sooda
Veteran Member
I've read Isaiah plenty of times.
Then you would know that he's speaking of Israel being the servant of God.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I've read Isaiah plenty of times.
Isaiah is sealed. It can't be understood by anyone; unless God shows the meaning. (see 1 Corinthians 2:9-11) That's clear from Isaiah's commission as a prophet in Isaiah chapter 6 where God informs Isaiah that they will hear but they will not understand and in Isaiah 29:10-14; they will not understand theThen you would know that he's speaking of Israel being the servant of God.
Actually, the nation is often referred to in the singular masculine (check Hoshea 14:6 and 7 where the masculine verbs are used). In Hoshea 11:1 the nation is called a "son" which is pretty male. Judges 20:17 also calls the nation as a whole "ish yisrael" the man, Israel. Ezekiel 34:31 uses the singular (masculine) Adam for the nation.Another evidence is how the Lord God compared Israel to a woman, wife or a she.
Israel was not compared to a man or a he.
Isaiah is sealed. It can't be understood by anyone; unless God shows the meaning. (see 1 Corinthians 2:9-11) That's clear from Isaiah's commission as a prophet in Isaiah chapter 6 where God informs Isaiah that they will hear but they will not understand and in Isaiah 29:10-14; they will not understand the
"vision" again and the wisdom of "their wise men" will be what leads them astray. Because they trust in men and not God.
If you don't understand it; you should pray for God to show you the truth. Don't let the traditions of men or the wisdom of the wise --so called-- prevent you.
Jesus is the true Israel as I've said before.
As Jesus said "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
Then you ignore what the book of Isaiah says about itself and the new Testament agrees with.That's nonsense.
They had schools for prophets.. They were NOT fortune tellers.
No one said they are fortune tellers either. Fortune tellers are demonic. They tell people's fortune for money and they consort with demons unless they're an outright fraud. In which case they don't consort with anything. Definitely not God.That's nonsense.
They had schools for prophets.. They were NOT fortune tellers.
Actually, the nation is often referred to in the singular masculine (check Hoshea 14:6 and 7 where the masculine verbs are used). In Hoshea 11:1 the nation is called a "son" which is pretty male. Judges 20:17 also calls the nation as a whole "ish yisrael" the man, Israel. Ezekiel 34:31 uses the singular (masculine) Adam for the nation.
if you @ me in a post, I'll read it and reply. That will get me involved in the discussion -- it will also have me replying to the remarks he makes in what you quote about him, since I'll see interesting things and use the back arrow to find the post.
Psalms 89:19-21 Then you spoke in vision to your saints, and said, “I have given strength to the warrior. I have exalted a young man from the people. (20) I have found David, my servant. I have anointed him with my holy oil, (21) with whom my hand shall be established. My arm (Isaiah 52:10-Isaiah 53:1) will also strengthen him.“My servant”
Why It Matters
When all the verses have been parsed, and all the proofs have been presented, one still might wonder: What difference does it make who is right?
The theological gap between Judaism and Christianity is not limited to the question: "Who is the Messiah," or a debate over the translation of a few biblical verses. Judaism and Christianity are two different belief systems, differing over core issues such as the existential nature of man, the role of our relationship with God, and the path to genuine spiritual fulfillment.
Jews have held steadfast to their beliefs for thousands of years, amidst all forms of persecution and hardship. They have done so in the belief that the Jewish people – as bearers of God’s message of morality and justice – have a unique and crucial role to play in human history. As the prophet Isaiah predicts, this will become eminently clear when the Messiah, the King of Israel, arrives. May it be speedily in our day.
Resources
For further study, see www.outreachjudaism.org, www.jewsforjudaism.org, www.jewishisaiah53.com and www.peninataylor.com, from which much of the information for this article was derived.
For an exploration of the core differences between Judaism and Christianity, see Rabbi Benjamin Blech’s online course: “Deed and Creed.”
For more on why Jesus can’t possibly be the Messiah, read Aish.com’s “Why Jews Don’t Believe in Jesus.”
For an accurate Jewish translation of the Bible, read the “ArtScroll English Tanach."
Its a good idea to do so. On this quotation I think some distortion is due to time and many deaths, but there are as you point out many who try to grasp for literalist arguments and jam this square peg into a round hole.Cutting through the distortions and mistranslations of this enigmatic text.
