:sl:
Isaiah :53 where it came from and where it goes?
Isaiah 53 would give us the answer to:
Why Matthew and the other writers misquoted the Old Testament?
Why they chose such (sacrificial passion) to finish their story of their Savoir Messiah ?
By misquoting Isaiah 7, passing by Jeremiah (31:15), Hosea 11:1 , Isaiah 40:3, Jeremiah 32:9 Psalms 22:16, Zechariah 12:10 etc………. ,
the writer of Matthew gives us the clue of his intentions and what kind of a story he tells , It is a story of the type of the messiah he and his sect (which the other NT writers belong) wished it to be .
Due to their belief in the Jewish hearsay regarding how the life of Jesus was terminated on earth, their awareness of the basic messianic concept in the old testament that couldn’t have been materialized by the hearsay account they received regarding Jesus ,their awareness of the (sin for blood ritual in the old testament ),their understanding of Isaiah 53 as a passage predicting blood atonement,
all that would lead logically to their misuse of the Jewish false propaganda (we killed Jesus), while they are not to be blamed for their belief in the hearsay, as nothing wondrous about a prophet who been killed(if it was true the hearsay) and been added to such list of the murdered prophets , but their awful mistake is that they convinced themselves and tried to convince others that such death has something with the ( blood for sin) Old testament concept (which the Hebrews borrowed from their pagan neighbours).....
The writers tried their best to find legitimacy to sell their (sacrificed messiah) concept, they started a never-ending search for Old testament passages that could be connected with the hearsay accounts they had, in doing so they misquoted the text , when they found the misquotation can't help the hearsay account, they invented things in the story line ,and invented old testament passages that not even exist in the old testament itself eg . Matthew (2:23),.. , (for more in this point see our conclusion )
in our discussion about Isaiah:7 , we suggested the key to be ( the context)...
Now the suggested key for Isaiah :53 would be ( the concept of blood sacrifice) such key , not only shows where the problem of Isaiah 53 came from ,but also will answer the Question ,why the writers wanted the story of Jesus to be a (sacrificial passion).......
let's read The text under discussion:
"1 Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.2 Shake thyself from the dust; arise, and sit down, O Jerusalem: loose thyself from the bands of thy neck, O captive daughter of Zion.3 For thus saith the LORD, Ye have sold yourselves for nought; and ye shall be redeemed without money.4 For thus saith the Lord GOD, My people went down aforetime into Egypt to sojourn there; and the Assyrian oppressed them without cause.5 Now therefore, what have I here, saith the LORD, that my people is taken away for nought? they that rule over them make them to howl, saith the LORD; and my name continually every day is blasphemed.6 Therefore my people shall know my name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am he that doth speak: behold, it is I.7 How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth!
8 Thy watchmen shall lift up the voice; with the voice together shall they sing: for they shall see eye to eye, when the LORD shall bring again Zion.
9 Break forth into joy, sing together, ye waste places of Jerusalem: for the LORD hath comforted his people, he hath redeemed Jerusalem.10 The LORD hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations; and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God.11 Depart ye, depart ye, go ye out from thence, touch no unclean thing; go ye out of the midst of her; be ye clean, that bear the vessels of the LORD.12 For ye shall not go out with haste, nor go by flight: for the LORD will go before you; and the God of Israel will be your rereward. Behold, my servant shall prosper, he shall be exalted, and extolled, and be very high. As many were astonished at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.Who would have believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? For he grew up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he had no form nor comeliness; and when we see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and as one from whom men hide their face he was despised, and we esteemed him not.Surely he hath borne griefs inflicted by us, and suffered sorrows we have caused: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded through our transgressions, bruised through our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his wounds we were healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath caused the iniquity of us all to fall upon him.He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: as a lamb which is brought to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth. He was taken away from rule and from judgment; and his life who shall recount? for he was cut off out of the land of the living; through the transgressions of my people was he stricken. And one made his grave among the wicked, and his tomb among the rich; although he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.But it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief; if his soul shall consider it a recompense for guilt, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my servant justify the righteous before many, and he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong because he hath laid open his soul unto death, and was numbered with transgressors; and he took off the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.*
Before showing my concept ,and how one properly understand the problem of Isaiah 53 , explaining why it can by no means be a valid passage
To be a prophecy or even a true description….
