# Isaiah 53 as Israel: the contention



## Cifrado (Feb 21, 2013)

So the last day or so iv been arguing on the forums whether or not Isaiah 53 points to the Messiah, or speaks of Israel. His argument is as follows:

For he suffered because of our transgressions. Israel is a House or name as is norm for the OT i.e. house of David, Saul, Solomon. All of these houses are considered "he". Israel is the he. "Our", is the people who make up the house, aka Israelites. He (Israel aka house/nation) suffered for "our" (people of Israel) transgressions. The nation of Israel suffered because the people who make up Israel were the ones causing the nation to suffer. Had they done right, Israel wouldn't have suffered as a nation and been crushed and pierced (aka enslaved by other nations). You must look at it from the time in which it was written and what going on. It is not Messianic.


First, context is key. Isaiah speaks of Israel for the entirety of the book he wrote. It is out of place to go from speaking of Israel as a servant and one who suffers into a Jesus prophecy. Second, the metaphor is in line with everything in the OT. Israel is personified over and over.

For he suffered because of our transgressions. Israel is a House or name as is norm for the OT i.e. house of David, Saul, Solomon. All of these houses are considered "he". Israel is the he. "Our", is the people who make up the house, aka Israelites. He (Israel aka house/nation) suffered for "our" (people of Israel) transgressions. The nation of Israel suffered because the people who make up Israel were the ones causing the nation to suffer. Had they done right, Israel wouldn't have suffered as a nation and been crushed and pierced (aka enslaved by other nations). You must look at it from the time in which it was written and what going on. It is not Messianic.

"It is not talking about suffering for anothers sins. Above I showed the metaphor. "He" is Israel, "Our" is Israelites. Israel is a house and a servant that suffers because of its peoples sins. That why the house of Israel was captive, enslaved, marred beyond recognition, and pierced via slavery as I directly showed was from Exodus, Your misunderstanding the template. Jesus does not fit it like you think. Men from 2000 years ago thought this was a messianic prophecy and wrote a story about a messiah figure that they pieced together out of thin air."

I have used some of the existing threads on the subject to combat his response, but I am at a loss for a rebuttal for the above reply. I was hoping some of you might be able to shed some light on this issue. I will do my best to reason with him even if in the end he refuses to be reasonable and accept the obvious.


----------



## Jack K (Feb 21, 2013)

I don't mean to make it sound simple, but does the guy you're discussing this with believe the truthfulness of the New Testament? 1 Peter 2:24 quotes Isaiah 53 in regard to Jesus. So does Matthew 8:17. As does Mark 15:28. And John 12:38. And Acts 7:32-33. And I might be missing some.

So if one believes Peter, Matthew, Mark, John and Luke, one has to believe that Isaiah 53 is about Jesus. Or am I missing something?

Or, if the fellow you're discussing this with wants you to prove that Jesus is the messiah and the suffering servant using the Old Testament alone, I think you're going to have to branch out well beyond just one chapter of Scripture. It's the totality of the OT message that makes the point. The Bereans took weeks of careful study to confirm it.


----------



## Cifrado (Feb 21, 2013)

Jack K said:


> I don't mean to make it sound simple, but does the guy you're discussing this with believe the truthfulness of the New Testament? 1 Peter 2:24 quotes Isaiah 53 in regard to Jesus. So does Matthew 8:17. As does Mark 15:28. And John 12:38. And Acts 7:32-33. And I might be missing some.
> 
> So if one believes Peter, Matthew, Mark, John and Luke, one has to believe that Isaiah 53 is about Jesus. Or am I missing something?
> 
> Or, if the fellow you're discussing this with wants you to prove that Jesus is the messiah and the suffering servant using the Old Testament alone, I think you're going to have to branch out well beyond just one chapter of Scripture. It's the totality of the OT message that makes the point. The Bereans took weeks of careful study to confirm it.



He believes that Paul and the disciples misinterpreted the scriptures. In fact, he made this claim earlier. I replied by saying that "Paul is not the originator of the Doctrine of Jesus as the Messiah, Jesus is the originator of that doctrine. He himself stated many times that all of the Old testament was about him. In Luke 24:27 for instance: "And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself."

His response was this:
_
Actually Paul is the originator of christianity as we know it today. Almost every concept of Jesus that christians have today stems from Pauls interpretations of him. Read the excerpt below and the entire article that I linked.

What Would Christianity Be Like if Paul Had Never Lived? By Bart Ehrman - Beliefnet.com

For more than a century some scholars have claimed that Paul should be understood as the "second founder of Christianity." What they mean is that Christianity is more than just the religion that Jesus preached. It is also the religion that preaches about Jesus. And more than any other person, it was the apostle Paul who shifted the focus of the religion from the proclamation of Jesus to the proclamation about Jesus. One could in fact make a case that without Paul, Christianity as we know it today would never have been possible, and that the Western world--which continues to be, nominally, at least, Christian--would never have adopted this faith, and would have remained firmly committed to the various polytheistic religions of the Roman empire._

I don't think hes willing to accept that Isaiah 53 is speaking of the messiah because of the implications it would have on the divinity of Christ, let alone recognize the entire scriptures are about him. Though nonetheless, I would like to show him that Isaiah 53 cant possibly be referring to Israel.