One thing I notice is that this has happened multiple times already, and I think its a story not of some singular future event but of a process that the prophet sees happening in the past multiple times. I think at the time of Ezra they had already experienced it recently. Europe experienced this recently, too. Parts of the USA have recently.Isaiah 53 is a prophecy foretelling how the world will react when they witness Israel's salvation in the Messianic era. The verses are presented from the perspective of world leaders, who contrast their former scornful attitude toward the Jews with their new realization of Israel's grandeur. After realizing how unfairly they treated the Jewish people, they will be shocked and speechless.
Its true that promoters of Christianity often do this, but there is leap from that to saying its how Jesus came to be associated with the suffering servant text. Its plain in Isaiah who the suffering servant is, and therefore the gospel writer must be alluding to the Jewish martyrs and possibly all martyrs when he writes about Jesus no matter what modern promoters of Christianity are saying about it. They can't unwrite Isaiah, yet somehow they reverse him.So how did the Suffering Servant come to be associated with Jesus? After his death, the promoters of Christianity retroactively looked into the Bible and “applied” – through mistranslation and distortion of context – these biblical verses as referring to Jesus.
Missionary apologist Walter Riggans candidly admitted:
The intention is not to denigrate another religion, but rather to understand the true meaning of the Divine word.
“There is no self-evident blueprint in the Hebrew Bible which can be said to unambiguously point to Jesus. Only after one has come to believe that Jesus was the Messiah, and more specifically the kind of Messiah that he is, does it all begin to make sense...” (Yehoshua Ben David, Olive Press 1995, p.155)
Missionaries do say Jesus lives a sinless life and thus is the messiah. Its poor scholarship. I'm not going to defend it. I can say that while you make a salient point its in a way a straw argument, since the things that missionaries say today aren't what they have always been saying. Your argument applies to our time and to our Jesus, but for the sake of clarity its only applicable in contexts where people make this silly argument. The main problem with this argument is that it depends upon an NT that explains Judaism and Christianity both, and the NT is not intended for this purpose. If it were we wouldn't be hearing so many denials of the Jews being the suffering servant.Missionaries cite this verse as a claim that Jesus lived a sinless life, and was thus the Messiah. This is contradicted, however, by the Gospels themselves, who record that Jesus sinned by violating the Sabbath (John 9:16) and – by claiming to be God Himself – violating the grave prohibition against making any physical image of God (John 10:33, 14:9-10).
This was part of your reply to MJFlores. There is a mistake in the article where it claims "NT writers frequently quote it to explain the cross..." which is not true. Perhaps missionaries quote it to misexplain some things, but the NT writers are not explaining anything. The NT writers have no idea that their writings will be translated in two millennia to English and transmitted to an ignorant group of new readers unfamiliar with Judaism and its reference system, suddenly mass produced on printing machines and mistaken for an explanation of anything.
I must point out that this prophet or these writers of Isaiah all know the text of Deuteronomy and chapter 30 which suggests that these things happen multiple times not only one time. Therefore when it says "He grew like a sapling or a root from dry ground" it must be referring to multiple events, but if it refers only to a single event then which one is it? I would assume the one happening in the prophet's time; but its almost certain it refers to every time Jews are exiled or oppressed. Similarly when you say "The Jewish struggle in exile" are you referring to just one or all of them?(2) He formerly grew like a sapling or a root from dry ground; he had neither form nor beauty. We saw him, but without a desirable appearance.
וַיַּעַל כַּיּוֹנֵק לְפָנָיו וְכַשּׁרֶשׁ מֵאֶרֶץ צִיָּה לא תאַר לוֹ וְלא הָדָר וְנִרְאֵהוּ וְלא מַרְאֶה וְנֶחְמְדֵהוּ
This imagery of a tree struggling to grow in dry earth is a metaphor for the Jewish struggle in exile.
Here is the problem though with applying this only strictly to Jewish people. Other people can also suffer for doing the right thing, not only Jews. Yes it applies to Jews, but are they really the only ones whom it can apply to? If that were the case wouldn't it be more specific? Suppose Quakers are oppressed for refusing to fight and are systematically destroyed. Does the prophecy not apply to them as well? Does their sacrifice not also count? I think Isaiah will think it does. That is where these NT authors seem to be going, and they seem to be extending Abraham's family through their arguments. Their interpretation appears to be that Abraham blesses the world through adoption.This verse describes the Servant as universally despised and rejected.