Let’s highlight the common, heated , debate between Jews and Christians regarding Isaiah 53........
in one hand Christians claim that the servant must be Jesus, in the other hand Jews affirms that the servant is not Jesus ....
The following is the Jewish academic refutation of the Christian interpretation of the text verse by verse:
Behold, my servant shall prosper, he shall be exalted, and extolled, and be very high
1- There is no reason to believe that the servant referred to is Jesus. "Servant" refers to anyone who works hard for God. It is used in reference to Moses (Num. 12:7, Job 1:Cool, all the prophets (Amos 3:7), and all of Israel (Lev. 25:42). The servant is expressly identified with Jacob or Israel in Isa. 41:8-9, 42:19, 44:1-2, and 49:3 . Judging from the context, it refers to the Jews , , not Jesus.
2- The chapter divisions did not exist until about four hundred years ago. Immediately before Isaiah 52:13-53:12 Isaiah is predicting the gathering of the exiles and just after Isa. 54:1 he is talking of the glorious promises descriptive of the same events. Therefore, logically, all in-between ( the midst of Isaiah's "Messages of Consolation", ) is speaking of the same thing.
3- Christians cling to this chapter so dearly as proof that the Messiah is to suffer is because it is one of those very few places where they can attempt to do so.
4- Most rabbinic interpretation of Isaiah 53 ascribes the “servant” to the nation of Israel who silently endured unimaginable suffering at the hands of its gentile oppressors.
5- It would be an indignity to apply "servant" to the godhead.
6- several Christian scholarly books, like Revised Standard Version Oxford Study Edition Bible, The Revised Standard Version tells us that Isaiah 53 is about national Israel. New Revised Standard Version and New English Bible echo this analysis.
7- When did Jesus prosper? How can a condition of prosperity or success be predicated of the Godhead?
so will he sprinkle many nations, and kings will shut their mouths because of him. For what they were not told, they will see, and what they have not heard, they will understand. (Isaiah 52:15)
1-What king ceased to speak because of Jesus?
2-The description refers to Israel:
And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy glory: and thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the LORD shall name. (Isaiah 62:2)
The stunned reaction of the world’s nations to the unexpected vindication and redemption of the Jewish nation in the messianic age is a reoccurring theme throughout the Hebrew Scriptures
Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? (Isaiah 53:1)
1-The speaker from 52:13 to the end of chapter 52 is God himself, whereas from the beginning of 53:1 through 53:9 the gentile kings of nations are speaking in their numbed astonishment. This narrative expressed by the surprised leaders of the surrounding gentile nations is referred to in 52:15. This alternation in speakers is evident in that verses 52:13 and 53:11 speak of "My [i.e. God's] servant," while the intervening verses refer to "our transgressions"
2-The “arm of the Lord” is the redemption of Israel, and has nothing to do with Jesus.
With your mighty arm you redeemed your people, the descendants of Jacob and Joseph. Selah (Psalms 77:15)
He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground.
Israel grew up like a plant:
No one looked on you with pity or had compassion enough to do any of these things for you. Rather, you were thrown out into the open field, for on the day you were born you were despised. " 'Then I passed by and saw you kicking about in your blood, and as you lay there in your blood I said to you, "Live!" I made you grow like a plant of the field.
(Ezekiel 16:5-7)
I will be as the dew unto Israel: he shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his roots as Lebanon.
(Hosea 14:5)
Israel grew up like a tender shoot:
Then will all your people be righteous and they will possess the land forever. They are the shoot I have planted, the work of my hands, for the display of my splendour. (Isaiah 60:21)
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. (Isaiah 53:2-3)
the servant is Ill ,bad looking, despised and rejected by men, familiar with sorrow and suffering
All such descriptions make more sense to Israel not Jesus
1- How many people really hated Jesus as opposed to the number of tribes who hated the Jews?
