that has been given the wrong points, for a perfect verb. for an example of how it should look, see genesis 5:1,2:
quote:
בְּיוֹם, בְּרֹא אֱלֹהִים אָדָם
with the correct vowel points, and the same structure: a complex preposition followed by an infinitive construct. the translation should read, literally, "in the beginning of god creating..." or more appropriately in english, "when god began to create..." see rashi on the subject matter. but the statement is not a catch-all summary of the chapter. it is an introduction.
Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Eliyahu, posted 12-30-2013 11:49 PM Eliyahu has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 24 of 176 (715056)
12-31-2013 8:29 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by jaywill
10-20-2013 3:55 PM


god made into the image of man
jaywill writes:
Then it says that "God created man in His own image"
God became incarnated as a man
quote:
God is not a man, that he should lie;
neither the son of man, that he should repent:
hath he said, and shall he not do it?
or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
(Numbers 23:19) emphasis mine
i think you are mixing up the difference between god making mankind in his image, and god making himself in mankind's image. or, perhaps, mankind making a man into an image of god.
in any case, the law is pretty clear about whether we should worship god, or the image of god.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by jaywill, posted 10-20-2013 3:55 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by jaywill, posted 01-01-2014 11:08 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 25 of 176 (715058)
12-31-2013 8:41 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by GDR
10-20-2013 7:59 AM


christians: don't read the OT!
GDR writes:
I also think that it is a mistake for Christians to look for messianic proof texts in the OT.
well, not if atheism is the goal.
The OT is a narrative that appears to be going somewhere and pointing to something. It is my belief that the narrative that runs throughout the Hebrew Scriptures in total pointed to Jesus.
how much of it, exactly, have you read? because i see a bunch of rather disjoint texts and subtexts, all with their own (sometimes conflicting) ideologies and theologies, and their own socio-political points to make. to see an overarching pictures is a bit like seeing pictures in the clouds. if you squint your eyes a lot and imagine really heard, it kind of looks like a jesus.
but when you begin examining the details -- like looking for justification of jesus as the jewish messiah -- it just all kind of falls apart.
for instance, jesus rode into jerusalem on a donkey (zecharian 9:9)... but then didn't sit on the throne, didn't end all wars, and didn't rule the world (zechariah 9:10). which part do you think is important for being the messiah? because i could totally fly to israel, rent a donkey, and ride into jerusalem if that's all it takes. i would say it's the other stuff that defines the messiah. wouldn't you?
and it really just gets more troubling from there. for instance, the entire substitute sacrifice ideology is completely untenable (and worse yet, unnecessary) with a solid reading of the law, where no man may die for another's sin, death isn't demanded of anything except the most heinous social crimes, and offerings are offered instead of sacrifices demanded.
so... no. don't go looking for prooftexts in the OT. because if you go looking, you'll only find disproof texts.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by GDR, posted 10-20-2013 7:59 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by GDR, posted 01-07-2014 9:02 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 26 of 176 (715084)
01-01-2014 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by arachnophilia
12-31-2013 8:29 PM


Re: god made into the image of man
God is not a man, that he should lie;
neither the son of man, that he should repent:
hath he said, and shall he not do it?
or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
(Numbers 23:19) emphasis mine
This is an often used passage used to disprove the incarnation of God as a man. But I think it backfires because if God SHOULD become a man He also would not lie.
Therefore when the "child ... born" is called "Mighty God" and the "son ... given" is called "Eternal Father" THAT Person also would not lie.
By the time Numbers 23:19 was spoken by God, God should not and does not lie.
By the time the prophecy of incarnation was fulfilled in the birth of Jesus Christ, God still should not and does not lie.
Jesus Christ did not lie about Himself.
i think you are mixing up the difference between god making mankind in his image, and god making himself in mankind's image. or, perhaps, mankind making a man into an image of god.
If the issue is whether or not man adds his erroneous concepts to imagine what God is like - it is true of course. Sometimes man does "create" God in his fallen own image.
However, that does not change the fact that God created man in His own image.
The Bible says that Christ is the image of the invisible God (Col. 1:15).
And the Bible says God created man in His own image (Gen. 1:26,27).
So admittedly there could be a "chicken and egg" paradox - which came first.
Did God create man in His image and then afterwards become a man in that very image ? Or did God create man according to Jesus Christ, with what Jesus Christ is in mind beforehand ?
I lean towards God having Jesus Christ in mind and creating man according to what Jesus Christ is. The God who came walking in the garden in the cool of the day to speak with Adam, was Christ / God before He was incarnated through birth from the virgin Mary.
Man fell into sin. And since that time, of course man's darkened mind has created many gods according to man's selfish, lustful, petty, vengeful, arrogant own sinful self. There's no question about that.
Again, that doesn't change that the uncreated and eternal God created man in His own image. And that man is in need of salvation from his fallen state.
If I haven't mentioned it yet, I would also add that our phrase "mankind" is interesting when we consider Genesis. All the other living things are said to be after their own kind. But when it gets to human beings it says really that they are after God's "kind" - in the image of God according to the likeness of God.
We know that nothing living on the earth is exactly like, or really anything like humanity. We are unique on the earth.
Much of this sense of human uniqueness has been lost in the concern for ecological health and because of the dwarfing effect of the sheer immensity of the size of the known universe.
The Psalmist before the scientific age uttered something of the same sense of insignificance of man -
quote:
" When I see Your heavens, the works of Your fingers, The moon and the stars, which You ordained,
What is mortal man, that You remember him, and the son of man that you visit him ? " (Psalm 8:2,3)

