Please explain Isaiah 53. Thank you.

Editor's Comment

You need to look at the surrounding texts and the Jewish translation. The New Testament completely changes the translation of certain Hebrew words to fit with their story. The change tenses from past to future to present whenever they feel like it and it is completely inconsistent.

You cannot take isolated phrases and say "look it's Jesus!!!" That is now the Jewish Torah (bible) works. Events must be taken in context.

A classic example of mistranslation is

"53:5 "But he was wounded FROM our transgressions, he was crushed FROM our iniquities."

Christian sources change FROM to FOR and I'm sure you can figure out where they go with it.

All of 53 is referring to Israel and the Jews. However, Christians say it is talking about Jesus! There are many conflicting statements:

53:10 "He will prolong his days." 

Not only did Jesus die young, but how could the days be prolonged of someone who is alleged to be God himself ? 

By my reading Jesus is not the messiah in the Jewish religion,however in the old testament the book of Daniel in his visions refer to Jesus as the messiah. I am servant of Jesus who is the messiah so please explain your position

Editor's Comment

Editor's Comment

"I don't believe Jesus' name is mentioned there... Is that the only chapter in the Bible which deals with the Messianic redemption? Even if Jesus' story bears similarities to Isaiah 53, how about all the other Messianic prophecies which he never fulfilled?"


WHAT ABOUT THE VAST MAJORITY HE DID?

Editor's Comment

It seems rather circular to use the mistranslation of old texts of the new testament to favor your arguments, given that the translators were mostly helenistic jews. Perhaps they were... biased? I don't know.

The Messiah is in fact supposed to bring peace to the entire world which will be a time called the 'Messianic Era'. And obviously, Jesus did not fulfill this task. However, why does it clearly state in Daniel's Seventy-Weeks Prophecy that the Messiah will be 'cut off, but not for himself'? The misconception of Jews is that the Messiah will come only once when he sets up his kingdom. But in fact, the Messiah comes twice. He will return again when the last 'week' spoken of by Daniel will be completed, thus he will establish his kingdom on earth.

Editor's Comment

The passage in Isaiah 53 seems to support a reference to Israel as a nation...that is unless you back up to 52:13-15, "Behold my servant will prosper, he will be high and lifted up and greatly exalted. Just as many were astonished at you, My people, so his appearance was marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men." surely we must conclude that this is not talking about a nation, for "My people" are compared with the subject at hand. please correct me where i am wrong but, it seems we must conclude that this is a reference to an individual and a very special one at that.

Editor's Comment

can you list the ones He did not fulfill with the scriptures? Im not saying you're wrong, but I would like to know the ones he did not fulfill and where they are in the Torah.

Editor's Comment

it is wrong for people to try to convince you that Jesus is the messiah, in fact you should not even have to explain to anyone that you do not believe that jesus is the messiah (you people should have more respect for the jewish faith). but understand that it was people and not jesus who exacerbated these world problems you speak of. know that this is not an argument for jesus being the messiah, I am merely pointing out that as the operators of this website you, sadly, have a greater responsibility to be more respectful than the people who read it and reply to it (and many are obviously disrespectful)

To get to the truth and beauty of the bible, you must learn the bible in its original language, Hebrew........here is an example

The Hebrew word that appears in Is 53:10 for the word seed is the hebrew word "Zera" and can mean only physical offspring...ie CHILDREN. Christians have interpreted this to mean Yeshu's "spiritual offspring".......but it can mean only physical offspring and we know that Yeshu did not have children or live a long a life. Therefore, Isaiah 53 can in no way refer to Yeshu.

53:10......... he shall see children, he shall prolong his days, and God's purpose shall prosper in his hand.

Actually, although Jesus is not mentioned in the Old Testament, a Messiah is mentioned. God says in Zechariah 9:9 that, " ... your King is coming! He is the Righteous One, the Victor! Yet he is lowly, riding on a donkey's colt..."

Basically, the Messiah was/ will be of low birth and had no royal lineage.

And yet, Jews believe that the Messiah will be of relation to David.

Personally, I'm not Jewish or Christian, but I noticed this and want to know what other people think.

Editor's Comment

Excuse me, I would like to respond to your response. It was your example of Deuteronomy 30. Israel rose again in 1946, i believe. Its now a nation again today. If you have more examples to counter please respond, thanks. God bless!

Editor's Comment

Sorry, I forgot to add. Israel is a nation again. How about Ezekiel 37? God gave the vision and fullfilled the promise after WWII. Please respond, thanks.

Editor's Comment

I am seeking knowledge and understanding.

A classic example of mistranslation is

"53:5 "But he was wounded FROM our transgressions, he was crushed FROM our iniquities." Christian sources change FROM to FOR and I'm sure you can figure out where they go with it.

