Who is the suffering servant in Isaiah 53?
- Thread starter Eliyahu613
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Bs"d
Revised Standard Version, 1 Chron 29:20; "Then David said to all the assembly, “Bless the Lord your God.” And all the assembly blessed the Lord, the God of their fathers, and bowed their heads, and worshiped the Lord, and did obeisance to the king."
That carpenter was not born a king, and he never was a king.
He never got further than a wandering preacher and miracle healer.
That assertion would be a major difference between Jews and Christians.
THE Messiah isn’t the main in Judaism; just a side point. It’s important for our readers (I especially have in mind someone like @PanInVietnam in mind) need to understand that this is your position in the historic, 1st century, Jewish kerfuffle which goes on to this day.
That’s part of the reason that I do too.
Excellent. I call upon this passage of scripture frequently in my conversations with Christians and with non-Christians.
As you know, not all Jews believe that.
Again, as you know, not all Jews believe that.
Pancho Frijoles
Active Member
Originally, the Suffering Servant was presented by Isaiah to represent Israel as a nation. There is more than solid evidence of this by reading the preceding chapters, where God calls Israel his Servant again, again, and again (I think about 9 times).
We, later on, "spiritualize" these references, as we do to others in the Tanakh, to see the spiritual kingdom of a spiritual King, Jesus.
This is a very good example of the enormous value of what you call "spiritualizing" the interpretation of the Scriptures, @Matthias.
It is impossible to "prove", in a debate with a Jew, that Jesus meets the messianic prophecies, unless you "spiritualize" those texts.
Otherwise, if you stick to the letter, any Jew will show you that Jesus was never a literal King who established a literal kingdom, leading Israel to literal prosperity, literal peace and literal recognition among the nations of his time.
We, later on, "spiritualize" these references, as we do to others in the Tanakh, to see the spiritual kingdom of a spiritual King, Jesus.
This is a very good example of the enormous value of what you call "spiritualizing" the interpretation of the Scriptures, @Matthias.
It is impossible to "prove", in a debate with a Jew, that Jesus meets the messianic prophecies, unless you "spiritualize" those texts.
Otherwise, if you stick to the letter, any Jew will show you that Jesus was never a literal King who established a literal kingdom, leading Israel to literal prosperity, literal peace and literal recognition among the nations of his time.
Jesus is the ideal, true, perfect, or faithful Israel; natural Israel is a disaster.
Jesus is the Israel story re-run, as it should have been run but wasn’t.
Pancho Frijoles
Active Member
Spiritualizing goes beyond what is written; the search for hidden meanings. The New Testament writers, inspired by God, are the final word on the matter.
This was all the unfolding of God’s plan and purpose from the beginning. The revelation has been completed within the Bible.
Pancho Frijoles
Active Member
From the perspective of the Jews, the New Testament writers, and those of us who believe in their inspiration, have gone way beyond what is written.
For example:
Jesus said "My kingdom is not of this world". This is going beyond what was written in the Tanakh. Never the prophets talked about a Messiah whose kingdom was not of this world.
You believe it by faith. I believe it by faith.
Faith implies seeing beyond what is written.
Which Jews are you talking about? The unbelieving Jews. The New Testament was written by believing Jews, with the exception of Luke’s writings.
Jesus himself is a Jew. He is the interpreter of the Hebrew Bible. He is explaining that his kingdom, the kingdom of God, is not part of the world system of kingdoms. The kingdom of God will replace them when Jesus himself returns. The governments of this world will all fall.
Faith is based on evidence. The evidence is what is written in the scriptures.
“Don’t go beyond what is written.” - Paul
Paul calls on his readers to see what is written and to have faith that what is written is true and will be brought to fruition.
The choice we are confronted with in the New Testament: choose your Jewish side.
Last edited:
Pancho Frijoles
Active Member
Sure, but from the perspective of those unbelieving Jews, believing Jews are apostates.
For example, God established circumcision as a "permanent covenant for all generations", and yet believing Jews considered it as optional.
To believe in the New Testament, you need faith.
That's why you can't use New Testament quotes as a source of doctrinal authority when you are talking to a Jew.
I acknowledge their perspective and wear it.
The unbelieving Jews say that Jesus, himself a Jews (as you know) is wrong. The believing Jews say that Jesus is right. Everyone must choose a side in the Jewish quarrel. The side I’ve chosen is the believers side.
Does it bother me that they call me an apostate? No, not in the least. When I visited the synagogue I wanted to hear for myself the cursing of the apostates / the cursing of me. They did to me what they did to Jesus. I bless those who curse me.
The believing Jew -> Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah, the Son of the living God; and those who belong to him.
I believe in the New Testament. I have the faith of the New Testament -> the faith once and for all delivered to the saints (Jude 1:3) and is the only faith that I contend earnestly for.
Paul did. Peter did. All of the Apostles did. All who belong to Jesus do.
Pancho Frijoles
Active Member
This sounds reasonable. You are manifesting something very personal: your belief, your faith.
They did not use NT texts to support their new interpretations of the Tanakh, since the NT was still being written.
They appealed to the Tanakh, to reason and to give some prophecies and spiritual, extended application/meaning.
They appealed to the action of the Holy Spirit to act on their hearts to change their ways. They appealed to example of a holy life.
I am saying this to you because you wrote that "The New Testament writers, inspired by God, are the final word on the matter."
To admit they are the "final word", you need to have faith in that their revelation not only brings continuity, but also supersedes prior revelation.
Gamaliel’s counsel.
