• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOD HIMSELF will be with them[W;105]

Tsk tsk... There are many servants in Isaiah -
  • Isa. 14:2 refers to unnamed foreigners who will become the servants of Israel.
  • Isa. 24:2 refers to the slaves of human masters.
  • Isa. 36:9 and 37:24 refer to servants/subjects of the king of Assyria
  • Isa. 36:11 has several figures referring to themselves politely as “your servants” when talking with an Assyrian official
  • Isa. 37:5 refers to the servants/subjects of King Hezekiah of Judah
  • Isa. 49:7 refers to an unnamed, despised figure who is “the servant of rulers”—i.e., a subject of foreign leaders
This last servant is also likely one of the figures described as a “servant” of the Lord, which brings us to the category we are primarily interested in: those who serve God.

Many of the uses of ‘ebed in Isaiah are in the plural and refer to God’s servants collectively. This theme emerges in chapter 54 and is especially prominent in the final four chapters of the book:
  • In such passages, the servants of God seem to refer to the righteous of Israel (Isa. 54:17, 65:8, 13-15, 66:14).
  • They are expressly identified with “the tribes of your heritage” in Isa. 63:17, and with descendants of Jacob and Judah inIsa. 65:9.
  • However, Isa. 56:6 makes it clear that they also can include foreigners who come to worship God and thus become “his servants.”
We thus see that in Isaiah God actually has many servants.


Individual Servants

Not all uses of ‘ebed are in the plural, and there remain 22 uses which speak of individual servants of the Lord. Four of them are named:

  • The first to be named is Isaiah himself. Isa. 20:3 refers to “my servant Isaiah.”
  • The second is Eliakim son of Hilkiah (Isa. 22:20), who was a man that God called to be the chief steward of the house of David.
  • The third is David himself (Isa. 37:35).
  • And the fourth is the corporate figure of the nation of Israel/Jacob, who is named as God’s servant in multiple passages. A typical example is Isa. 41:8, which speaks of “you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen” (cf. Isa. 41:9, 44:1-2, 21 [2 references], 45:4, 48:20, and 49:3). https://www.ncregister.com/blog/the-servant-s-of-god-in-isaiah
 

So your article says the nation of Israel is the suffering servant of Isaiah 53. That's IMPOSSIBLE. Here's why:

1.The servant of Isaiah 53 is an innocent and guiltless sufferer. Israel is never described as sinless. Isaiah 1:4 says of the nation: "Alas sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity. A brood of evildoers, children who are corrupters!" He then goes on in the same chapter to characterize Judah as Sodom, Jerusalem as a harlot, and the people as those whose hands are stained with blood (verses 10, 15, and 21). What a far cry from the innocent and guiltless sufferer of Isaiah 53 who had "done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth!"

2. The prophet said: "It pleased the LORD to bruise him." Has the awful treatment of the Jewish people (so contrary, by the way, to the teaching of Jesus to love everyone) really been God's pleasure, as is said of the suffering of the servant in Isaiah 53:10 ? If, as some rabbis contend, Isaiah 53 refers to the holocaust, can we really say of Israel's suffering during that horrible period, "It pleased the LORD to bruise him?" Yet it makes perfect sense to say that God was pleased to have Messiah suffer and die as our sin offering to provide us forgiveness and atonement.

3. The person mentioned in this passage suffers silently and willingly. Yet all people, even Israelites, complain when they suffer! Brave Jewish men and women fought in resistance movements against Hitler. Remember the Vilna Ghetto Uprising? Remember the Jewish men who fought on the side of the allies? Can we really say Jewish suffering during the holocaust and during the preceding centuries was done silently and willingly?

4. The figure described in Isaiah 53 suffers, dies, and rises again to atone for his people's sins. The Hebrew word used in Isaiah 53:10 for "sin-offering" is "asham," which is a technical term meaning "sin-offering." See how it is used in Leviticus chapters 5 and 6. Isaiah 53 describes a sinless and perfect sacrificial lamb who takes upon himself the sins of others so that they might be forgiven. Can anyone really claim that the terrible suffering of the Jewish people, however undeserved and unjust, atones for the sins of the world? Whoever Isaiah 53 speaks of, the figure described suffers and dies in order to provide a legal payment for sin so that others can be forgiven. This cannot be true of the Jewish people as a whole, or of any other mere human.

5. It is the prophet who is speaking in this passage. He says: "who has believed our message." The term "message" usually refers to the prophetic message, as it does in Jeremiah 49:14. Also, when we understand the Hebrew parallelism of verse 1, we see "Who has believed our message" as parallel to "to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed." The "arm of the Lord" refers to God's powerful act of salvation. So the message of the speaker is the message of a prophet declaring what God has done to save his people.

