[ETWolverine]

Ex. 15:2... His exaltation predicted as Yeshua... Acts 7:55,56
Ex. 15:11... His Character-Holiness... Luke 1:35; Acts 4:27

Ex 15:1 Moses and the Israelites then sang this song to God. It went:
I will sing to God for His great victory, Horse and rider He threw in the sea.

15:2 My strength and song is God And this is my deliverance;
This is my God, I will enshrine Him, My father's God, I will exalt Him.

15:3 God is the Master of war, God is His name.

15:4 Pharaoh's chariots and army He cast in the sea;
His very best officers Were drowned in the Red Sea.

15:5 The depths covered them; They sank to the bottom Like a stone.

15:6 Your right Hand, O God Is awesome in power;
Your right Hand, O God crushes the foe.
15:7 In Your great Majesty You broke Your opponents;
You sent forth Your wrath, It devoured them like straw.

15:8 At the blast of Your Nostrils the waters towered.
Flowing water stood like a wall. The depths congealed In the heart of the sea.

15:9 The enemy said, 'I will give chase; I will overtake, divide the spoils
I will satisfy myself. I will draw my sword; My hand will demolish them.'

15:10 You made Your wind blow; The sea covered them.
They sank like lead In the mighty waters.

15:11 Who is like You among powers, God? Who is like You, majestic in holiness,
Awesome in praise, doing wonders?

15:12 You put forth Your right Hand; The earth swallowed them.

15:13 With love, You led the people You redeemed;
With might, You led [them] to Your holy shrine.

15:14 Nations heard and shuddered; Terror gripped those who dwell in Philistia.

15:15 Edom's chiefs then panicked; Moab's heroes were seized with trembling;
Canaan's residents melted away.

15:16 Fear and dread fell upon them. At the greatness of Your Arm
They are still as stone.
Until Your people crossed, O God, Until the people You gained crossed over.

15:17 O bring them and plant them On the mount You possess.
The place You dwell in Is Your accomplishment, God.
The shrine of God Your Hands have founded.

15:18 God will reign forever and ever.

Did Jesus fight any wars against Egypt? Did he drown any enemy armies in the sea? Was Jesus ever referred to as a G-d of War? Were the Philistines, the Edomites, the Canaanites and the Moabites afraid of Jesus? Last I heard, all of those nations were wiped out long before Jesus was born. Did Jesus "plant the people on the mountain he possessed? If Jesus did not do these things, then these verses cannot refer to Jesus.

Ex. 17:6... The Spiritual Rock of Israel... 1 Cor. 10;4

Ex 17:1 The entire Israelite community moved on from the Sin desert, traveling according to God's instructions until they camped in Rephidim. There was no water for the people to drink.
17:2 The people began to quarrel with Moses. 'Give us water to drink!' they exclaimed.
'Why are you quarreling with me?' asked Moses. 'Are you trying to test God?'
17:3 The people began to suffer thirst because [of the lack] of water, and they began demonstrating against Moses. 'Why did you bring us out of Egypt?' demanded [the leader]. 'Do you want to make me, my children and my livestock die of thirst?'
17:4 Moses cried out to God. 'What shall I do for this people?' he said. 'Before long they will stone me!'
17:5 God said to Moses, 'March in front of the people along with the elders of Israel. Take in your hand the staff with which you struck the Nile, and go.
17:6 I will stand before you there on the rock at Horeb. You must strike the rock, and water will come out of it for the people to drink.' Moses did this in the presence of the elders of Israel.
17:7 [Moses] named the place Testing-and-Argument because the people had argued and had tested God. They had asked, 'Is God with us or not?'

This scriture doesn't refer to some kind of "spiritual rock". It refers to the literal rock from which Moses, with the help of G-d, brought water for the Israelites in the desert. Where did you get the silly idea that the rock referred to in this verse is anything but a literal rock?

Ex. 33:19... His Character-Merciful... Lu. 1:72

33:17 God said to Moses, 'Since you have been pleasing to Me and I know you by name, I will also fulfill this request of yours.'
33:18 'Please let me have a vision of Your Glory,' begged [Moses].
33:19 [God] replied, 'I will make all My good pass before you, and reveal the Divine Name in your presence. [But still,] I will have mercy and show kindness to whomever I desire.'

Jesus may indeed have been a merciful person. I have no idea. I never met the guy. But where in this verse does it say that this character trait refers to Jesus? Where is there any prophetic statement in this verse? And is Jesus the only person ever born who showed mercy and kindness? I think not. So where is there any proof that this verse in any way refers to someone in the future who will be named Jesus, and who will be the son of G-d, and who will be merciful?

Lev.14:11.. The leper cleansed-Sign to priesthood.. Lu.5:12-14; Acts 6:7

Lev 14:1 God spoke to Moses, saying:
14:2 This is the law concerning the leper when he is purified and placed under the jurisdiction of the priest.
14:3 The priest shall go outside the camp, where he shall examine the leper to determine that the leprous mark has healed.
14:4 The priest shall then order that for the person undergoing purification there be taken two live kosher birds, a piece of cedar, some crimson [wool], and a hyssop branch.
14:5 The priest shall give orders that one bird be slaughtered over fresh spring water in a clay bowl.
14:6 He shall then take the live bird together with the piece of cedar, the crimson wool, and the hyssop. Along with the live bird, he shall dip [the other articles] into the spring water mixed with the blood of the slaughtered bird.
14:7 He shall then sprinkle [this mixture] seven times on the person undergoing purification from the leprous curse, thus rendering him clean. He shall send the living bird away toward the fields.
14:8 The person undergoing purification shall then immerse his clothing, and [the priest] shall shave off all the person's hair. He shall then immerse in a mikvah and thus complete [the first part] of the purification process. He may return to the camp, but he must remain outside his tent for seven days.
14:9 On the seventh day, [the priest] shall shave off all [the person's] hair. His head, beard, eyebrows and other [body] hair must all be shaved off. He shall then immerse his clothing and body in a mikvah and he is clean.
14:10 On the eighth day, he shall take two unblemished [male] sheep, one unblemished yearling female sheep, three-tenths [of an ephah] of the best grade wheat flour mixed with oil as a meal offering, and one log of [olive] oil.
14:11 The priest tending to the purification process shall stand [all these items] and the person undergoing purification before God at the Communion Tent entrance.
14:12 The priest shall take one [male] sheep and present it as a guilt offering along with the log of oil. He shall wave them in the manner prescribed for a wave offering before God.
14:13 He shall then slaughter the sheep in the same place where burnt offerings and sin offerings are slaughtered, in a holy place. This guilt offering is holy of holies, and it is just like a sin offering to the priest.
14:14 The priest shall take some of the guilt offering's blood and place it on the right ear lobe, right thumb, and right big toe of the person undergoing purification.
14:15 The priest shall take some of the log of oil and pour it into the palm of [another] priest's hand.
14:16 [This second] priest shall then dip his right forefinger into the oil in his left hand, and with his finger, sprinkle some oil before God seven times.
14:17 The priest shall place some of the oil in his hand on the right ear, right thumb, and right big toe of the person undergoing purification, over the guilt offering's blood.
14:18 The priest shall then place the rest of the oil in his hand on the head of the person undergoing purification. In this manner, the priest shall make atonement for him before God.
14:19 The priest shall then sacrifice the sin offering to remove the defilement for the person undergoing purification. After that, he shall slaughter the burnt offering,
14:20 and the priest shall present the burnt offering and the meal offering on the altar. The priest shall thus make atonement for him, and [the person] is then ritually clean.

Wow, I had no idea that Jesus was a leper. I though he only healed lepers. I had no idea that he was one himself. If this verse is to apply to the "purification of Jesus", then Jesus must have been a leper, as discussed in verse 2 above. Furthermore, I had no idea that Jesus sacrificed birds, washed his clothing in the river, then sacrificed sheep. If he was God, then who was he making those sacrifices to? Himself? It seems kind of silly. And if Jesus was God, why was he unpure in the first place that he should have to go through a purification process? Isn't G-d, by His very nature, the essence of purity and holiness? Why would he need any form of purification?