This has been a historical theme for the Jewish people, as a long list of oppressors have treated the Jews as sub-human (the Nazis) or as a pariah state (the United Nations). See similar imagery in Isaiah 49:7, 60:15; Psalms 44:14; Nechemia 3:36.
I don't see this argument very clearly. Is the phrase in fact 'Universally rejected' ? I have seen Jews rejected but never universally. There always seems to be at least one or two who sticks up for them though not many.This verse describes the Servant as universally despised and rejected.
This has been a historical theme for the Jewish people, as a long list of oppressors have treated the Jews as sub-human (the Nazis) or as a pariah state (the United Nations). See similar imagery in Isaiah 49:7, 60:15; Psalms 44:14; Nechemia 3:36.
While this description clearly applies to Israel, it cannot be reconciled with the New Testament account which describes Jesus as immensely popular (Matthew 4:25). “Large crowds” of people came from far and wide to hear him speak, and Jesus had to sail into the water to avoid being overrun by the crowds (Mark 3:7-9). Luke 2:52 describes him as physically strong and well respected, a man whose popularity spread and was "praised by all" (Luke 4:14-15). A far cry from Isaiah’s description of “despised and rejected.”
Definitely I agree. Its a ridiculous argument and yet another indicator that the gospels are being used abnormally.In the days of Jesus, nobody ever understood Isaiah 53 to be predicting the death of the Messiah.
It underscores the point that Mary is the first disciple to accept that Jesus will be killed, but this portion of the story has a different emphasis unrelated to the argument. Peter has three names in the gospels. He begins as Simon which means "The Reed" an allusion to Isaiah 42:3 "...a bruised reed he will not break..." Peter also denies Jesus in this story while all of the twelve disciples also run away, abandoning Jesus. This symbolizes the universal rejection to which you refer. Here is Joseph rejected by all family, and here are the Jews rejected by the world. Why do they reject and deny? The gospel is addressing the question "Why must saints put up with it?" Simon is a bent reed, but rather than correcting him directly he is left untouched. He is not straightened, since there is a risk it will break him. He then receives direct wisdom from heaven (and not through any person or interpreter) and becomes the Rock not made with hands. His name alludes to the image of the dream seen by king Nebuchadnezzar in the book of Daniel. All of this gets explained in the letter 1 Peter. Apparently the only way to win souls is through endurance, and so the gospel argues the reason for the present crisis is that it is to benefit people and bless the world. The point is that the suffering is for a reason and is not pointless. When Peter objects to Jesus suffering (and that of all martyrs) he is named Satan, because there must be martyrs. I think the gospel is arguing that progress cannot be made without them.When Jesus said, "I am going to Jerusalem where I will suffer and die," the Apostle Peter did not relate this in any way to the suffering described in Isaiah 53. Rather, Peter rebuked Jesus, saying, "Be it far from you Lord, this shall not be unto you." In other words, "God forbid – that cannot happen to you!" Peter never expected the Messiah to be tortured and killed (see Matthew 16:21-22).
Indeed, the Christian idea directly contradicts the basic Jewish teaching that God promises forgiveness to all who sincerely return to Him; thus there is no need for the Messiah to atone for others (Isaiah 55:6-7, Jeremiah 36:3, Ezekiel chapters 18 and 33, Hoseah 14:1-3, Jonah 3:6-10, Proverbs 16:6, Daniel 4:27, 2-Chronicles 7:14).
(6) We have all strayed like sheep, each of us turning his own way, and God inflicted upon him [Israel] the iniquity of us all.
כֻּלָּנוּ כַּצּאן תָּעִינוּ אִישׁ לְדַרְכּוֹ פָּנִינוּ וַיהוָה הִפְגִּיעַ בּוֹ אֵת עֲון כֻּלָּנוּ.
The nations realize that their lack of proper leadership (“shepherd”) caused them to treat the Jews with disdain. They further acknowledge how punishments that should have befallen the nations were averted through Israel’s suffering.
(7) He was persecuted and afflicted, but he did not open his mouth. Like a sheep being led to the slaughter or a lamb that is silent before her shearers, he did not open his mouth.
נִגַּשׂ וְהוּא נַעֲנֶה וְלא יִפְתַּח פִּיו כַּשֶּׂה לַטֶּבַח יוּבָל וּכְרָחֵל לִפְנֵי גֽזְזֶיהָ נֶאֱלָמָה וְלא יִפְתַּח פִּיו
In various contexts, the Bible uses the imagery of “sheep led to the slaughter” specifically in reference to the Jewish people. For example: "You give us as sheep to be eaten and have scattered us among the nations... we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered" (Psalms 44:12, 23).