6. The prophet speaking is Isaiah himself, who says the sufferer was punished for "the transgression of my people," according to verse 8. Who are the people of Isaiah? Israel. So the sufferer of Isaiah 53 suffered for Israel. So how could he be Israel?

7. The figure of Isaiah 53 dies and is buried according to verses 8 and 9. The people of Israel have never died as a whole. They have been out of the land on two occasions and have returned, but they have never ceased to be among the living. Yet Jesus died, was buried, and rose again.

8. If Isaiah 53 cannot refer to Israel, how about Isaiah himself? But Isaiah said he was a sinful man of unclean lips (Isaiah 6:5-7). And Isaiah did not die as an atonement for our sins. Could it have been Jeremiah? Jeremiah 11:19 does echo the words of Isaiah 53. Judah rejected and despised the prophet for telling them the truth. Leaders of Judah sought to kill Jeremiah, and so the prophet describes himself in these terms. But they were not able to kill the prophet. Certainly Jeremiah did not die to atone for the sins of his people. What of Moses? Could the prophet have been speaking of him? But Moses wasn't sinless either. Moses sinned and was forbidden from entering the promised land (Numbers 20:12). Moses indeed attempted to offer himself as a sacrifice in place of the nation, but God did not allow him to do so (Exodus 32:30-35). Moses, Isaiah, and Jeremiah were all prophets who gave us a glimpse of what Messiah, the ultimate prophet, would be like, but none of them quite fit Isaiah 53.

https://chaim.org/cannot-be-israel
 

More from the previous post:

So what can we conclude? Isaiah 53 cannot refer to the nation of Israel, nor to Isaiah, nor to Moses, nor another prophet. And if not to Moses, certainly not to any lesser man. Yet Messiah would be greater than Moses. As the rabbinic writing "Yalkut" said: "Who art thou, O great mountain? (Zech. iv.7) This refers to the King Messiah. And why does he call him`the great mountain?' because he is greater than the patriarchs, as it is said, `My servant shall be high, and lifted up, and lofty exceedingly' --he will be higher than Abraham...lifted up above Moses...loftier then the ministering angels..." (Quoted in The Fifty-third Chapter of Isaiah According to the Jewish Interpreters, Ktav Publishing House, 1969, Volume 2, page 9.)
 

Isaiah 53:How Do the Rabbis Interpret This?​


Rabbi Moses Alschech(1508-1600) says:
"Our Rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the Messiah, and we shall ourselves also adhere to the same view."
Abrabanel (1437-1508) said earlier:
"This is also the opinion of our own learned men in the majority of their Midrashim."
Rabbi Yafeth Ben Ali ( second half of the 10th Century):
"As for myself, I am inclined to regard it as alluding to the Messiah."
Abraham Farissol ( 1451- 1526) says:
"In this chapter there seem to be considerable resemblances and allusions to the work of the Christian Messiah and to the events which are asserted to have happened to Him, so that no other prophecy is to be found the gist and subject of which can be so immediately applied to Him."
Targum Jonathan ( 4th Century ) gives the introduction on Isa. 52:13:
"Behold, my servant the Messiah..."
Gersonides (1288-1344) on Deut. 18:18:
"In fact Messiah is such a prophet, as it is stated in the Midrasch on the verse,'Behold, my servant shall prosper...' (Isa. 52:13)."
Midrash Tanchuma:
"He was more exalted than Abraham, more extolled than Mose, higher than the archangels" (Isa.52:13).
Yalkut Schimeon ( ascribed to Rabbi Simeon Kara, 12th Century ) says on Zech.4:7:
"He ( the king Messiah ) is greater than the patriarchs, as it is said, 'My servant shall be high, and lifted up, and lofty exceedingly' (Isa. 52:13)."
Maimonides (1135-12O4) wrote to Rabbi Jacob Alfajumi:
"Likewise said Isaiah that He (Messiah) would appear without acknowledging a father or mother: 'He grew up before him as a tender plant and as a root out of a dry ground' etc. (Isa.53:2)."
Tanchuma:
"Rabbi Nachman says: ,The Word MAN in the passage, 'Every man a head of the house of his father' (Num.1,4), refers to the Messiah, the son of David, as it is written, 'Behold the man whose name is Zemach'(the Branch) where Jonathan interprets,'Behold the man Messiah' (Zech.6:12); and so it is said,'A man of pains and known to sickness' (Isa.53:3)."