[ETWolverine]

Lev.16:15-17.. Prefigures Christ's once-for-all death.. Heb. 9:7-14
Lev.16:27.Suffering outside the Camp.. Mt. 27:33; Heb. 13:11, 12

Leviticus 16 speaks about the Yom Kippur service. It talks about multiple sacrifices: a Bull and two goats. Even if you believe the story of Jesus, there was only a single "sacrifice", not multiple ones. And I thought that Jesus was likened to a "lamb" not a bull or a goat. Which of these three animals refers to Jesus? And did Jesus sacrifice take place, as God commanded, in the Sanctuary? Finally, I thought Jesus was supposed to be a descendant from Judah. The Priests were decended from Levi. How could Jesus have taken the role of a Priest when he wasn't qualified to be such? Again, I think that it is hard to apply these verses to Jesus when Jesus never did these things.

Lev.17:11.. The Blood-the life of the flesh.. Mt. 26;28; Mk. 10:45
Lev.17:11... It is the blood that makes atonement... 1 Jn. 3:14-18

17:3 If any member of the family of Israel sacrifices an ox, sheep or goat, whether in the camp or outside the camp,
17:4 and does not bring it to the Communion Tent to be offered as a sacrifice to God before His sanctuary, that person is considered a murderer. That person has committed an act of murder, and he shall be cut off [spiritually] from among his people.
17:5 The Israelites shall thus take the sacrifices that they are offering in the fields, and bring them to God, to the Communion Tent entrance, [where they are given] to the priest. They can then be offered as peace offerings to God.
17:6 The priest will then dash the blood on God's altar at the Communion Tent's entrance, and burn the choice parts as an appeasing fragrance to God.
17:7 The Israelites will then stop sacrificing to the demons who [continue to] tempt them. This shall be an eternal law for them for all generations.
17:8 [Also] tell them that if any person, whether from the family of Israel or a proselyte who joins them, prepares a burnt offering or other sacrifice,
17:9 and does not bring it to the Communion Tent to present it to God, that person shall be cut off [spiritually] from his people.
17:10 If any person, whether of the family of Israel or a proselyte who joins them, eats any blood, I will direct My anger against the person who eats blood and cut him off [spiritually] from among his people.
17:11 This is because the life-force of the flesh is in the blood; and I therefore gave it to you to be [placed] on the altar to atone for your lives. It is the blood that atones for a life,
17:12 and I therefore told the Israelites, 'Let none of you eat blood.' A proselyte who joins you shall [likewise] not eat blood.
17:13 If any man, whether of the family of Israel or a proselyte who joins them, traps an animal or bird that may be eaten and spills its blood, he must cover [the blood] with earth.
17:14 [All this] is because every living creature has its blood associated with its life-force. Tell the Israelites not to eat any blood, since the life-force of all flesh is in its blood. Whoever eats it shall be cut off [spiritually].
17:15 If any person, whether native born or a proselyte, eats a creature which has died on its own and which [is forbidden only because it] has a fatal lesion, he must immerse his clothes and his body in a mikvah. He then remains unclean until evening, whereupon he is clean.
17:16 If he does not immerse his clothing and body, then he can bear his guilt.

First of all, you are correct, blood does atone. However, it is the blood of animals, as discussed in verse 3... and ox, sheep or goat. Second of all, this is an admonision not to bring sacrifices to false gods or to drink blood. Where is there any reference to Jesus or any future person in this verse? How is it interpreted as a prophesy, rather than a commandment?

Lev.23:36-37.. The Drink-offering: "If any man thirst." Jn. 19:31-36

23:2 speak to the Israelites and say to them: There are special times that you must celebrate as sacred holidays to God. The following are My special times:
23:3 You may do work during the six weekdays, but Saturday is a Sabbath of Sabbaths. It is a sacred holiday to God, when you shall do no work. Wherever you may live, it is God's Sabbath.
23:4 These are God's festivals that you must celebrate as sacred holidays at their appropriate times:
23:5 The afternoon of the 14th day of the first month is [the time that you must sacrifice] God's Passover offering.
23:6 Then, on the 15th of that month, it is God's festival of matzahs, when you eat matzahs for seven days.
23:7 The first day shall be a sacred holiday to you, when you may not do any service work.
23:8 You shall then bring sacrifices to God for seven days. The seventh day is a sacred holiday when you may not do any service work.
23:9 God spoke to Moses, telling him to
23:10 speak to the Israelites and say to them:
When you come to the land that I am going to give you, and you reap its harvest, you must bring an omer of your first reaping to the priest.
23:11 He shall wave it in the motions prescribed for a wave offering to God, so that it will be acceptable for you. The priest shall make this wave offering on the day after the first day of the [Passover] holiday.
23:12 On the day you make the wave offering of the omer, you shall prepare an unblemished yearling sheep as a burnt offering to God.
23:13 Its meal offering shall be two-tenths [of an ephah] of wheat meal, mixed with oil, a fire offering to God. Its libation offering shall be one-fourth hin of wine.
23:14 Until the day that you bring this sacrifice to your God, you may not eat bread, roasted grain or fresh grain. This shall be an eternal law for all generations, no matter where you live.

23:15 You shall then count seven complete weeks after the day following the [Passover] holiday when you brought the omer as a wave offering,
23:16 until the day after the seventh week, when there will be [a total of] 50 days. [On that 50th day] you may present new grain as a meal offering to God.
23:17 From the land upon which you live, you shall bring two loaves of bread as a wave offering. They shall be made of two-tenths [of an ephah] of wheat meal, and shall be baked as leavened bread. They are the first-harvest offering to God.
23:18 Together with this bread, you shall sacrifice seven unblemished yearling sheep, one young bull, and two rams. These, along with their meal offerings and libations shall be a burnt offering to God, a fire offering as an appeasing fragrance to God.
23:19 You shall also prepare one goat as a sin offering, and two yearling sheep as peace sacrifices.
23:20 The priest shall make the motions prescribed for a wave offering before God with the bread for the first-harvest offering and the two sheep. They belong to the priest as something sacred to God.
23:21 This very day shall be celebrated as a sacred holiday when no service work may be done. This is an eternal law for all generations, no matter where you may live.
23:22 [Furthermore,] when you reap your land's harvest, do not completely harvest the ends of your fields. [Also] do not pick up individual stalks that may have fallen. You must leave [all these] for the poor and the stranger. I am God your Lord.
23:23 God spoke to Moses, telling him to
23:24 speak to the Israelites and say: The first day of the seventh month shall be a day of rest. It is a sacred holiday for remembrance [and] sounding [of the ram's horn].
23:25 Do not do any service work [on that day]. Bring a fire offering to God.

23:26 God spoke to Moses, saying:
23:27 The 10th of this seventh month shall be the Day of Atonement for you. It is a sacred holiday when you must fast and bring a fire offering to God.
23:28 Do not do any work on this day; it is a day of atonement, when you gain atonement before God your Lord.
23:29 If anyone does not fast on this day, he shall be cut off [spiritually] from his people.
23:30 [Similarly,] if one does any work on this day, I will destroy him [spiritually] from among his people.
23:31 Do not do any work [on this day]. This is an eternal law for all generations, no matter where you may live.
23:32 It is a sabbath of sabbaths to you, [and a day] when you must fast. You must keep this holiday from the ninth of the month until [the next] night.

23:33 God spoke to Moses, telling him to
23:34 speak to the Israelites, as follows: The 15th of this seventh month shall be the festival of Sukkoth to God, [lasting] seven days.
23:35 The first day shall be a sacred holiday when you may not do any service work.
23:36 For seven days then, you shall present a fire offering to God.
The eighth day is a sacred holiday to you when you shall bring a fire offering to God. It is a time of retreat when you may do no service work.
23:37 The above are God's special times which you must keep as sacred holidays. [They are times] when you must present to God a burnt offering, a meal offering, a sacrifice and libations, each depending on the particular day.

I'm curious. Where do you see any reference in this section to a thirsty person? The only mention of any form if liquid is in wine and oil poured on the Alter as part of the sacrificial services. Where is there any reference to offering a man a drink? And it's not a "drink offering", but rather a LIBATION offering... a pouring of wine on the Alter, not offering it to a person to drink. That is where you mistranslate the scripture. And none of this is any sort of reference to Jesus or any other Messianic entity. The context makes that clear.