Of course that is easy...but what does it mean that he was wounded from our transgressions and crushed from our iniquities...did our transgressions wound him...crushed seems to signify squished...like you would crush an ant with your foot...seems kind of final...like death.

what is your understanding of what this means?

Is the he a collective he...I thought second person singular was one or is it different here? If so how?

Is it Israel's transgressions, and iniquities. Was he wounded by them, crushed by them? The "our" seems to denote the Jews, but the he???

If it poses no threat to rabbinic teaching, why is it excluded from the parsha readings?

Editor's Comment

I have read your responses to the above question and it only proves what alot of people think of Jewish people. You are very arrogant and racist people. The reason you do not wish to acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God is purely because then you would need to take responsibility for his death, plan and simple and by reading about the Jewish religion it proves to me how you only accept people of your religion and will only help people of your religion and the destructive information you gave to that poor grandmother who's daughter has converted to Catholic and far as she is concerned she wants to be a Catholic and wants to raise her children as catholics you and the grandmother have no right to impose on that when the children are old enough if they wish to change they can, but I cant see whey they would, for the catholic religion helps you be a better person with Ideals as humans we will never live up to because we are flawed and not perfect the jewish religion does not teach that.

I was "raised Christian". My parents drug us to a church every Sunday where service lasted 8hrs, but in that time only about 2 or 3 VERSES were actually discussed. They had their theories, but all of them depended on us reading only which part they wanted us to in that order. Like the 'read the bible in a year' devotions (they're never in order). By that I mean that the bible, old and new, are writings. True, special, but books. Who would ever pick up a Harry Potter book and start reading at the last 3 chapters, and then reference here and there through beginning and middle, and come up with their own meaning of the entire story. There's a Divine reason the Creator gave man knowlege at certain times. to tell a 'story' of the WHOLE picture. I always wondered how you could take 1 Christian bible and get over 100 different religions. So I read starting at page 1 to & by the time I got to the new T. I was mortified at how Jesus was NEVER in any of old verses used to verify him.

Jews don't belive that Jesus was the Messiah because he healed people on the sabbath and they belived that this was working. The Jews were very strict about the sabbath and many other Jewish religous laws but Jesus was not so strict about them.

I hope I helped.

I read from some judaism source saying that a person who are born from a virgin is related to paganism. what about this scripture ?

Isaiah 7:14

Therefore the Lord himself will give you [a] a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and [b] will call him Immanuel.

christian has been always relate this scripture to Matthew 1:23 saying the one born from the virgin (In this case) is Jesus.

Editor's Comment

http://www.answers.com/topic/maiden

from the following links. maiden seem to means virgin but you say it isnt.

maid·en (mād'n)

n.

An unmarried girl or woman.

A virgin.

A machine resembling the guillotine, used in Scotland in the 16th and 17th centuries to behead criminals.

Sports.

A racehorse that has never won a race.

A maiden over.

PS: Is virgin giving birth to a baby is considered a part of paganism ?

Editor's Comment

I like your website. It seems to me that you have to keep answering questions about Jesus, because the answers you are giving are insufficient. There are too many "coincidences" in the OT pointing to Jesus as Messiah. I mean no disrespect, obviously I am a follower of Jesus, but not because someone talked me into it. I agree you need to look at Scripture in Hebrew and context and culture. In Genesis 49:10, is "Shiloh" a person or a place? ...Do you find yourself thinking before you answer a question "if I say this, then he will say that?" It should not be that way. Truth is truth. None of us should try to sway the truth. We can't.

Editor's Comment

in response to "anonymous" from australia. how dare you say we impose our beliefs on others. as to grandchildren being raised catholic. christians try to convert jews all the time to christianity...that's trying to impose one's beliefs on others..isn't it? you are the one who is arrogant. jews don't care what others believe but we care when you knock on our door and try to convert us!

First of all, I appreciate the editor's patient responses - keeping this debate peaceful has made it an a more stimulating read. I am a Christian and can offer no proof that Jesus was/is the Messiah...not because I don't believe it exists, but because I am weak in the area of "defending my faith". My question is much more broad: if the Messiah that Jews have been long-awaiting finally comes, will we Christians have the option of turning towards Him and accepting Him...or is it considered too late for us? On the flip side, what if Jesus truly was the Messiah? Do you believe that you will be granted grace, given your sincere pursuit of G-d? This is honestly not a rhetorical question - I truly would like to know your response.

Editor's Comment

Wow!!! This site is fascinating. I'm learning a lot about Judaism I didn't know. :)

Just to clarify, I'm LDS (mormon) and I do believe Jesus is the Messiah and much more. The creator of the earth. However, I've always been fascinated with Judaism.