More in the following link: http://www.hearnow.org/isa_com.html
 

Isaiah 53:How Do the Rabbis Interpret This?​


Rabbi Moses Alschech(1508-1600) says:
"Our Rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the Messiah, and we shall ourselves also adhere to the same view."
Abrabanel (1437-1508) said earlier:
"This is also the opinion of our own learned men in the majority of their Midrashim."
Rabbi Yafeth Ben Ali ( second half of the 10th Century):
"As for myself, I am inclined to regard it as alluding to the Messiah."
Abraham Farissol ( 1451- 1526) says:
"In this chapter there seem to be considerable resemblances and allusions to the work of the Christian Messiah and to the events which are asserted to have happened to Him, so that no other prophecy is to be found the gist and subject of which can be so immediately applied to Him."
Targum Jonathan ( 4th Century ) gives the introduction on Isa. 52:13:
"Behold, my servant the Messiah..."
Gersonides (1288-1344) on Deut. 18:18:
"In fact Messiah is such a prophet, as it is stated in the Midrasch on the verse,'Behold, my servant shall prosper...' (Isa. 52:13)."
Midrash Tanchuma:
"He was more exalted than Abraham, more extolled than Mose, higher than the archangels" (Isa.52:13).
Yalkut Schimeon ( ascribed to Rabbi Simeon Kara, 12th Century ) says on Zech.4:7:
"He ( the king Messiah ) is greater than the patriarchs, as it is said, 'My servant shall be high, and lifted up, and lofty exceedingly' (Isa. 52:13)."
Maimonides (1135-12O4) wrote to Rabbi Jacob Alfajumi:
"Likewise said Isaiah that He (Messiah) would appear without acknowledging a father or mother: 'He grew up before him as a tender plant and as a root out of a dry ground' etc. (Isa.53:2)."
Tanchuma:
"Rabbi Nachman says: ,The Word MAN in the passage, 'Every man a head of the house of his father' (Num.1,4), refers to the Messiah, the son of David, as it is written, 'Behold the man whose name is Zemach'(the Branch) where Jonathan interprets,'Behold the man Messiah' (Zech.6:12); and so it is said,'A man of pains and known to sickness' (Isa.53:3)."

More in the following link: http://www.hearnow.org/isa_com.html
Ask a Jewish person.
 
Nonsense. They're Jews. Wikipedia is a secular-minded rag. They screw up theological issues regularly.
What a load of nonsense, which of course has nothing to do with your opinion of Wikipedia, for that is but one source quoting others, and many others are available if you had bothered to look. Why should your lone assertion mean anything to me? Anyway, it isn't a theological issue for Messianic Jews are just Protestants playing pretend ~ that's it.
 
What a load of nonsense, which of course has nothing to do with your opinion of Wikipedia, for that is but one source quoting others, and many others are available if you had bothered to look. Why should your lone assertion mean anything to me? Anyway, it isn't a theological issue for Messianic Jews are just Protestants playing pretend ~ that's it.
There's Messianic Jews all over the world with their own Synagogues, including some 10,000-15,000 Messianic Jews in Israel.
 
There's Messianic Jews all over the world with their own Synagogues, including some 10,000-15,000 Messianic Jews in Israel.

So? How does that alter my point? It's a stupid concept, as Jews do not believe Jesus is the moshiach. If people believe Jesus is the moshiach, then they are not Jews, they are Christian Protestants and whatever they call themselves is immaterial.
 
So? How does that alter my point? It's a stupid concept, as Jews do not believe Jesus is the moshiach. If people believe Jesus is the moshiach, then they are not Jews, they are Christian Protestants and whatever they call themselves is immaterial.
Messianic Jews who believe in the legitimate Messiah - Jesus - are the true Jews. The others are in the dark.
 
Messianic Jews who believe in the legitimate Messiah - Jesus - are the true Jews. The others are in the dark.

Not according to those of the Jewish religion. The reality of the matter is that none of you know whether the faiths you follow are true or not.
 
Not according to those of the Jewish religion. The reality of the matter is that none of you know whether the faiths you follow are true or not.

I know the Gospel accounts of Jesus are true. There's multiple, independent reports/confirmations of the life of Jesus.

If you think the Gospels are nonsense, then I have a challenge for you: How about you show me your BEST ONE EXAMPLE ( 1 - JUST ONE) of a fictitious person, place, or event in the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). PERSON, PLACE OR EVENT. Cite the pertinent scripture(s) and make your case with some kind of evidence or substantiation why it's fictitious. Please follow the instructions above. Let's see that bad boy.
 
I know the Gospel accounts of Jesus are true. There's multiple, independent reports/confirmations of the life of Jesus.

You KNOW nothing of the sort. You BELIEVE these tales to be true, but you cannot demonstrate them to be true.