Continued

[ETWolverine]

Num. 9:12... Not a bone of Him broken... John 19:31-36

Num 9:1 God spoke to Moses in the Sinai Desert, in the second year of the Exodus of Egypt, in the first month, saying, 9:2'The Israelites shall prepare the Passover offering at its proper time.9:3The proper time for its preparation shall be the 14th day of this month in the afternoon. They must prepare it in accordance with all its decrees and laws.'9:4Moses spoke to the Israelites, [telling them] to prepare the Passover offering.9:5They prepared the Passover offering in the Sinai Desert, on the 14th of the first [month] in the afternoon. The Israelites did exactly as God had instructed Moses.9:6There were, however, some men who had come in contact with the dead, and were therefore ritually unclean, so that they could not prepare the Passover offering on that day. During the course of that day, they approached Moses and Aaron.9:7'We are ritually unclean as a result of contact with the dead,' the men said to [Moses]. 'But why should we lose out and not be able to present God's offering at the right time, along with the other Israelites?'9:8'Wait here,' replied Moses. 'I will hear what orders God gives regarding your case.'

9:9 God spoke to Moses, telling him to
9:10 speak to the Israelites, saying: If any person is ritually unclean from contact with the dead, or is on a distant journey, whether among you [now] or in future generations, he shall still have the opportunity to prepare God's Passover offering.
9:11 He shall prepare it on the afternoon of the 14th of the second month, and shall eat it with matzahs and bitter herbs.
9:12 He shall not leave any of it over until morning, and not break any bone in it. He shall thus prepare it according to all the rules of the [regular] Passover offering.
9:13However, if a man is ritually clean, and not on a distant journey, and he neglects to prepare the Passover offering, that person shall be cut off [spiritually] from his people. He shall bear his guilt for not offering God's sacrifice at the prescribed time.
9:14 If a proselyte joins you, he must also prepare God's Passover offering, presenting it according to the rules and laws governing the Passover offering. There shall thus be a single law for [all of] you, the proselyte and native born [alike].

These are the laws of how to make up the pascal sacrifice is one was unpure at the regular time of Passover and unable to do it. The sacrifice is of a lamb, not a person. It follows all the laws of the regular Passover sacrifice. Again, did anyone eat Jesus' roasted flesh with Matzoh and bitter herbs? If not, then these verses cannot apply to Jesus.

Num. 21:9... The serpent on a pole-Christ lifted... Jn. 3:14-18

Num 21:4 [The Israelites] moved on from Hor Mountain, going by way of the South Sea so as to skirt the territory of Edom. The people began to become discouraged along the way.
21:5 The people spoke out against God and Moses, 'Why did you take us out of Egypt to die in the desert? There is no bread and no water! We are getting disgusted with this insubstantial food.'
21:6 God sent poisonous snakes against the people, and when they began biting the people, a number of Israelites died.
21:7 The people came to Moses and said, 'We have sinned by speaking against God and you. Pray to God, and have Him take the snakes away from us.'
When Moses prayed for the people,
21:8 God said to Moses, 'Make yourself [the image of] a venomous snake, and place it on a banner. Everyone who is bitten shall look at it and live.'
21:9 Moses made a copper snake and placed it on a high pole. Whenever a snake bit a man, he would gaze at the copper snake and live.

This section is talking about a cure for a specific snake affliction that took place in the time of Moses. There is no reference here to any sort of prophesy, any sort of statements about the future, or any reference to the Messiah. Furthermore, the last time you mentioned a serpent, it was as a surrogate for Satan... in Genesis 3:15. So are you trying to say that Jesus is Satan? That both Satan and Jesus are to be likened to a snake? That doesn't seem to follow Christian philosophy very well. Are you SURE you want to liken Jesus to a snake?

Num. 24:17... Time: "I shall see him, but not now."... Gal. 4:4

Num 24:1 When Balaam realized that God desired to bless Israel, he did not seek out the occult forces as he had done before. Instead, he set his gaze toward the desert.
24:2 When Balaam raised his eyes, and saw Israel dwelling at peace by tribes, God's spirit was on him.
24:3 He proclaimed his oracle and said, 'This is the word of Beor's son Balaam, the word of the man with the enlightened eye.
24:4 It is the word of one who hears God's sayings, who sees a vision of the Almighty, falling [into a meditative trance] with mystical insight.
24:5 'How good are your tents, Jacob, your tabernacles, Israel.
24:6 [They] stretch out like streams, like gardens by the river; they are like the aloes God has planted, like cedars by the water.
24:7 His dipper shall overflow, and his crops shall have abundant water.
'When their kingdom is established, their king shall be greater than Agag.

24:8 Since God brought them out of Egypt, they are like His highest expression of strength. [God] shall devour His enemy nations, grinding their bones and piercing them with His arrows.
24:9 [Israel] crouches, lies like a lion, like an awesome lion, who will dare rouse him? Those who bless you are blessed, and those who curse you are cursed.'
24:10 Furious at Balaam, Balak struck his hand together. 'I brought you to curse my enemies,' said Balak to Balaam, 'but you blessed them these three times!
24:11 Now go home as fast as you can! I promised to honor you, but God won't let you get any honor!'
24:12 Balaam said to Balak, 'My exact words to the messengers you sent me were,
24:13 'Even if Balak gives me his whole palace full of gold and silver, I cannot do anything good or bad on my own that would violate God's word.' Isn't that true? I must proclaim whatever God declares.
24:14 Now I am returning to my people, but first I will advise you about what this nation will do to your people in the final days.'
24:15 He then proclaimed his oracle and said, 'This is the word of Beor's son Balaam, the word of the man with the enlightened eye.
24:16 It is the word of the one who hears God's sayings and knows the Highest One's will; who sees a vision of the Almighty while fallen [in a meditative trance] with mystical insight.
24:17 'I see it, but not now; I perceive it, but not in the near future. A star shall go forth from Jacob, and a staff shall arise in Israel, crushing all of Moab's princes, and dominating all of Seth's descendants.
24:18 Edom shall be demolished, and his enemy Seir destroyed, but Israel shall be triumphant.
24:19 Out of Jacob shall come an absolute ruler who will obliterate the city's last survivors.'
24:20 When [Balaam] saw Amalek, he proclaimed his oracle and said, 'First among nations is Amalek, but in the end he will be destroyed forever.'
24:21 When he saw the Kenites, he proclaimed his oracle and said, 'You live in a fortress, and have placed your nest in a cliff.
24:22 But when the time comes to destroy the Kenites, how long will Assyria hold back from you?'
24:23 He then declared his oracle and said, 'Alas! Who can survive God's devastation?
24:24 Warships shall come from the ports of the Kittim, and they will lay waste Assyria and Eber. But in the end they too shall be destroyed forever.'
24:25 With that, Balaam set out and returned home. Balak also went on his way.

Did Jesus destroy Moab or dominate all of Seth's descendants? He couldn't even "dominate" the Jews, much less all the descendants of Seth. Did Jesus destroy Edom and Amalek and Ken? If not, then these verses cannot apply to Jesus.

Continued...

[Soldout]

Wow, I had no idea that Jesus was a leper. I though he only healed lepers. I had no idea that he was one himself. If this verse is to apply to the "purification of Jesus", then Jesus must have been a leper, as discussed in verse 2 above. Furthermore, I had no idea that Jesus sacrificed birds, washed his clothing in the river, then sacrificed sheep. If he was God, then who was he making those sacrifices to? Himself? It seems kind of silly. And if Jesus was God, why was he unpure in the first place that he should have to go through a purification process? Isn't G-d, by His very nature, the essence of purity and holiness? Why would he need any form of purification?

I see your point but you are getting this all wrong and this is one of the example. Jesus was not a leper and scripture is not making any reference to jesus being a leper undergoing purification. If you read Luke 5 it would make more sense if you are a believer, but let me explane it to you; The Old Testerment is a comprensive book because it is the Word of God even though it was written by many different writers it is all linked together. The whole old testament is a picture of Christ. Everything points to Him therefore it may not explicitly say in a particular verse that it is the messiah but that same concept is then explained in another verse in a totally different book. So I suppose if you are a non believer these sublte inferences to Christ don't make any sense so why don't we look at more specific inferences. Lets look at Isaiah 53.This scripture is a very specific and literal prophesy of the coming mesaih and Jesus fulfilled every one of them.