2- The first book of the Talmud Berachoth page 5a states "If the Holy One, blessed be He, is pleased with a man, He crushes him with painful sufferings. For it is said: And the Lord was pleased with [him, hence] He crushed him by disease (Isa. 53:10, an exegetical reading). Now, you might think that this is so even if he did not accept them with love. Therefore it is said: To see if his soul would offer itself in restitution. Even as the trespass-offering must be brought by consent, so also the sufferings must be endured with consent. And if he did accept them, what is his reward? He will see his seed, prolong his days. And more than that, his knowledge [of the Torah] will endure with him. For it is said: The purpose of the Lord will prosper in his hand.
3- Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. He taught in their synagogues, and everyone praised him. (Luke 4:14-15)
4- we hid as it were our faces from him" (53:3). The Jews did not hide their faces from him but condemned him many times .
5- And no, disease does not mean sin or any other metaphorical interpretation. The historical context confirms this, early Jewish sources confirm this - it refers to leprosy.” The Rabbis said: His name is 'the leper scholar,' as it is written, Surely he hath borne our grieves, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him a leper, smitten of God, and afflicted." (Sanh. 98b)
Jesus was no leper. He wasn't smitten, afflicted, plagued, crushed by disease. Jesus doesn't fit.
Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. Isaiah 53:4)
see our conclusion below
the preposition "mi" in Isaiah 53:5 and 53:8 is commonly translated as "for." The meaning of "mi" is not "for" but rather "from" or "because of". Thus the Judaica Press Tanach translates Isaiah 53:5 as: "But he was pained because of our transgressions, crushed because of our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his wound we were healed."
We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:6)
see our conclusion below
He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth. (Isaiah 53:7)
Jesus not only opened his mouth when oppressed but was struck in the process. He even cried for help.
From the sixth hour until the ninth hour darkness came over all the land. About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"—which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
(Matthew 27:46)
By oppression and judgment he was taken away. And who can speak of his descendants? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was stricken. (Isaiah 53:8)
1- Israel was politically oppressed by Babylon king Nebuchadrezzar, who conquered Jerusalem in 587 B.C.E. and destroyed the Temple. The Israelites were “taken away” into captivity.
2- the Hebrew phrase "mi-pesha’ ‘ami niga’ lamo" is translated as "for the transgression of my people was he stricken". The word "lamo" is the poetic form of the Hebrew "lahem" which means their/them not him and is used as such throughout the Hebrew Bible. The Jewish rendition of Isaiah 53:8 then is: "because of the transgression of my people, a plague befell them." Based on this, the servant is argued to be a collective entity not a person. This claim is supported by the fact that the Hebrew word for "death" in the following verse of Isaiah 53:9, "And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death;" is plural.
He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death,
1- The word used in Hebrew is (deaths) and not death...
2- The suffering servant's "deaths" as well as the description of his subsequent revival are indeed, metaphors for the fortunes of Israel, he was cut off out of the land of the living" (verse 8), "his grave was set" (verse 9), and "in his deaths" (verse 9) are not to be taken literally. The metaphor "his grave was set" describing an event in the life of God's suffering servant, is similar to the statement, "for he was cut off out of the land of the living" (verse 8). Metaphors of this type, used to describe deep anguish and subjection to enemies, are part of the biblical idiom. Similar metaphorical language is used, for example, in Ezekiel 37 to express the condition preceding relief and rejuvenation following the end of exile. Ezekiel provides the clues needed for understanding the phraseology used by Isaiah. The metaphorical images employed by Isaiah-"cut off out of the land of the living" and "grave"-are used in Ezekiel's description of the valley of the dry bones, where the bones symbolize the exiled Jewish people. Lost in apparently hopeless exile, the Jewish people exclaim: "we are clean cut off" (Ezekiel 37:11). In reply, God promises: "And I will put My spirit in you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land" (Ezekiel 37:14). It is now clear that Isaiah's phrase, "for he was cut off out of the land of the living," refers to the deadly condition of exile. Similarly, the term "grave" in Isaiah-"And his grave was set with the wicked"-refers to life in exile as used in Ezekiel: "I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves" (Ezekiel 37:12), where "graves" is a metaphor for the lands of exile.