”But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the Law respected by all the people, stood up in the Council and gave orders to put the men out for a short time. And he said to them, ‘Men of Israel, take care what you propse to do to these men. … So in the present case, I say to you, stay away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or action is of men, it will be overthrown; but if it is of God you will not be able to overthrow them; or else you may even be found fighting against God.’”
(Acts 5:34-35, 38-39)
It hasn’t been overthrown. They are fighting against God.
”They took his advice; and after calling the apostles in, they flogged them and ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and then released them.”
(Acts 5:40)
They can’t speak to the Jews using the doctrinal authority of the New Testament as they lived it?
”So then they went on their way from the presence of the Council, rejoicing that they had been considered worthy to suffer shame for his name. And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they kept right on teaching and preaching Jesus the Messiah.”
(Acts 5:41-42)
I must use New Testament quotes as a source of doctrinal authority when speaking to a Jew (and when speaking to non-Jews.)
”But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the Law respected by all the people, stood up in the Council and gave orders to put the men out for a short time. And he said to them, ‘Men of Israel, take care what you propse to do to these men. … So in the present case, I say to you, stay away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or action is of men, it will be overthrown; but if it is of God you will not be able to overthrow them; or else you may even be found fighting against God.’”
(Acts 5:34-35, 38-39)
It hasn’t been overthrown. They are fighting against God.
”They took his advice; and after calling the apostles in, they flogged them and ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and then released them.”
(Acts 5:40)
They can’t speak to the Jews using the doctrinal authority of the New Testament as they lived it?
”So then they went on their way from the presence of the Council, rejoicing that they had been considered worthy to suffer shame for his name. And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they kept right on teaching and preaching Jesus the Messiah.”
(Acts 5:41-42)
I must use New Testament quotes as a source of doctrinal authority when speaking to a Jew (and when speaking to non-Jews.)
Thanks. It is personal but it isn’t any more or less personal to me than it is, or should be, to everyone who is a disciple of Jesus.
They lived the New Testament, in the first 1st century, before it was completely written. Some of it was written in their lifetime. I use New Testament quotes because I live it, in the 21st century. I am them. What they were then, I am now -> a disciple of Jesus. I won’t go beyond what is written in the New Testament. There are no hidden meanings in what the New Testament writers wrote.
With the inspiration of God. It ended with the completing of the New Testament.
Yes.
Why would I write such a thing? It’s simple. You know why. It’s because, like them, I’m a primitive Christian.
I do have that faith.
They didn’t supersede prior revelation. Jesus, the Messiah, is the interpreter of prior revelation. It is the unfolding of revelation, not the superseding of revelation.
Bs"d
Yes, the NT goes way beyond what is written.
Faith implies believing what is written, not making up your own stories.
“… The ancient Sages reject on the one hand the idea that the injunctions received from their fathers will cease to be valid, yet on the other hand they sometimes stress that the Messiah will give Israel a new Torah. RaMBaM states in the 8th and 9th of his 13 dogmas that the ‘Torah which we now have was given to Moses’ and ‘This Torah will not be changed nor will the Creator - may he be blessed - institute any other Torah’. He nevertheless explains in his work ‘Ordinances of the Kings’ that the King anointed as Messiah will ‘sit on his kingly throne and write for himself a Book of the Law in addition to the Law given to our Fathers’ and ‘He will compel Israel to obey these commandments. Not even the NT speaks of the abrogation of the Torah but rather of its ‘fulfillment’. Could this be the same as when the Pesikhta Rabbati says that ‘The Torah will revert to its original state’? Jesus ‘fulfilled’ the punishment of the Law by his atoning death.
According to the Rabbis the Messiah will be invested with such authority. Yalqut Isaiah states that, ‘The Holy One - may he be blessed - will sit (in the Garden of Eden) and draw up a new Torah for Israel, which will be given to them by the Messiah.’ Even the fearful thought of ‘abrogation’ appears in the traditions of the Wise: ‘In the future the commandments will be annulled.’ In the Midrash Mekhilta from the time of the Taanaites - that is, from the first two Christian centuries - we find the statement that, ‘At the end the Torah will be forgotten.’ R. Shimon Ben Eleazar, who was active from ca. 170-200 AD, declares that, ‘This is how it will be in the days of the Messiah; there will be no “thou shalt” and “thou shalt not” commandments (zechut be-hovah).’ Klausner, in his book “The Messianic Idea in Israel”, explains that, ‘The natural interpretation of this is that in the days of the Messiah, the Torah and the Commandments will lose their significance.’”
tovrose.com
According to the Rabbis the Messiah will be invested with such authority. Yalqut Isaiah states that, ‘The Holy One - may he be blessed - will sit (in the Garden of Eden) and draw up a new Torah for Israel, which will be given to them by the Messiah.’ Even the fearful thought of ‘abrogation’ appears in the traditions of the Wise: ‘In the future the commandments will be annulled.’ In the Midrash Mekhilta from the time of the Taanaites - that is, from the first two Christian centuries - we find the statement that, ‘At the end the Torah will be forgotten.’ R. Shimon Ben Eleazar, who was active from ca. 170-200 AD, declares that, ‘This is how it will be in the days of the Messiah; there will be no “thou shalt” and “thou shalt not” commandments (zechut be-hovah).’ Klausner, in his book “The Messianic Idea in Israel”, explains that, ‘The natural interpretation of this is that in the days of the Messiah, the Torah and the Commandments will lose their significance.’”
Tov RoseMessiah will speak a New Torah (Instructions), not like Moses’?
I thought this might be a good conversation starter? What do you think? The future of the Law has preoccupied the Rabbis from early times. They sometimes asked, “Torah, whatever will b…
tovrose.com
Similar threads