Who has believed our report?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant,
And as a root out of dry ground.
He has no form or comeliness;
And when we see Him,
There is no beauty that we should desire Him.
3 He is despised and rejected by men,
A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.
And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him;
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
4 Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.
5 But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He opened not His mouth;
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
So He opened not His mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment,
And who will declare His generation?
For He was cut off from the land of the living;
For the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9 And they[a] made His grave with the wicked—
But with the rich at His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was any deceit in His mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,
And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand.
11 He shall see the labor of His soul,[b]and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many,
For He shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,
And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,
Because He poured out His soul unto death,
And He was numbered with the transgressors,
And He bore the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.

How do Jews reject this prophesy of the suffering servant who came to redeem us from sin?

[ETWolverine]

Deut. 18:15... "This is of a truth that prophet."... Jn. 6:14
Deut. 18:15-16... "Had ye believed Moses, ye would believe me."... Jn. 5:45-47
Deut. 18:18... Sent by the Father to speak His word... Jn. 8:28, 29
Deut. 18:19... Whoever will not hear must bear his sin... Jn. 12:15,

18:9 When you come to the land that God your Lord is giving you, do not learn to do the revolting practices of those nations.
18:10 Among you, there shall not be found anyone who passes his son or daughter through fire, who practices stick divination, who divines auspicious times, who divines by omens, who practices witchcraft,
18:11 who uses incantations, who consults mediums and oracles, or who attempts to communicate with the dead.
18:12 Anyone involved in these practices is repulsive to God, and it was because of repulsive practices such as these that God your Lord is driving out [these nations] before you.
18:13 You must [therefore] remain totally faithful to God your Lord.
18:14 The nations that you are driving out listen to astrologers and stick diviners, but what God has given you is totally different.
18:15 In your midst, God will set up for you a prophet like me from among your brethren, and it is to him that you must listen.
18:16 This is a result of the request that you made of God your Lord at Horeb on the Day of Assembly, [when you] said, 'We cannot listen to the voice of God our Lord any more! We cannot look at this great fire any more! We do not want to die!'
18:17 God then said to me, 'They have spoken well.
18:18 I will set up a prophet for them from among their brethren, just as you are. I will place My word in his mouth, and he will declare to them all that I command him.
18:19 If any person does not listen to the word that he declares in My name, I will punish [that person].
18:20 Conversely, if a prophet presumptuously makes a declaration in My name when I have not commanded him to do so, or if he speaks in the name of other gods, then that prophet shall die.'
18:21 You may ask yourselves, 'How shall we recognize that a declaration was not spoken by God?'
18:22 If the prophet predicts something in God's name, and the prediction does not materialize or come true, then the message was not spoken by God. That prophet has spoken deceitfully, and you must not fear him.

Is there any proof that Jesus was the person that this verse was talking about? Doesn't this describe every prophet in the scriptures? Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Samuel, Joshua, Elijah, Elisha, etc. all fit this description. Perhaps verse 20 is more applicable to Jesus than verse 17 or verses 15-16.

Deut. 21:23... Cursed is he that hangs on a tree... Gal. 3:10-13

21:22 When a man is legally sentenced to death and executed, you must then hang him on a gallows.
21:23 However, you may not allow his body to remain on the gallows overnight, but you must bury it on the same day. Since a person who has been hanged is a curse to God, you must not [let it] defile the land that God your Lord is giving you as a heritage.

I didn't know that Jesus was hung on a tree. I had understood that he was crucified. Furthermore, the scripture says that the body should be buried the same day that it dies. My understanding is that Jesus was on the cross overnight before being buried. Finally, these verses discuss one who was killed for violations of the law that he committed. Does that fit your personal image of Jesus? Did Jesus violate the law and thus deserve to be executed? Or was he an innocent who sacrificed himself for OTHER people's sins? These verses don't seem to apply to Jesus either.

-------------------

I have now completed all of your citations from the Pentateuch (Five Books of Moses). I will continue on your other citations from the rest of Tanach (The Prophets and The Writings) tomorrow. But I think you have enough to think about for now. Enjoy.

Elliot

[ETWolverine]

Wow, I had no idea that Jesus was a leper. I though he only healed lepers. I had no idea that he was one himself. If this verse is to apply to the "purification of Jesus", then Jesus must have been a leper, as discussed in verse 2 above. Furthermore, I had no idea that Jesus sacrificed birds, washed his clothing in the river, then sacrificed sheep. If he was God, then who was he making those sacrifices to? Himself? It seems kind of silly. And if Jesus was God, why was he unpure in the first place that he should have to go through a purification process? Isn't G-d, by His very nature, the essence of purity and holiness? Why would he need any form of purification?

I see your point but you are getting this all wrong and this is one of the example. Jesus was not a leper and scripture is not making any reference to jesus being a leper undergoing purification. If you read Luke 5 it would make more sense if you are a believer, but let me explane it to you; The Old Testerment is a comprensive book because it is the Word of God even though it was writen by many different writers it is all linked together. The whole old testament is a picture of Christ. Everything points to Him therefore it may not explicitly say in a particular verse that it is the messiah but that same concept is then explained in another verse in a totaly different book. So i supose if you are a non believer these sublte inferences to Christ dont make any sense so why dont we look at more specific inferences. Lets look at Isaiah 53.This scripture is a very specific and literal prophesy of the coming mesaih and Jesus fulfilled every one of them.

Who has believed our report?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant,
And as a root out of dry ground.
He has no form or comeliness;
And when we see Him,
There is no beauty that we should desire Him.
3 He is despised and rejected by men,
A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.
And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him;
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
4 Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.
5 But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He opened not His mouth;
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
So He opened not His mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment,
And who will declare His generation?
For He was cut off from the land of the living;
For the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9 And they[a] made His grave with the wicked—
But with the rich at His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was any deceit in His mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,
And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand.
11 He shall see the labor of His soul,[b]and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many,
For He shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,
And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,
Because He poured out His soul unto death,
And He was numbered with the transgressors,
And He bore the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.

How do Jews reject this prophesy of the suffering servant who came to redeem us from sin?

Just to save a bit of time, I have cut and pasted from my original post in this string (#10).

The “Proofs” of Jesus in the Torah

Many Christian missionaries try to use the words of the Torah as proofs that Jesus is G-d and/or the Messiah. Most of these “proofs” are deliberate mistranslation from the original Hebrew or cases of the words being taken out of context. Here are two common, often-used examples of the “proofs” used by the Christians. (editorial note: I am only dealing with one here. Please go back to post #10 for the other example.)

“Isaiah 53 discusses a suffering servant who will die and be rejected. Surely this passage proves that Jesus is the Messiah.”

Actually, no, it proves nothing of the sort. The “Suffering Servant” passages used by Christians does not refer to Jesus at all. It refers to the “House of Israel”, all Jews, who will suffer because of their own sins. Many people ask, “If these sentences refer to all Jews, why is it in the singular rather than plural?” The answer is simple. The Torah is filled with many cases of singular use, which actually refers to all of Israel. For instance, Isaiah in Chapter 49, refers to a “servant”, and states specifically that this single servant refers to all of Israel . Another example is “HEAR O Israel the L-rd, our G-d, the L-rd is one”. The word “hear” in the sentence is singular, yet it refers to all of Israel.

In fact, if read correctly, the Christian interpretation makes little sense. “He shall grow up as a plant” (Is. 53:2) refers to the future, while “He is despised and rejected” (Is. 53:3) refers to the present, and “Surely He has born or grief and carried our sorrows” (Is. 53:4) and “But He was wounded for our transgressions” (Is. 53:5) both refer to the past. If the entire passage referred to Jesus, wouldn't it all be in one tense? If it refers to Jesus in the present, how can it also refer to him in the past and in the future? Obviously, the passage refers to something else. However, if interpreted in the Jewish way, it makes perfect sense. Isaiah is saying that that the Jewish people will develop like a plant as a source of nourishment (in the future) despite being despised and rejected by all the nations (in the present) and despite having been persecuted and enslaved by the Egyptians, Philistines and others (in the past). Thus the Jewish interpretation has none of the difficulties of the Christian version.