"Among billions of galaxies and as many possible planets, what is man ? "
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by arachnophilia, posted 12-31-2013 8:29 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by arachnophilia, posted 01-01-2014 12:45 PM jaywill has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 27 of 176 (715098)
01-01-2014 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by jaywill
01-01-2014 11:08 AM


Re: god made into the image of man
But I think it backfires because if God SHOULD become a man He also would not lie.
so, god lied when he said he wasn't a man?
However, that does not change the fact that God created man in His own image.
in fact, the text goes a bit further than that. the older story, genesis 2, has god literally breathing his own soul into man. in genesis 2, adam is literally part of god. is it kosher to worship adam?
no, of course not. because adam is not yahweh. he is the dust of the earth as well.
and christ, of course, is not even adam. he is ben-adam. the son of man.
If I haven't mentioned it yet, I would also add that our phrase "mankind" is interesting when we consider Genesis. All the other living things are said to be after their own kind. But when it gets to human beings it says really that they are after God's "kind" - in the image of God according to the likeness of God.
sure, but just as we are not worship any other gods, we are not to worship any man.
Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by jaywill, posted 01-01-2014 11:08 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by jaywill, posted 01-02-2014 11:18 AM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 29 by jaywill, posted 01-02-2014 1:54 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 28 of 176 (715209)
01-02-2014 11:18 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by arachnophilia
01-01-2014 12:45 PM


Re: god made into the image of man
so, god lied when he said he wasn't a man?
I do not believe God lied when He said "God is not a man that He should lie."
Neither do I believe God lied when the "child ... born" was the Mighty God and the "son ... given" was the Eternal Father.
In both cases God "who cannot lie" spoke the truth. ( Titus 1:2 )
God was not always a man for man is an item of God's creation.
But God became a man when the Word became flesh (John 1:1,14 and Isaiah 9:6).
quote:
In the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before the times of the ages." (Titus 1:2)
in fact, the text goes a bit further than that. the older story, genesis 2, has god literally breathing his own soul into man. in genesis 2, adam is literally part of god. is it kosher to worship adam?
Before I respond please elaborate in terms of linguistics. Why do you believe God breathed His soul into man ?
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by arachnophilia, posted 01-01-2014 12:45 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by ramoss, posted 01-02-2014 2:35 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 32 by arachnophilia, posted 01-02-2014 6:33 PM jaywill has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 29 of 176 (715225)
01-02-2014 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by arachnophilia
01-01-2014 12:45 PM


Re: god made into the image of man
sure, but just as we are not worship any other gods, we are not to worship any man.
Let me be clear.
Yes, the created man as Adam was not to be an object of worship.
No man descending from Adam was to be an object of worship.
Now further along in the economy of God God is manifested in the flesh - incarnation.
Psalm 72 is a Messianic Psalm. It speaks of Solomon but prophetically points beyond Solomon to the real and ultimate son of David - the Messianic Son of God.
Look what it says concerning this MAN:
Verse 5 - "They will fear You as long as the sun endures throughout all generations."
Verse 7 - "In His days the righteous will flourish, and there will be an abundance of peace until the moon is no more. And He will have dominion from sea to sea and from the River unto the ends of the earth."
Verse 9 - "The desert dwellers will bow down before Him."
Verse 11 - "And all the kings will bow down before Him; All the nations will serve Him."
Verse 15b - "And prayer shall be made continually for Him; He shall be blessed all the day long. There will be an abundance of grain on earth ..."
Verse 17 - "His name will be forever; As long as the sun endures, His name will spread; and all men will be blessed in Him; All the nations will call Him blessed."
Verse 18 - "Blessed be Jehovah God, the God of Israel ... And blessed be His glorious name forever; And may His glory fill the whole earth. Amen and amen."
In those blessed days, if we are blessed to be there, don't you think these passages reveal an adoration and worship towards this Man ... this Godman ?
David prophetically calls this Messiah his own Lord -
quote:
"Jehovah declares to my Lord, Sit at My right hand until I make Your enemies Your footstool."
This is the Psalm Jesus used to confound the Pharisees. David's Lord was going to be David's Messianic Son.
quote:
"Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus questioned them, saying, What do you think concerning the Christ? Whose son is He?
They said to Him, David's. He said to them, How then does David in spirit call Him Lord, saying,
'Sit at My right hand until I put Your enemies underneath Your feet? If then David calls Him Lord, how is He his son ?
And no one was able to answer Him a word ..." (Matt. 22:41-46a)

I believe that this Man is the referent of the child born called Mighty God. He is worthy of my worship.
I believe that this Man is the fulfillment the Son given called Everlasting God.
I am happy to worship Him in all that worship entails - love, praise, thanksgiving, even more breathing His Spirit into my innermost being, drinking of His as the living water.
Hebrews 1 quotes Psalm 97:7 that the Firstborn Son of God comes again into the inhabited earth being worshiped by the angels.
quote:
"And when He brings again the Firstborn into the inhabited earth, He [God] says, And let all the angels of God worship Him." (Hebrews 1:6)
This Godman is worthy of my worship.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by arachnophilia, posted 01-01-2014 12:45 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by arachnophilia, posted 01-02-2014 6:49 PM jaywill has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 30 of 176 (715231)
01-02-2014 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by jaywill
01-02-2014 11:18 AM


Re: god made into the image of man
AH yes.. the good old misunderstanding of Isaiah 9:6 (or 9:5 in the Hebrew numbering).
That is the royal name of Hezekiah. There are plenty of incidence and examples in the Jewish scripture where people's names describe traits in God, and Hezekiah literally means 'God is our might'.. so.. that's just one of the list of his royal names , from a historical point of view.
No need to shove prophecy into that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by jaywill, posted 01-02-2014 11:18 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by jaywill, posted 01-02-2014 4:50 PM ramoss has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024