The messages of these two prophets are addressed to God's suffering servant. The sovereign national entity was destroyed but the Jewish people survive, albeit in exile from which God will restore them to their land. Although "cut off out of the land of the living" and now living in the lands of exile, the "grave set with the wicked," God will free the servant from this fate and restore him to the "land of the living," the Land of Israel. That Isaiah speaks in the singular and Ezekiel in the plural is of no consequence, for the people of Israel may be spoken of in both forms (for example, Exodus 14:31, Psalms 81:12-14).
Paralleling "grave set with the wicked" is the phrase "with the rich in his deaths." "Rich" here refers to the powerful men and institutions of the Gentile nations among whom the personified people of Israel are exiled.
"And his grave was set with the wicked" describes an imposed fate and not something accepted voluntarily by the servant. Furthermore, this was not a literal death, as the servant was alive when "his grave was set" (cf. Genesis 30:1; Exodus 10:17; Numbers 12:12; 2 Samuel 9:8, 16:9; Jonah 4:9 for examples of figurative death). This verse informs us that despite the imposed fate of exile, Israel continued to be faithful to God. Accordingly, Israel is to afterwards enjoy the fruits of his sacrifice. The phrase "in his deaths" signifies that the suffering servant of the Lord experienced figuratively many "deaths" in exile. His anguish was multiplied exceedingly by the constant harassment of his enemies.
3-The Midrash Rabba on Deuteronomy says, "The Israelites poured out their soul to die in the captivity, as it is said, ‘Because he poured out his soul to die.’(Isaiah 53:12)”"[7]
though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth. (Isaiah 53:9)
Jesus according to the New Testament had done some violence and deception
1- John 2:15 ("And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables" besides his failed prophecies eg,the prophecies of second coming,peter denial etc....
2- But I will leave within you the meek and humble, who trust in the name of the LORD. The remnant of Israel will do no wrong; they will speak no lies, nor will deceit be found in their mouths. They will eat and lie down and no one will make them afraid." (Zephaniah 3:12-13)
obviously If we understand the verse as talking about sinless ness, neither Jesus(as the NT tells) nor Israel could fit such description
the text doesn't talk about a sinless being from his-their birth nor someone that never done violence all his-their life long, it simply affirms that such being(s) had suffered though did nothing bad for such punishment...... he-they could have had countless flaws all his-their life but, he-they did nothing wrong to deserve such punishment.....
And that could be applicable to countless innocent people all over history
Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin
1- Most Jewish scholars equate the phrase "It pleased..." with the concept of divine kingship. All royal acts in an absolute kingdom take place at the "pleasure" of the king, regardless of whether they bring the king actual joy or not. Additionally, Jewish theologians contend that one need not be guiltless for his suffering to have meaning.
"He shall see seed, he shall prolong days.
1- The Hebrew word for “seed” is zerah, and it always refers to physical descendants:
2- Hardly a fitting description of a man who died childless in his thirty third year!!
According to the words "He shall see seed, he shall prolong days," the suffering servant is to be rewarded for his selflessness in the service of the Almighty by being blessed with children and prolongation of life. These two promises must be treated as a unit, as described in greater detail in Isaiah 65:20-23. Each promise complements the other, highlighting the ancient Hebraic ideal of viewing children and a long life as the two greatest rewards God gives to man here on earth. This is further illustrated in Job 5:25-26: "You shall know also that your seed shall be great, and your offspring as the grass of the earth. You shall come to your grave in ripe age, as a shock of corn in its season." From the manner in which the Hebrew word zer'a ("seed") is used in the Scriptures, there can be no doubt that actual physical offspring is meant here.