------------

I'll take it one step further than that. Quoting from you:

7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He opened not His mouth;
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
So He opened not His mouth.

Does that describe the death of Jesus as you understand it? As I understand it, Jesus did indeed open his mouth. Depending on which particular version you read, Jesus either said "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?" or "Forgive them, for they know not what they do." He was NOT silent at the time of his death. He opened his mouth quite clearly. So again, the verses in Isaiah 53 cannot refer to Jesus.

Elliot

[Soldout]

I think it is very interesting that you say the "Christian Missionaries" are the ones who try to prove Jesus but missionaries are from modern days so I don't think that they are the ones you should focus on. The new testament was not written by Christian missionaries but mostly by Jews who witnessed Jesus 2000years ago. Everything they wrote coinsides perfectly with all scriptures and specifically Isaiah 53.

I think it is very convenient for you to say that this chapter is talking of Isreal despite the fact that it is in singular form and yet you were discounting my interpretations because they were not literal. If you are going to argue that scriptures should be taken literally then you need to be consistent. If we take this chapter literally then it is making reference to the mesiah and singular person not a nation.

If you read this chapter carefully it talks about redemption from sin vs 10: Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
This is what Jesus did he was an offering for sin. The nation of Isreal can not be an offering for sin, the nation of isreal did not die for mankinds sin.
Verse 6 :All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
God did not lay iniquity on the nation of isreal to redeem humanity but he laid it on Jesus Christ.


It talks about him being led to slaughter like a lamb and that is what Jesus Christ is. He is the lamb of God who was sacrificed for the redemption of sin and that is what this chapter is talking about.


The tense is irrelevant because there are also some prophesies of his Kingship that are stated in the past tense. The tense is just a figure of speech.

[BABRAM]

I suppose ALL these profecies are just miss translated. hmmm.. How convienient for your arguement. Even if they were miss translated what are the chances that someone would even vagely live up to all these prophesies? Jesus is Christ and i am sure when he returns for the second time and fulfills the other second coming prophesies of earthly rule, you will all finaly get with program.

You probably are not taught this at your church, but G-d doesn't accept human sacrifice. G-d tested Abraham's will to give up Isaac, but made Abraham stop short. In fact, G-d forbids human sacrifice. Why would I want to join a program that champions old pagan and mythological values? Another thing: like most Christians you are suggesting the future tense "fulfills." Remember though according to Christianity's "Paul" his expectations were for his lifetime. Now if Jesus was to miraculously appear tomorrow, next week, or in my lifetime, and manages the tasks of messiahship as proposed by the Torah, then I'm all in.

Everthing they wrote coinsides perfectly with all scriptures and specifically Isaiah 53.

Nope. And perhaps that's why Christianity became it's own religion.

Jews for Judaism FAQ




Bobby

[rosends]

The new testament was not writen by Christian missionaries but mostly by Jews who witnessed Jesus 2000years ago. Everthing they wrote coinsides perfectly with all scriptures and specifically Isaiah 53.

Actually, not. The authorship of the gospels is actually a matter of faith, as much scholarly opinion places the authorship after the death of the four authors (and their identities are also argued). Check here for some light reading gospel authors

And it is difficult for you to claim the conformity with Isaiah 53 when a recent post shows how Jesus was not silent and the Matthew 27 synopsis shows that he made his grave with the rich and he died among the wicked, as opposed to the textual demand for the opposite.

I think it is very convienient for you to say that this chapter is talking of Isreal despite the fact that it is in singular form and yet you were discounting my interpretations because they were not literal. If you are going to argue that scriptures should be taken literaly then you need to be consistant. If we take this chapter literaly then it is making reference to the mesiah and singular person not a nation.

It isn't about convenience but about accuracy and consistency. If you start from Isaiah 41:8, you will find no fewer than 8 references to the entire nation as a singular servant. You can also find in Hoshea 11 that the nation is personified as a singular, and look in Judges 20 to see the nation represented by the singular Hebrew "ish" 'man.'

As to a claim that he is a human sacrifice to atone for sins, you have to keep in mind the following:
1. An atonement sacrifice could only account for a narrow and specific type of sin
2. No animal was necessary for the sacrifice -- the poor man could offer flour
3. No man dies for another's sin in Judaism
4. If Jesus was not a man, but god, God doesn't die.
5. The Paschal lamb is not an atonement sacrifice.
6. If Jesus was a god, not a man, then he certainly could not "die" to atone.

The tense is irrelevent because there are also some prophesies of his Kingship that are stated in the past tense. The tense is just a figure of speach.

Saying that tense doesn't matter specifically because some "prophesies" are actually in the past tense is like saying that color is unimportant because some green jelly beans are red. In fact, if they are red, they aren't gren jelly beans. While biblical Hebrew tenses are confusing, you cannot dismiss tense because it doesn't agree with your argument.

[ETWolverine]

I think it is very interesting that you say the "Christian Missionaries" are the ones who try to prove Jesus but missionaries are from modern days so I don't think that they are the ones you should focus on.

My original essay was written as a response to missionaries. So that is what I cut and pasted. I can change it for you, if you would prefer, but such a change would not make any substantive difference in the arguments themselves.

The new testament was not written by Christian missionaries but mostly by Jews who witnessed Jesus 2000years ago. Everything they wrote coinsides perfectly with all scriptures and specifically Isaiah 53.

As I pointed out, that is not true. Is. 53 states that the "suffering servant", whoever it is, did not open its mouth. Jesus, as I pointed out, clearly did openm his mouth. Ergo, Is 53 does not fit the story of Jesus.

Additionally, I thought that Jesus was PIERCED, not bruised. Another thing that doesn't seem to fit the Jesus story.

I think it is very convenient for you to say that this chapter is talking of Isreal despite the fact that it is in singular form and yet you were discounting my interpretations because they were not literal. If you are going to argue that scriptures should be taken literally then you need to be consistent. If we take this chapter literally then it is making reference to the mesiah and singular person not a nation.

And yet, as I pointed out, Israel is referred to in the singular throughout the OT. So clearly there is a scriptural basis for my statement. If there were no scriptural basis for my argument, you would be correct. However, since there is a scriptural basis for it, there is no reason to believe that this case is any different.

If you read this chapter carefully it talks about redemption from sin vs 10: Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
This is what Jesus did he was an offering for sin. The nation of Isreal can not be an offering for sin, the nation of isreal did not die for mankinds sin.
Verse 6 :All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
God did not lay iniquity on the nation of isreal to redeem humanity but he laid it on Jesus Christ.

It talks about him being led to slaughter like a lamb and that is what Jesus Christ is. He is the lamb of God who was sacrificed for the redemption of sin and that is what this chapter is talking about.

Except that Jesus WASN'T SLAUGHTERED LIKE A LAMB, was he? He was crucified, not slaughtered. He was not given ritual slaughter, his blood was not sprinkled on the Alter, his body was not burned as an offering... in fact, none of the requirements for a sin-offering (or any other offering) were performed on Jesus. Even assuming that G-d would ever accept human sacrifice instead of animal sacrifice, the law is very clear on how such sacrifices must be done. Jesus was NOT slaughtered like a lamb, so this scripture cannot apply to him.

The tense is irrelevant because there are also some prophesies of his Kingship that are stated in the past tense. The tense is just a figure of speech.

Yes, many prophesies are done in the past tense. In fact both Jeremiah and Isaiah were known for giving prophesy in the past tense. But do you know of any prophes in which the past, present and future tenses are all used together? There is none besides Isaiah 53. And therefore, the different tenses MUST be for a reason, or else he would have stuck to just one tense as he does in all other prophesies. There is a definite meaning to the tenses here.

Have you had a chance to read my responses to the other 40 citations that I gave? Do you want me to continue with responses to the other citations, or would you like time to digest what I have done so far? Please let me know.