If you think the Gospels are nonsense, then I have a challenge for you: How about you show me your BEST ONE EXAMPLE ( 1 - JUST ONE) of a fictitious person, place, or event in the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). PERSON, PLACE OR EVENT. Cite the pertinent scripture(s) and make your case with some kind of evidence or substantiation why it's fictitious. Please follow the instructions above. Let's see that bad boy.

You are demanding one prove a negative, yet again and that is fallacious. Furthermore, you are trying to reverse the burden of proof of the burden of proof. YOU are claiming these tales are true, then YOU have the burden of proof. I don't have to do anything and I don't fall for such tactics. Care to try again?
 
You KNOW nothing of the sort. You BELIEVE these tales to be true, but you cannot demonstrate them to be true.



You are demanding one prove a negative, yet again and that is fallacious. Furthermore, you are trying to reverse the burden of proof of the burden of proof. YOU are claiming these tales are true, then YOU have the burden of proof. I don't have to do anything and I don't fall for such tactics. Care to try again?
That's is M-O. Always dodging a challenge and trying to shift the burden of proof. It's downright dishonest.
 
You KNOW nothing of the sort. You BELIEVE these tales to be true, but you cannot demonstrate them to be true.
You are demanding one prove a negative, yet again and that is fallacious. Furthermore, you are trying to reverse the burden of proof of the burden of proof. YOU are claiming these tales are true, then YOU have the burden of proof. I don't have to do anything and I don't fall for such tactics. Care to try again?
So, because of your vaunted knowledge of the Gospels, you are unable to point out even one fictitious person, place, or event. Very chic!
 
Thanks to Daisy that this verse came up.

#403




Hebrews 3

Jesus Greater Than Moses

3 Therefore, holy brothers and sisters, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, whom we acknowledge as our apostle and high priest.
2 He was faithful to the one who appointed him, just as Moses was faithful in all God’s house.
3 Jesus has been found worthy of
greater honor than Moses, just as the builder of a house has greater honor than the house itself.
4 For every house is built by someone, but God is the builder of everything.




Jesus is given the title, HIGH PRIEST, after all He is the HEAD of His Church.
Is there any other apostle that's given that title, High Priest?
Did Paul or Peter or anyone else, identified themselves as the High Priest?

And yet - Jesus is given, and He actually identifies Himself with the same title - ALPHA and OMEGA - that's meant only for God.







See?
Jesus and Moses were both faithful - and yet, they were not equal. How is that?
Jesus has greater honor than Moses, because He is God - the builder of everything!


John 1:3
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.




See how everything consistently flows and meld together?
 
Last edited:
Thanks to Daisy that this verse came up.

#403




Hebrews 3

Jesus Greater Than Moses

3 Therefore, holy brothers and sisters, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, whom we acknowledge as our apostle and high priest.
2 He was faithful to the one who appointed him, just as Moses was faithful in all God’s house.
3 Jesus has been found worthy of
greater honor than Moses, just as the builder of a house has greater honor than the house itself.
4 For every house is built by someone, but God is the builder of everything.




Jesus is given the title, HIGH PRIEST, after all He is the HEAD of His Church.
Is there any other apostle that's given that title, High Priest?
Did Paul or Peter or anyone else, identified themselves as the High Priest?

And yet - Jesus is given, and He actually identifies Himself with the same title - ALPHA and OMEGA - that's meant only for God.







See?
Jesus and Moses were both faithful - and yet, they were not equal. How is that?
Jesus has greater honor than Moses, because He is God - the builder of everything!


John 1:3
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.




See how everything consistently flows and meld together?
A veritable potage of mythology!
 
Thank you to @Daisy for asking the question.
Her question has given another biblical evidence for the Trinity.


then I ask them, "But even if that were so, what about the holy spirit...if it is part of the same God as the Father, why does Jesus not say that it knows what the Father knows?"...that is a question they can't answer...



here is the answer.



1 Cor 2

10 these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit.
The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God.
11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them?
In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.
12 What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us.
13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words.
14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from
the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.

15 The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments,
16 for,

“Who has known the mind of the Lord
so as to instruct him?”

But we have the mind of Christ.





What do you think it means, when we refer to "The Spirit?"
Whose Spirit is it? G O D.
So - why can't it not know?


Having the mind of Christ is having the mind of GOD.



Voila! ....................THE TRINITY!
 
Christ (God in human form), had sacrificed Himself for us.
That's how GOD can purely make claim with all honesty that ........................................HE LOVES US.



John 3:16
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.




It was God, who died for us - in the person of Jesus (The Word), who came to us as The Son of GOD.




1 Timothy 3

15 if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
16 Beyond all question, the mystery from which true godliness springs is great:


He appeared in the flesh,
was vindicated by the Spirit,[d]
was seen by angels,
was preached among the nations,
was believed on in the world,
was taken up in glory.
 
Back
Top Bottom