sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
You’re going to lose this one. The scholarship is solidly against your stance.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How did Isaiah 52:13 predict that the Messiah Jesus would be crucified "lifted up"?
- Thread starter 74x12
- Start date
74x12
Well-Known Member
1 Corinthians 3:19
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
By scholarship you mean predominantly liberal and secular scholars... the consensus of conservative scholars is quote different
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
I like how Lamentations point forward in chapter 3 to the one who will both take God's judgement and point us to mercy and hope
Lamentations hope in the midst of how?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Just a comment to say that Jesus was a "conservative"-- quite the opposite. He shook up the status quo and demanded that his followers go even beyond the requirements of Jewish Law to help the poor and downtrodden, such as what the Parable of the Widow's Mite states.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
No, I mean responsible, peer-reviewed scholarship. Political outlook and religious leanings aren’t factored in.
74x12
Well-Known Member
Talking to your peers about something is one thing. But you should verify with someone who is greater. That is taking it to the Lord in prayer.
Psalm 146:3 King James Version (KJV)
Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
1) peer-review is verifying with someone greater.
2) the Psalmist wasn’t talking about scholarly pursuits.
3) prayer and scholarship are two completely different endeavors
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
In Is 6, the prophet's mouth is shut before the King who is high and lifted up
In Is 52, kings mouths are shut by the work of the same, who is now called the servant who is high and lifted up and astonishing and even sacrificially sprinkles all nations
In Is 57 the king , the holy one is high and lifted up but swells with the humble and contrite who are now made pure and opens their mouths
so... yes... it is fitting with the trajectory of the book that Is 52 is about the Messiah lifted up
it's interesting how the book prepares the reader... In Isaiah 51 God calls the reader to ponder how Abraham was saved by faith and in Isaiah 52 the gospel is sung of 'How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news' [in context of salvation]
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
A big hint is Is 52:10 where God bares his Holy arm in the sight of the nations.
That phrase related to the right hand of God almost always refers to an act of salvation
and in this case definitely since Isaiah 53 equates the suffering servant to the arm of the Lord
The Right Hand of God in the Psalms
That phrase related to the right hand of God almost always refers to an act of salvation
and in this case definitely since Isaiah 53 equates the suffering servant to the arm of the Lord
The Right Hand of God in the Psalms
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
You do realize that:
1) Isaiah was written by several human beings
2) These people all lived in a time before Jesus, and before his system of salvation was known.
3) Isaiah was written as a Judaic prophecy. That’s its trajectory. The Jews are still waiting for its fulfillment.
4) to appropriate another religion’s texts and claim they mean what you want them to mean, does not change the fact that it’s not what the authors meant, and it’s the lowest form of treatment of the texts.
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
I do not 'realize' what you say in fact have some points of disagreement
1) Isaiah was a thus says the Lord through a specific named person.
If you examine Isaiah, it starts saying who Isiah is and in the second half only says 'thus says the Lord' (in chapters 40 on) It mentions a specific Isaiah son of and no one else... so I don't agree and the ordinary sense of the literature would not either. Chapter 40 starts a new column but.... it's like a second part but all sections are tied together interweaving the same melodies and countermelodies from the start
2) God sees the end from the beginning and says so in Isaiah But in the text Israel goes from unholy and rebellious to holy at the end, through the work of the servant in the servant songs and then the fruit of the servant seen in the servants (plural) songs.
3) Isaiah promised salvation to the gentiles and in Isaiah 6 through 53 there is described a hardening of the Jews 'who would believe our report' and so God mostly is saving gentiles 'to make Jews jealous' and eventually to save more in large numbers as the nations are blessed in the seed of Abraham who is Jesus
4) the Author was God. By another's text I think you mean my religion's text? My God, my saviour and in the end of Isaiah which breaks into marriage language points to the marriage supper of the Lamb
Last edited:
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Best scholarship points to more than one author. The author was not God. I can guarantee the text didn’t fall out of the sky. By “snother’s Text,” I mean the Jews. It’s their text. Xtians have misappropriated it and ascribed a meaning to it that was never intended..
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
To go along with what you're saying, the notable Anglican theologian William Barclay said that if one takes the scriptures literally, then God cannot apparently spell because there are a great many spelling/grammatical errors in John's gospel alone.
Also, "Jerome's Bible Commentary" (Catholic) makes the realistic statement that Deutero-Isaiah (53+) is not about Jesus but about God's forgiveness and the eventual return from Babylon. Then they add that Catholic theology generally believes that the Suffering Servant "prefigures" Jesus as a like kind.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
The suffering servant is a widely-known and used archetype.
74x12
Well-Known Member
I'm not saying peer-review is always wrong but it can be wrong and often is. God should be the highest authority.
When you realize that every man must fight to enter the kingdom of God. (2 Timothy 4:7) Then you realize that this is a war and you're either putting your trust in God or not. The way of Egypt is to trust in chariots and horses rather than the Lord. (Isaiah 31:1)
That's not to say that just because we trust in God we leave our sword or the bow at home and just walk out into the battle. But we don't trust in these things to save us. (Psalm 44:6) So going to college to learn theology and studying peer-reviewed studies is not wrong by itself. It's good to be educated. However our ultimate trust is supposed to be in the Lord.
He was talking about trusting in God instead of humans though.
74x12
Well-Known Member
But Jesus fulfilled it. That's the difference.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Yeah, but God’s not going to give us the knowledge we need to exegete ancient texts.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
In one instance, yes. There have been a number of suffering servants.
74x12
Well-Known Member
Not only that but this speaks of how Jesus was literally bare on the cross. At the very least from his usual clothes. (Mark 15:24) But it was Roman practice to crucify people naked.