Elliot

[Soldout]

My original essay was written as a response to missionaries. So that is what I cut and pasted. I can change it for you, if you would prefer, but such a change would not make any substantive difference in the arguments themselves.

The authors of the New testament Bible are undeniably the deciples of christ and some other aposels that followed after His death. That is a historic fact! I am not going to believe some consiracy theory (with zero credibilty) you got of the internet.


[QUOTE=As I pointed out, that is not true. Is. 53 states that the "suffering servant", whoever it is, did not open its mouth. Jesus, as I pointed out, clearly did openm his mouth. Ergo, Is 53 does not fit the story of Jesus.[/QUOTE]

If you read the New testament particlarly Mathew and John you will see that Jesus did not open his mouth. They probed him and he did not answer. And if your argument is correct then it does not make sense that "the nation of isreal" did not open its mouth?? Try reading Isaiah 53 and replace the He with the nation of Israel..lol it just makes not sense. Seriously.


[QUOTE=Additionally, I thought that Jesus was PIERCED, not bruised. Another thing that doesn't seem to fit the Jesus story..[/QUOTE]

I think you are just now spitting hairs here. Jesus was whiped and pushed to the ground slapped etc. Do you think maybe the crown of thorns could have bruised him? ofcoures he was bruised. lets be serious here, if we are going to have a rational argument there is no need for us to split hairs over unnessesary detail. He was as also wounded and chastised. If you are going to split hairs like that then this verse would not make any sense for your argument. Was the nation of isreal bruised? If you are going to be nit picky and literal about EVERY LITTLE DETAIL, then you need to apply the same standard to your point of view.

[QUOTE=And yet, as I pointed out, Israel is referred to in the singular thoughout the OT. So clearly there is a scriptural basis fo my statement. If there were no scriptural basis for my argument, you would be correct. However, since there is a scriptural basis for it, there is no reason to believe that this case is any different...[/QUOTE]

You discounted my previous arguments because you said i should take the scriptures literaly. But you now because it suits you, you are choosing not to take Isaiah 53 literaly. Just because the nation of israel has been personified in other chapters is not a basis to say that it is the case in this example. I can also find sriptural basis for taking some other scriptures as figurative as oposed to literal.


[QUOTE=Except that Jesus WASN'T SLAUGHTERED LIKE A LAMB, was he? He was crucified, not slaughtered. He was not given ritual slaughter, his blood was not sprinkled on the Alter, his body was not burned as an offering... in fact, none of the requirements for a sin-offering (or any other offering) were performed on Jesus. Even assuming that G-d would ever accept human sacrifice instead of animal sacrifice, the law is very clear on how such sacrifices must be done. Jesus was NOT slaughtered like a lamb, so this scripture cannot apply to him....[/QUOTE]

like i said before if you are going split hairs on this issue, then you need to apply the same standard to your agrument.. Let apply this to your side of the argument.. was the "Nation of Israel" Slaughtered like a lamb. I am just applying your own reasoning here and you twisting things to suit you and that is no way of providing an objective argument.


[QUOTE=Yes, many prophesies are done in the past tense. In fact both Jeremiah and Isaiah were known for giving prophesy in the past tense. But do you know of any prophes in which the past, present and future tenses are all used together? There is none besides Isaiah 53. And therefore, the different tenses MUST be for a reason, or else he would have stuck to just one tense as he does in all other prophesies. There is a definite meaning to the tenses here.....[/QUOTE]

"And therefore, the different tenses MUST be for a reason" this is not a fact, you are drawing your own conclusions here. Let keep it objective.
Have you had a chance to read my responses to the other 40 citations that I gave? Do you want me to continue with responses to the other citations, or would you like time to digest what I have done so far? Please let me know.

Yes i did read through the citations and did explain to you that the OT is the word of God dispite its many authors everthing is linked together all pointing to one thing, the mesiah. The Verses you were discussing are not very explicit but are linked in othe chapters to paint a picture of Christ however because dont believe The mesiah has already fulfilled the first coming prophesies these slight inferences to Him will not make any sense to you and i understand your point of view. So that is why i brought up isaiah 53 because it is more specific.


Thanks

[Soldout]

Actually, not. The authorship of the gospels is actually a matter of faith, as much scholarly opinion places the authorship after the death of the four authors (and their identities are also argued). Check here for some light reading gospel authors

And it is difficult for you to claim the conformity with Isaiah 53 when a recent post shows how Jesus was not silent and the Matthew 27 synopsis shows that he made his grave with the rich and he died among the wicked, as opposed to the textual demand for the opposite.



It isn't about convenience but about accuracy and consistency. If you start from Isaiah 41:8, you will find no fewer than 8 references to the entire nation as a singular servant. You can also find in Hoshea 11 that the nation is personified as a singular, and look in Judges 20 to see the nation represented by the singular Hebrew "ish" 'man.'

As to a claim that he is a human sacrifice to atone for sins, you have to keep in mind the following:
1. An atonement sacrifice could only account for a narrow and specific type of sin
2. No animal was necessary for the sacrifice -- the poor man could offer flour
3. No man dies for another's sin in Judaism
4. If Jesus was not a man, but god, God doesn't die.
5. The Paschal lamb is not an atonement sacrifice.
6. If Jesus was a god, not a man, then he certainly could not "die" to atone.



Saying that tense doesn't matter specifically because some "prophesies" are actually in the past tense is like saying that color is unimportant because some green jelly beans are red. In fact, if they are red, they aren't gren jelly beans. While biblical Hebrew tenses are confusing, you cannot dismiss tense because it doesn't agree with your argument.

Okey, lets apply this to your argument since you believe Isaiah 53 is making referce to the nation of isreal. Did the "nation of isreal" stay silient, was the nation of israel "led as a lamb to the slaughter" and sacrificed, bruised and wounded for our iniquites?? Was the nation of Israel have its grave with rich? Seriously guys, don't try and discount my argument before you actually see how that relates to your argument. If we replace the "He" in this chapter it make not sense at all but it is obvious here that Isaiah is prophesying the Birth, Passion, Death and Burial of the one whom God sent to die for our sins and it is going to be hard for you all to argue against this chapter because it lays it out on the table.

[Soldout]

God's servant would be silent before His accusers
Bible passage: Isaiah 53:7
Written: perhaps between 701-681 BC
Fulfilled: About 32 AD
In the book of Isaiah, chapter 53, Isaiah the prophet wrote about a servant of God. Many people believe this was a prophecy about the life of Jesus Christ, who lived about 700 years later. In Isaiah 53:7, the prophet said that the servant would be afflicted and accused, but like a lamb being led to slaughter, he would remain silent. As explained in Matthew 27:12-14, which was recorded about 700 years after the time of Isaiah, this is what happened to Jesus. He was falsely accused but remained silent and did not protest the accusations. Jesus was crucified by the Romans a short time later.
- Copyright 100prophecies.org
Isaiah 53:7
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.

If you are going to argue againse the piercing what about this verse
Zechariah 12:10
Written: between 520 and 518 BC
Fulfilled: About 32 AD

"And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.

In Zechariah, chapter 12, the Bible said that there will be a time when the world's nations attack Jerusalem. In Zechariah 12:10, the Bible says that after this attack fails, the people will lament over the one who was "pierced," as one mourns for the loss of a first-born son. This is in reference to the return of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was pierced when He was crucified by the Romans about 2000 years ago. Christians believe that Jesus will return in the future to establish an everlasting kingdom and literally rule over the earth.

[BABRAM]

As explained in Matthew 27:12-14, which was recorded about 700 years after the time of Isaiah, this is what happened to Jesus. He was falsely accused but remained silent and did not protest the accusations. Jesus was crucified by the Romans a short time later.

Actually according to the Christian Testament Book of John, Jesus did protest the accusations.

John 18:34, Jesus replied, "Does that word come from you, or did you hear it from others."

John 18:36, Jesus answered, "My kingship does not come from this world. If I were king like those of this world, my guards would have fought to save me from being handed over to the Jews. But my kingship is not from here."

John 18:37, Jesus answered, "Just as you say, I am a king. For this I was born and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Everyone that is on the side of truth hears my voice." (38) Pilate said, "What is truth."