I certainly understand why Jews don't believe Jesus was the Messiah. But I was wondering. If its not Jesus, then who is it? Is Elijah the Messiah? I understood that it was the I AM or G-d. G-d himself would come to redeem the Jews. Elijah is certainly not G-d although he was a prophet. And if G-d is just a mere Force with no form, how can G-d itself be it?

Also, I was wondering what "strengthening the Torah" meant?

I'd apprectiate the clarification.

Jae

Editor's Comment

Perhaps the most important reason Jews do not accept Jesus as messiah is because the messiah can only come when the majority of Israel is prepared to receive him! He is not interested in catching his people off gaurd! That's what evil forces do...they catch you unprepared.

It is impossible to reject him..."when the students are ready the teacher will come." Two thousand years of prayer, research, and investigation has shown that Jesus is not the Jewish messiah. Quite simply: the Jewish people would have figured it out by now!

If G-d has blinded them, then why fight G-d's will and attempt to convert the Jews?

Salvation is based upon 'teshuvah'or repentence, not any sacrifice. Tehillim (Psalm) 51 states that: "sacrifice and oblation I deire not, but a humble and contrite heart, I will not reject." There is absolutely no relation between Jewish temple sacrifice and the idea of atonement for sin. That is a Greek, gentile idea. Issac was spared from Abraham's knife by G-d himself!

If you are christian, read up on the Jewish dual covenant first before doing any further research.

if we flip to Exodus 4:22, even using the NLT, which is the most distorted christian translation - we can get a further understanding of Isaiah 53.

Exodus 4:22

Then you will tell him, `This is what the LORD says: Israel is my firstborn son.

Notice that here, Israel is not only personified, it is presented in a masculine sense (son).

A big misconception is that Jesus was crucified for blasphemy. This actually isn't the case at all. Religious blasphemers were stoned to death, rome only crucified people for political reasons, and Jesus apparentlty proclaimed himself the "king of the jews". This was at a time when political tensions were already high as it was. His death gave him instant martyr status among his followers.

Next, at the time of Jesus, there was other historical accounts of people walking around with disciples - and even performing miracles.

In the previous comment we read: "The Hebrew word that appears in Is 53:10 is the hebrew word 'Zera' and can mean only physical offspring...ie CHILDREN"...

That comment is not exact. The Hebrew word "Zerah" may have different meanings other than "offspring". In fact, the usual literal translation is "Seed", but as you will find in any Biblical Hebrew Dictionary, sometimes it means Fruit, Field, or Sowing.

The Jewish Publication Society's most recently published Tanakh (Jewish Bible) translates Zerah as "Offspring" (in Genesis 3:15), as "Seed" (in Isaiah 6:13 and Jeremiah 35:7), as "Fields" (in Jeremiah 35:7), and as "Sowing" (in Zechariah 8:12).

So, following Isaiah 53, maybe Messiah is not supposed to have physical offspring, he could plant "seed", sow fields, and reap fruit.

G-d showed the Jewish people the miracles and wonders of the plagues of Egypt and the giving of the torah at mount Sinai. If G-d were suddenly to change all his laws and ways of dealing with the Jews, he would give proof of it to the Jews. The fact that the earliest manuscripts of the New Testament are from around 125 C.E. shows that if Jesus did live, there was about 100 years to change his story and make his life sound as divine and miraculous as early Christians wanted. From the fact that there clearly are passages that were not in the original New Testament (for example the passage of "he who is without sin cast the first stone" was not in original manuscripts, and this has been proven) this shows that Christians were not against adding and changing the story of Jesus' life. Who's to say someone didn't go through the Tanach, and find as many passages that they thought referred to the messiah, and then write a story around it. The New Testament is mainly a work of fiction.

Is it so clear really? In that case all historical texts should be considered works of fiction. In fact, by those standards, we should say the same about the Torah... if we consider the obvious differences between the masoretic text and the septuagint, for example. What about the earliest manuscripts of the book of Genesis? They were written thousands of years after Adam, Noah, and Abraham lived... does that make our beloved ancestors part of a fairy tale? Of course not! Lets try to be a little objective in our argumentation.

Editor's Comment

"The reason you do not wish to acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God is purely because then you would need to take responsibility for his death, plan and simple"

First, let me give legitimacy to what I am about to say...I was raised in a conservative Christian home and lived most of my 36 years believing wholeheartedly that Jesus was messiah.

Even through all those years, and especially now that I know the truth, one thing bothered me:

If Christians purport to believe that G-d sent himself to die on that cross as a sacrifice for mankind, how can the Christians blame the Jews?? According to Christian theology, G-d willed that event and it was unavoidable. How can any human be accountable for G-d's will?

Secondly, and less important, given it was reportedly G-d's will, the ROMANS killed Jesus according to the NT, NOT the Jewish people. The Roman governor could have stopped it. But, I guess it wouldn't do any good to hate the Romans because they aren't here now, are they?