Generally, the Hebrew word bayn ("son") may be employed metaphorically with the meaning "disciples," but never is the term zer'a ("seed") used in this sense. For example, "And Abraham said: 'Behold to me You have given no seed (zer'a), and, see the son (ben) of my house is my heir.' And, behold, the word of the Lord came to him, saying: 'This man shall not be your heir, but he that shall come forth out of your own bowels shall be your heir'" (Genesis 15:3-4). Hence, zer'a must be taken literally, which rules out the possibility that it refers to Jesus since he had no children of his own
The second part of the promise, ". . . he shall prolong days," also cannot be applied to Jesus, who died at a young age. To apply these words, as Christian commentators do, is not only evasive but also meaningless. How can such a promise have any meaning for Jesus, who is viewed as being of divine substance and whose existence is believed by Christianity to be eternal? There would be no need for God to assure a fellow member of the Trinity eternal life.
In understanding the meaning of the phrase ". . . he shall prolong days" it should be understood that there is a difference in meaning between the concept of prolonging of days and that of gaining eternal life. The concept of a prolonged life cannot be treated as the equivalent of eternal life because in an eternal context, time of any duration is of no consequence. Consequently, one cannot speak of an eternal being as having his days prolonged: "Are Your days as the days of man, or Your years as a man's days?" (Job 10:5). God must be referred to as eternal: "The number of his years is unsearchable" (Job 36:26). He is the first, He is the last, He cannot be anything else. Prolonging the days of one who is already supposed to be eternal would make his life longer than eternity. That is an obvious impossibility. If the promise of prolonged days is applied to Jesus, he could not be of divine origin.
Now the crucial question to understand Isaiah 53,
Where the theme of Isaiah 53 came from?
Without doubt the Idea of Korban (sacrifiece) has a divine origin ,but It was corrupted ,changed from
pious (act of obedience to God ) as Cain and Abel , Abraham and his son story to
satanic ( Blood for sin ritual )
such satanic concept , Blood for sin ,had its wicked effects all over history , it has corrupted nations after nations all over history .... beginning from pre-historic nations passing by Ancient Egyptians, far east nations ,Scandinavians , Africans , south Americans , Hebrews , Christians ...............
as if a guilty person is convinced that an animal or human had given his life to atone him... for such person(s) ,whatever amount of preaching of the importance of being with morality he may listen to , he will continue committing sins without feeling ashamed of his deeds.....
The offerings in atonement for transgressions concept in the Old Testament is the same theme of the pagan neighbours (and all the heathen world without exception) to the Jews and the New Testament writers continued the same theme making it more and more destructive to morality ...
Just as in Judaism sins could be forgiven through the offering and the pouring out of the blood of an "unblemished" lamb (cf. Lev 4:32), so Christians believe they can be freed from sin by the blood of Jesus, the unblemished Lamb of God.
in the Old Testament some writers were aware of the negatives of such concept ,they for sure were not able to abolish the practice , cause if they tried to , the masses would be angry .....but they spoke out against those Israelites who brought forth sacrifices but did not act in accord with the precepts of the Torah.
With what shall I approach the Lord,
Do homage to God on high?
Shall I approach Him with burnt offerings,
With calves a year old?
Would the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams,
With myriads of streams of oil?
Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression,
The fruit of my body for my sins?
Man has told you what is good.
But what does the Lord require of you?
Only to do justice
And to love goodness,
And to walk humbly with your God (Micah 6:6-8).
All a man's ways seem right to him, but the LORD weighs the heart. To do what is right and just is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice. (Proverbs 21:2-3)
The Maimonides , a medieval Jewish scholar, was aware of the pagan connection with the blood for sin ritual ,taking the view that God understood that the Israelites were used to the animal sacrifices that the surrounding pagan tribes used as the primary way to commune with their gods. , it was only natural that Israelites would believe that sacrifice would be a necessary part of the relationship between God and man. . It would have been too much to have expected the Israelites to leap from pagan worship to prayer and meditation in one step. (Book III, Chapter 32. Translated by M. Friedlander, 1904, The Guide for the Perplexed, Dover Publications, 1956 edition.)
such pagan concept ( blood for sin) infected the mentality of the Bible writers ,as the more they write about it, the worse would it came to be......
in the beginning, the concept was offering animal to atone for some transgressions ,till Isaiah 53 , making the concept worse ,that a being (If the single understanding to be valid) atoned for all transgressions ....
the group which the New Testament writers belong to ,picked such concept ,and as they were aware that they can by no means convince themselves and others that Jesus could have fulfilled the actual exhaustive breadth of Messianic prophecy ,having believed the hearsay propagated by some Jews who hated Jesus (we killed Jesus the magician) ,they convinced themselves that his death was not of that normal kind , but it was sacrificial death .....that is why we find such graphic description in the contradictory ,hearsay accounts of the so called ( crucifixion-resurrection) of Jesus......