So besides the obvious contradictory in the Matthew reference compared to John, apparently Jesus did give a defense as questioned by Pilate.

Okey, lets apply this to your argument since you believe Isaiah 53 is making referce to the nation of isreal.

Well if you backup and read the complete context it's very clear whom the servant of the L-rd is:

The servant referred to here is Israel.

(Is 41:8)"But Israel is my servant"

(Is 41:9) "You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you away"

(Is 44:21) "Remember these, O Jacob and Israel, for you are my servant. I have formed you; you are my servant; O Israel, you shall not be forgotten by Me

(Is 49:3)"You are My servant, Israel in whom I glory"

(Is. 45:4) "For the sake of My servant Jacob, Israel My chosen one"

*cut and paste to save time

Did the "nation of isreal" stay silient, was the nation of israel "led as a lamb to the slaughter" and sacrificed, bruised and wounded for our iniquites???

This doesn't mean every Jew that ever lived. But as much effort historical revisionist attempts have been made in denying the Holocaust, the ground still cries out.

Was the nation of Israel have its grave with rich?

Why not? When you say "nation" you obviously don't understand Jews scattered throughout the nations, a people.

Seriously guys, dont try and discount my argument before you actualy see how that relates to your argument. If we replace the "He" in this chapter it make not sense at all but it is obvious here that Isaiah is prophesying the Birth, Passion, Death and Burial of the one whom God sent to die for our sins and it is going to be hard for you all to argue against this chapter because it lays it out on the table.

I think your case for Jesus has deteriorated to the point you'd rather diverge your argument toward Israel. Are you really arguing that in the book of Isaiah that "Israel" was not declared the servant of the L-rd? Are you going to continue denying that fact?



Bobby

[rosends]

I'll try to get to some of the silliness posted here:
1. Tenses. As a student of Judaism, and one versed in Hebrew, I guess it is my job to let you in on a secret of Hebrew grammar: "you have to study it to draw conclusions from it."
A literal translation of hebrew words and a presumption of understanding is doomed. As I pointed out earlier regarding the missing vav in the translation your pastor gave you, tense is often flipped in hebrew because of something called the vav hamehapechet. This is a semantic device found throughout Hebrew scripture but overlooked by non-jews who see the words on a literal level. Many propehecies were listed in what is called the "future/past". Ask your local pastor to explain it -- it is a known device which predates Jesus.

2. Did the nation of Israel go like a lamb to the slaughter? I'll ask the 6 million who were sacrificed. I'll ask the children of Jerusalem who were besieged, or exiled or slaughtered. I'll ask the countless Jews over history who tried to fit in to the world and kept quiet against their oppressors and ended up dead. Some would even say to ask current Israelis who choose to appease instead of fight with the neighbors who attack and end up being bombed out of the pizzarias and buses. To be sure, look at Psalms 44:12 and 44:23.

3. israel wasn't bruised? Check out Isaiah 30:26 for a statement that Israel actually was bruised.
Wounded? Try Jeremiah 30:12

4. Being buried with certain people after dying with the rich? The riches Jews have amassed haven't been taken and the Jews accused flasely and treated as criminals and killed? I'll check on the blood libels, and then try to recover money from the third Reich.

Jews knoew for many centuries before the birth of Jesus that these prophecies and descriptions were about them. The entire culture of Judaism revolves around an in depth investigation and understanding of the Hebrew text -- it is the one given to us for us to understand. Isn't it a bit presumptuous to say that the text has changed in its meaning from what jews for centuries or millennia have understood it to mean? Remember, Matthew 27 records that jesus did not keep silent... Matthew 21 records that Jesus was violent (as does Mark 5 and John 2. The deceit in his mouth is obvious - Mark 16 and John 14 come to mind, and certainly John 7:8-10.

Isaiah 53 records that this servant will be crushed by disease. Not crucifixion, and see his children, which Jesus never did.

All I see is a mass of proofs which show, textually, that your articles of faith have no bearing, and a modicum of respect and rhetorical honesty should drive you at least to the point which says "well, I can see why Judaism would not follow jesus so I guess I'll let them believe as it makes sense to them (you know, like it says to do in Matt 10:14)." Your insistence that belief in Jesus is mandated though you do nothing to deal with the points raised reminds me more of Hamlet "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

[Soldout]

Actually according to the Christian Testament Book of John, Jesus did protest the accusations.

John 18:34, Jesus replied, "Does that word come from you, or did you hear it from others."

John 18:36, Jesus answered, "My kingship does not come from this world. If I were king like those of this world, my guards would have fought to save me from being handed over to the Jews. But my kingship is not from here."

John 18:37, Jesus answered, "Just as you say, I am a king. For this I was born and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Everyone that is on the side of truth hears my voice." (38) Pilate said, "What is truth."


So besides the obvious contradictory in the Matthew reference compared to John, apparently Jesus did give a defense as questioned by Pilate.





Well if you backup and read the complete context it's very clear whom the servant of the L-rd is:

The servant referred to here is Israel.

(Is 41:8)"But Israel is my servant"

(Is 41:9) "You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you away"

(Is 44:21) "Remember these, O Jacob and Israel, for you are my servant. I have formed you; you are my servant; O Israel, you shall not be forgotten by Me

(Is 49:3)"You are My servant, Israel in whom I glory"

(Is. 45:4) "For the sake of My servant Jacob, Israel My chosen one"

*cut and paste to save time





This doesn't mean every Jew that ever lived. But as much effort historical revisionist attempts have been made in denying the Holocaust, the ground still cries out.




Why not? When you say "nation" you obviously don't understand Jews scattered throughout the nations, a people.




I think your case for Jesus has deteriorated to the point you'd rather diverge your argument toward Israel. Are you really arguing that in the book of Isaiah that "Israel" was not declared the servant of the L-rd?! Are you going to continue denying that fact?



Bobby

I Think it you are just stretching the Truth to make sense of your argument. Just because In other verses it says Isreal is the servant of God has no baring what so ever on this particular verse. It is interesting how when it comes to your argument you choose to understand the figurative nature of the way the bible was written but when it comes to the point I make all of a sudden every single detail has to be literal, why? All of a sudden the nation of isreal is dying for the remission of the world sin. That doesn't make sense, You said before that God doesn't use human sacrifice, so that means if "He" here refers to isreal then God used a whole nation of Humans as a sacrifice led to slaughter like a lamb to die for our iniguities. You are really contradicting yourself. Besides that Judist do not all agree that that isaiah 53 refers to the nation of Israel. In fact some of the ancient Rabbis believed that this passage from Isaiah is indeed about an individual Messiah. Rabbi Moshe Alshekh, one of the great seventeenth-century expositors from Safed, Israel, said "Our Rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the King Messiah, and we shall ourselves also adhere to the same view."

The mension of Israel being a Servant does not take away from the prophesies of the messiah. For example you said in Isaiah 49:3 says Israel is my servant but if your read further to verse 7 you will see that Isaiah also talks of the Mesiah who will be the light unto the Gentiles and will be spread Gods salvation to the world.

6 Indeed He says,
‘ It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant
To raise up the tribes of Jacob,
And to restore the preserved ones of Israel;
I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles,
That You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.’”
7 Thus says the LORD,
The Redeemer of Israel, their Holy One,
To Him whom man despises,
To Him whom the nation abhors,
To the Servant of rulers:

In Isaiah 49:6, the prophet speaks of a servant of God who would be a light to Gentiles (non-Jews) so that God's salvation could reach the ends of the earth. Jesus is the fulfillment of this promise. The followers of Jesus helped spread Christianity about 2000 years ago. Christianity is unique in that it is among the first evangelical religions in history, and the first to be taken to people all over the world. The "nation of Israel" has not spread God's salvation anywhere. But Jesus Christ has been a light unto the Gentiles, He has spread the salvation and the knowledge of the God of Abraham Isacc and Jacob to the whole world. So You can not argue that this is talking of Isreal because it says I will give you as a light to the Gentiles and then it goes on to say The redeamer of Isael the Holy one. So that is the definatately the mesiah.

[Soldout]

Actually according to the Christian Testament Book of John, Jesus did protest the accusations.

John 18:34, Jesus replied, "Does that word come from you, or did you hear it from others."