This verse prophesizes the many hardships – both physical torment and economic exploitation – that the Jews endured in exile. Ironically, this prophecy refers in part to the 11th century Crusaders who "persecuted and afflicted” the Jews in the name of Jesus. In our time, while Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe were "led to the slaughter," they still remained like a "lamb that is silent before her shearers" – without complaints against God.
(8) He was released from captivity and judgment; who could have imagined such a generation? For he was removed from the land of the living; because of my people's sin they were afflicted.
לָמוֹ
The phrase, "land of the living” (Eretz HaChaim) refers specifically to the Land of Israel. Thus this verse, “He was removed from the land of the living,” does not mean that the servant was killed, but rather was exiled from the Land of Israel.
This verse again describes the world’s surprise at witnessing the Jewish return to the Promised Land. "Who could have imagined” that the nation we tortured now prospers? World leaders offer a stunning confession: “Because of my people’s sin, they [the Jews] were afflicted.”
Here the text makes absolutely clear that the oppressed Servant is a collective nation, not a single individual. This is where knowledge of biblical Hebrew is absolutely crucial. At the end of the verse, the Hebrew word for “they were” (lamoh – לָמוֹ) always refers to a group, never to an individual. (see for example, Psalms 99:7)
(9) He submitted his grave to evil people; and the wealthy submitted to his executions, for committing no crime, and with no deceit in his mouth.
וַיִּתֵּן אֶת רְשָׁעִים קִבְרוֹ וְאֶת עָשִׁיר בְּמתָיו על לא חָמָס עָשָׂה וְלא מִרְמָה בְּפִיו
Missionaries cite this verse as a claim that Jesus lived a sinless life, and was thus the Messiah. This is contradicted, however, by the Gospels themselves, who record that Jesus sinned by violating the Sabbath (John 9:16) and – by claiming to be God Himself – violating the grave prohibition against making any physical image of God (John 10:33, 14:9-10).
Throughout history, Jews were given the choice to “convert or die.” Yet as this verse describes, there was “no deceit in his mouth” – the loyal Jews refused to accept a pagan deity as their God. Rather than profane God’s Holy Name, they “submitted to the grave” – i.e. chose to die rather than renounce their faith. As such these Jews were often denied proper burial, discarded “to the grave as evil people.”
Further, wealthy Jews "submitted to his executions, for committing no crime" – killed so that wicked conquerors could confiscate their riches.
(10) God desired to oppress him and He afflicted him. If his soul would acknowledge guilt, he would see offspring and live long days, and God’s purpose would succeed in his hand.
ויהוָה חָפֵץ דַּכְּאוֹ הֶחֱלִי אִם תָּשִׂים אָשָׁם נַפְשׁוֹ יִרְאֶה זֶרַע יַאֲרִיךְ יָמִים וְחֵפֶץ יְהוָה בְּיָדוֹ יִצְלָח
"God desired to oppress” the Jewish people, in order to inspire them to return to Torah observance. If the Jews would only "acknowledge guilt," they would see their "offspring and live long days." This refers to the Messianic era when all Jews will return to Torah observance.
This verse emphasizes that the Servant is to be rewarded with long life and many children. This verse could not possibly refer to Jesus who, according to the New Testament, died young and childless. (Furthermore, if Jesus was alleged to be the immortal Son of God, it is absurd to apply the concept of “living long days.”)
Although missionaries may claim that the “offspring” refers to spiritual descendants, this is based on a distortion and mistranslation. In this verse, the Hebrew word for "offspring" (zera - זֶרַע) always refers to physical descendants (see Genesis 12:7, 15:2-4, 15:13, 46:6; Exodus 28:43). A different word, banim (בנים), generally translated as "sons," is used to refer to spiritual descendants (see Deut. 14:1).
(11) He would see the purpose and be satisfied with his soul's distress. With his knowledge My servant will cause the masses to be righteous; and he will bear their sins.