To sum up:
approaching Isaiah 53 with objective approach (neither Jewish nor christian)we begin with what Thomas Paine commented regarding the issue :
Isaiah, or at least the writer of the book that bears his name, employs the whole of this chapter, Iiii., in lamenting the sufferings of some deceased persons, of whom he speaks very pathetically. It is a monody on the death of a friend; but he mentions not the name of the person, nor gives any circumstance of him by which he can be personally known; and it is this silence, which is evidence of nothing, that Matthew has laid hold of, to put the name of Christ to it; as if the chiefs of the Jews, whose sorrows were then great, and the times they lived in big with danger, were never thinking about their own affairs, nor the fate of their own friends, but were continually running a Wild-Goose chase into futurity. To make a monody into a prophecy is an absurdity. The characters and circumstances of men, even in the different ages of the world, are so much alike, that what is said of one may with propriety be said of many; but this fitness does not make the passage into a prophecy; and none but an impostor, or a bigot, would call it so.
Isaiah, in deploring the hard fate and loss of his friend, mentions nothing of him but what the human lot of man is subject to. All the cases he states of him, his persecutions, his imprisonment, his patience in suffering, and his perseverance in principle, are all within the line of nature; they belong exclusively to none, and may with justness be said of many. But if Jesus Christ was the person the church represents him to be, that which would exclusively apply to him must be something that could not apply to any other person; something beyond the line of nature, something beyond the lot of mortal man; and there are no such expressions in this chapter, nor any other chapter in the Old Testament.
It is no exclusive description to say of a person, as is said of the person Isaiah is lamenting in this chapter, He was oppressed and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; he is brought as a Lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before his shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. This may be said of thousands of persons, who have suffered oppressions and unjust death with patience, silence, and perfect resignation
.(Examination of the prophecies)
Truly . All the cases he states of him, his persecutions, his imprisonment, his patience in suffering, and his perseverance in principle, are all within the line of nature; they belong exclusively to none, and may with justness be said of many.
What about (But he was wounded through our transgressions, )?
In both cases (whether Christians or Jews interpretations) such verse is not a valid language for a prophecy or a description..
We can’t accept Jewish interpretation , as neither Jews nor any other nation whatever degree of morality get would suffer of other sins..
As one of the basic concepts regarding God is that he is just
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. (Ezekiel 18:20)
We can’t accept the Christian interpretation(which makes less sense than the Jewish one) as well , cause of
1-the point we have highlighted , where Isaiah 53 idea came from(paganism) and where it goes (the mind of the New testament writers),
2- some of the description can’t be applicable to Jesus story (according to the NT)And that makes more sense to the Jewish interpretation
3-the only thing in the description which Christian would claim to be exclusive to Jesus (wounded through our transgressions) is a not a proper language to make a prophecy ,as it is something can never be verified by the naked eyes ,exactly just as ,imagine finding a text about Osiris claiming that by his murder he atoned for the ancient Egyptians sins !!!
How on earth one could ever verify the truth of such claim?!!!
The best Christians could offer to support such (impossible to be verified ,common in the pagan mythology) description ,is the contradictory accounts of ( the crucifixion-resurrection) which makes their position weaker and weaker…
Why shouldn’t we accept the contradictory accounts of ( the crucifixion-resurrection) ?
Because
The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.
Proverbs 14:15
In a word , Isaiah 53 is a lie been inspired by ancient lie and will inspire another future lie…..
more posts related to the topic
http://www.islamicboard.com/discover...s-islam-4.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...tml#post979966
peace for all