----------



## SeanPatrickCornell (Feb 21, 2013)

Oh boy. A Bart Ehrman reader. :S


----------



## Loopie (Feb 21, 2013)

Nate,

I would ask the person you are debating with to read ALL of Isaiah 53 very carefully. There are a few things I have put in bold that should raise question marks (if it is assumed that the entire chapter is talking about a 'house':

Isaiah 53:1-12 (NASB) 
1 Who has believed our message? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? 
2 For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot, And like a root out of parched ground; He has no stately form or majesty That we should look upon Him, Nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him. 
3 He was despised and forsaken of men, A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; And like one from whom men hide their face He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. 
4 Surely our griefs He Himself bore, And our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, Smitten of God, and afflicted. 
5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed. 
6 All of us like sheep have gone astray, Each of us has turned to his own way; But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all To fall on Him. 
7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth. 
8 By oppression and judgment He was taken away; And as for His generation, who considered That He was cut off out of the land of the living For the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due? 
9 *His grave was assigned with wicked men, Yet He was with a rich man in His death, Because He had done no violence, Nor was there any deceit in His mouth.* 
10 But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting Him to grief; If He would render Himself as a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand. 
11 As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied; *By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, As He will bear their iniquities. *
12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, And He will divide the booty with the strong; Because He poured out Himself to death, And was numbered with the transgressors; *Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors. *

Obviously I believe that every single verse of this chapter cannot be looked at as referring to the 'house' of David, Solomon, etc. But I put in bold a few parts that should bring about some questions for your friend to answer. 

1) Since when did any member of the house of David (let alone the entire house of David) avoid doing violence or having deceit in his mouth? King David himself committed murder and adultery. So how could this verse be applied to the ENTIRE house?

2) Since when did the house of David (or any house of Israel) 'justify' anyone, or bear their iniquities? It is not simply that the house of David is suffering the consequences (after-effects) of the sins of Israel, but rather the person who is being referred to in this passage actually 'bears' iniquities of others. Since when did anyone in Israel (other than Christ) ever do that?

Those are just a few questions that should at least give some pause to the person you are having this discussion with. He needs to look at the entire chapter (just like he needs to look at ALL the Old Testament).


----------



## Cifrado (Feb 22, 2013)

His most recent reply is this: 

_Below is an analysis of Isaiah which I hope will open your understanding that it is not about Jesus and will answer your post completely without going through each point.

Here is the context of Isaiah and who the servant is.

1. “But you, Israel, are my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen.” (Isaiah 41:8-9)

2. “Yet hear now, O Jacob My servant and Israel whom I have chosen.” (Isaiah 44:1)

3. “Remember these, O Jacob, And Israel, for you are My servant, I have formed you, you are My servant.” (Isaiah 44:21)

4. “…for Jacob My servant’s sake, and Israel My elect.” (Isaiah 45:4)

5. “The Lord has redeemed His servant Jacob.” (Isaiah 48:20)

6. “You are My servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.” (Isaiah 49:3

The context is set all through Isaiah as you can see the servant that Isaiah speaks of is Israel.

ISAIAH 52: “Behold, My [God’s] servant [Israel] will succeed; he [Israel] will be exalted and become high and exceedingly lofty. Just as multitudes were astonished over you [Israel] …so will the many nations [exclaim about him [Israel] and [Gentile] kings will shut their mouths [in amazement] for they [Gentiles] will see that which had never been told to them [Gentiles], and will perceive things they (Gentiles] had never heard.” (Isaiah 52:15)

ISAIAH 53:3: “He [Israel] was despised and isolated from men, a man of pains and accustomed to illness [not grief]. As one from whom we would hide our faces; he was despised, and we had no regard for him.”

ANALYSIS: “He” [the Jewish People] was subjected to 2000 years of antiSemitism, “despised,” and forced to live in walled ghettos in Europe “isolated from men” and “we “ [Gentiles] had no regard for “him” [the Jewish People].

ISAIAH 53:4: “But in truth, it was our ills that he bore, and our pains that he carried-but we had regarded him diseased, [not sorrows] stricken by God, and afflicted!”

ANALYSIS: The Gentiles admit that it was “our” [the Gentiles] “ills and pains” that “he” [the Jews] bore. The Gentiles regarded the Jews cursed by God and “diseased, stricken, and afflicted.” Clearly, Jesus was not “accustomed to illness, diseased, stricken or afflicted.”

ISAIAH 53:5: “He was pained because of our rebellious sins and oppressed through our iniquities; the chastisement upon him was for our benefit, and through his wounds, we were healed.”

ANALYSIS: “He” [the Jewish People] “was pained” [suffered] because of “our” [the Gentiles] rebellious sins and “he” [the Jewish People] was “oppressed” by “our” [the Gentiles] “iniquities” [sins]. The Gentiles believed that the suffering of the Jewish People was deserved because the Jews rejected and killed Jesus but his death redeemed their sins. “We” [the Gentiles] believed that they were “healed” [justified] “through his [the Jewish People’s] wounds” that the Gentiles inflicted_


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Feb 22, 2013)

Moderating>>>

This longer this thread goes, the more it resembles an argument-by-proxy. Contributors end up challenging a person who isn't here, but who's represented by someone who disagrees with him.

The argument that we have a "fair representation" because so much is quoted, only changes the nature of the problem.

And, we don't want links to the original, because "board-wars" are not fitting.

It is painful to hear about a friend having a hard time in an argument he freely chose. But if you aren't ready for the challenge, it can't be the responsibility of others to supply the defect.

Come in, ask questions, get an education (such as it is) from the PB. But if we are informing so that these ideas can be immediately lifted and dropped in another context in order to "answer" contrary opinions, this is the wrong use of education.

Don't get into an exchange you aren't ready for.


----------