John 18:36, Jesus answered, "My kingship does not come from this world. If I were king like those of this world, my guards would have fought to save me from being handed over to the Jews. But my kingship is not from here."

John 18:37, Jesus answered, "Just as you say, I am a king. For this I was born and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Everyone that is on the side of truth hears my voice." (38) Pilate said, "What is truth."


So besides the obvious contradictory in the Matthew reference compared to John, apparently Jesus did give a defense as questioned by Pilate.





Well if you backup and read the complete context it's very clear whom the servant of the L-rd is:

The servant referred to here is Israel.

(Is 41:8)"But Israel is my servant"

(Is 41:9) "You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you away"

(Is 44:21) "Remember these, O Jacob and Israel, for you are my servant. I have formed you; you are my servant; O Israel, you shall not be forgotten by Me

(Is 49:3)"You are My servant, Israel in whom I glory"

(Is. 45:4) "For the sake of My servant Jacob, Israel My chosen one"

*cut and paste to save time





This doesn't mean every Jew that ever lived. But as much effort historical revisionist attempts have been made in denying the Holocaust, the ground still cries out.




Why not? When you say "nation" you obviously don't understand Jews scattered throughout the nations, a people.




I think your case for Jesus has deteriorated to the point you'd rather diverge your argument toward Israel. Are you really arguing that in the book of Isaiah that "Israel" was not declared the servant of the L-rd?! Are you going to continue denying that fact?



Bobby

I Think it you are just stretching the Truth to make sense of your argument. Just because In other verses it says Isreal is the servant of God has no baring what so ever on this particular verse. It is interesting how when it comes to your argument you choose to understand the figurative nature of the way the bible was written but when it comes to the point I make all of a sudden every single detail has to be literal, why? All of a sudden the nation of isreal is dying for the remission of the world sin. That doesn't make sense, You said before that God doesn't use human sacrifice, so that means if "He" here refers to isreal then God used a whole nation of Humans as a sacrifice led to slaughter like a lamb to die for our iniguities. You are really contradicting yourself. Besides that Judist do not all agree that that isaiah 53 refers to the nation of Israel. In fact some of the ancient Rabbis believed that this passage from Isaiah is indeed about an individual Messiah. Rabbi Moshe Alshekh, one of the great seventeenth-century expositors from Safed, Israel, said "Our Rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the King Messiah, and we shall ourselves also adhere to the same view."

The mension of Israel being a Servant does not take away from the prophesies of the messiah. For example you said in Isaiah 49:3 says Israel is my servant but if your read further to verse 7 you will see that Isaiah also talks of the Mesiah who will be the light unto the Gentiles and will be spread Gods salvation to the world.

6 Indeed He says,
‘ It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant
To raise up the tribes of Jacob,
And to restore the preserved ones of Israel;
I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles,
That You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.’”
7 Thus says the LORD,
The Redeemer of Israel, their Holy One,
To Him whom man despises,
To Him whom the nation abhors,
To the Servant of rulers:

In Isaiah 49:6, the prophet speaks of a servant of God who would be a light to Gentiles (non-Jews) so that God's salvation could reach the ends of the earth. Jesus is the fulfillment of this promise. The followers of Jesus helped spread Christianity about 2000 years ago. Christianity is unique in that it is among the first evangelical religions in history, and the first to be taken to people all over the world. The "nation of Israel" has not spread God's salvation anywhere. But Jesus Christ has been a light unto the Gentiles, He has spread the salvation and the knowledge of the God of Abraham Isacc and Jacob to the whole world. So You can not argue that this is talking of Isreal because it says I will give you as a light to the Gentiles and then it goes on to say The redeamer of Isael the Holy one. So that is the definatately the mesiah

[Soldout]

[B]Actually according to the Christian Testament Book of John, Jesus did protest the accusations.

John 18:34, Jesus replied, "Does that word come from you, or did you hear it from others."

John 18:36, Jesus answered, "My kingship does not come from this world. If I were king like those of this world, my guards would have fought to save me from being handed over to the Jews. But my kingship is not from here."

John 18:37, Jesus answered, "Just as you say, I am a king. For this I was born and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Everyone that is on the side of truth hears my voice." (38) Pilate said, "What is truth."


So besides the obvious contradictory in the Matthew reference compared to John, apparently Jesus did give a defense as questioned by Pilate.

Isaiah 53vs 8
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
So He opened not His mouth

If you read the New testament you will see that Jesus was passive and did not distpute the charges or go against what was happening to him. He answered some questions from Pilot that he if was asked whether he was the son of God and he answered rightly and said I AM, he did not give any answers "in defence". When If you read this scripture carefuly this is making refence to AFTER Jesus Christ was sentensed to death on the cross, he was silent, meaning he did not try and defend himself or try to dispute the charges and if you understand the use of figure of speach you will understand that isaiah here is making a comparison of as a sheep being silent before its shearers so was Jesus when they led him to His death. The Book of Isaiah in particular is filled with all sorts of imagery, metaphors and simililies and it is intentional negligence on your part to try and take everthing little word as literal and yet when it comes to your points all of a sudden it is not literal any more.

[rosends]

I think you should check the context of 49. This is Isaiah speaking in first person about what God charged him to do and be. God said that Isaiah was not only to be a leader bringing back Jacob but also a light unto all the nations with his prophecy of the fall of Babylon.

Then, in verse 7, the prophecy begins (as indicated by the "thus says") -- God, the redeemer of Israel says to the one that man despises and who has been a servant to the Unjust rulers f the earth (the childre of Israel) "Kings shall see and rise, princes, and they shall prostrate themselves, for the sake of the Lord Who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel, and He chose you."

Pretty basic if you look at it in context and don't add commas or misinterpret he specific form of address in the text.

Can we do this in Hebrew? The English is so misleading.


BTW, I think you are missing a major point.This is not about selectively applying literal and metaphorical meanings. If the text in Isaiah 44 and in 4 other places listed above clearly equates the servant with the entire nation (literally) wh would anyone see the reference to a servant in 53 as anything different?

About the Alshich quote -- please quote completely -- the next phrase is
“for the Messiah is of course, David, who was 'anointed' as is well known…”
So the text is about an anointed one, yes, but one who already came. He also explains the text as referring to Moses.

Driver and Neubauer's text which is the foundation for the claims that the rabbis saw the servant as Jesus has been repeatedly and selectively misquoted since its 1877 publication.

[BABRAM]

I Think it you are just stretching the Truth to make sense of your argument. Just because In other verses it says Isreal is the servant of God has no baring what so ever on this particular verse.

First off it's Israel, not "Isreal." Next, not just "a" servant as you suggested, but G-d's servant. Guess Whom you're really arguing with? Re-read again!

(Is 49:3)"You are My servant, Israel in whom I glory"

(Is. 45:4) "For the sake of My servant Jacob, Israel My chosen one"

It is interesting how when it comes to your argument you choose to understand the figurative nature of the way the bible was written but when it comes to the point i make all of a sudden every single detail has to be literal, why? all of a sudden the nation of isreal is dying for the remission of the world sin. That doesnt make sense, You said before that God doesnt use human sacrifice, so that means if "He" here refers to isreal then God used a whole nation of Humans as a sacrifice led to slaughter like a lamb to die for our iniguities.

And just where in all the Torah does it say that G-d accepts human sacrfice? I think it's clear you were taught in the Christian religion to assume that being passive and persecuted meant human sacrifice. Add to this the nonsense that you were taught about Jesus being G-d and able to commit suicide on a cross, is pure silliness.

Isaiah 53 vs.8

He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
So He opened not His mouth

John 18:34, Jesus replied, "Does that word come from you, or did you hear it from others."

John 18:36, Jesus answered, "My kingship does not come from this world. If I were king like those of this world, my guards would have fought to save me from being handed over to the Jews. But my kingship is not from here."

John 18:37, Jesus answered, "Just as you say, I am a king. For this I was born and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Everyone that is on the side of truth hears my voice." (38) Pilate said, "What is truth."



Now again I used the words of your Christian Testament. Was Jesus silent not opening his mouth? Does this disqualification mean anything to you or are you going to deny the facts?




Bobby