מֵעֲמַל נַפְשׁוֹ יִרְאֶה יִשְׂבָּע בְּדַעְתּוֹ יַצְדִּיק צַדִּיק עַבְדִּי לָרַבִּים וַעֲוֹנתָם הוּא יִסְבּל
Missionaries cite this verse to claim that Jesus died for our sins. The Christian idea of one’s sins being forgiven through the suffering of another person goes against the basic biblical teaching that each individual has to atone for his own sins by repenting. (Exodus 32:32-33, Deut. 24:16, Ezekiel 18:1-4)
This verse describes how God’s Servant “will cause the masses to be righteous” – not as some mistranslate, “he will justify the many." The Jewish mission is to serve as a "light to the nations," leading the world to righteousness through knowledge of the one true God. The Jews will accomplish this both by example (Deut. 4:5-8; Zechariah 8:23) and by instructing the nations in God's Law (Isaiah 2:3-4; Micah 4:2-3). As it says: “The world will become full of the knowledge of God, as water covers the sea” (Isaiah 11:9).
(12) Therefore, I will assign him a portion in public and he will divide the mighty as spoils – in return for having poured out his soul for death and being counted among the wicked, for he bore the sin of the many, and prayed for the wicked.
לָכֵן אֲחַלֶּק לוֹ בָרַבִּים וְאֶת עֲצוּמִים יְחַלֵּק שָׁלָל תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱרָה לַמָּוֶת נַפְשׁוֹ וְאֶת פּֽשְׁעִים נִמְנָה וְהוּא חֵטְא רַבִּים נָשָׂא וְלַפּֽשְׁעִים יַפְגִּיעַ
This verse speaks of how the Jews always pray for the welfare of the nations they are exiled into (see Jeremiah 29:7). The verse continues to explain that the Jewish people, who righteously bore the sins of the world and yet remained faithful to God, will be rewarded.
Regarding the above passage, some have claimed that the "suffering servant" cannot be Israel, since Israel has sins. Yet this is a fallacy, since we know that no human being – not even Moses – is completely free of sin. Yet Moses was considered “righteous,” which takes into account not only one's good deeds, but also one's repentance after sin. If Jesus is God, these ideas have no meaning.
Immediately following this promise of reward for the Jews’ suffering (53:10-12), chapter 54 clearly speaks of the redemption which awaits the Jewish people. This point is acknowledged by all Christian commentaries.
Conclusion
In the days of Jesus, nobody ever understood Isaiah 53 to be predicting the death of the Messiah. When Jesus said, "I am going to Jerusalem where I will suffer and die," the Apostle Peter did not relate this in any way to the suffering described in Isaiah 53. Rather, Peter rebuked Jesus, saying, "Be it far from you Lord, this shall not be unto you." In other words, "God forbid – that cannot happen to you!" Peter never expected the Messiah to be tortured and killed (see Matthew 16:21-22).
Interestingly, the 20th century Christian New English Bible – Oxford Study Edition (annotation on Isaiah 52:13-53:12) clearly identifies the Suffering Servant as the nation of Israel which “has suffered as a humiliated individual."
If the context of Isaiah 53 so clearly refers to the Jewish people, how could so many Christian leaders have mistranslated the Bible? History shows that – for whatever motivation – many did so knowingly:
- Lucius Coelius Firmianes Lactantius, 3rd century Church leader: "Among those who seek power and gain from their religion, there will never be wanting an inclination to forge and lie for it."
- St. Gregory, 4th century Bishop of Nanianzus: "A little jargon is all that is necessary to impose on the people. The less they comprehend, the more they admire. Our forefathers and doctors have often said not what they thought, but what circumstances and necessity dictated."
- Dr. Herbert Marsh, 19th century English Bishop: "It is a certain fact that several readings in our common printed text are nothing more than alterations made by Origen..."
continued
- Walter Brueggemann Ph.D., an ordained minister and author of 60 books on the Bible, writes: "[A]lthough it is clear that this poetry does not have Jesus in any first instance on its horizon, it is equally clear that the church, from the outset, has found the poetry a poignant and generative way to consider Jesus, wherein humiliation equals crucifixion and exaltation equals resurrection and ascension."
Its a good idea to do so. On this quotation I think some distortion is due to time and many deaths, but there are as you point out many who try to grasp for literalist arguments and jam this square peg into a round hole.
One thing I notice is that this has happened multiple times already, and I think its a story not of some singular future event but of a process that the prophet sees happening in the past multiple times. I think at the time of Ezra they had already experienced it recently. Europe experienced this recently, too. Parts of the USA have recently.
Its true that promoters of Christianity often do this, but there is leap from that to saying its how Jesus came to be associated with the suffering servant text. Its plain in Isaiah who the suffering servant is, and therefore the gospel writer must be alluding to the Jewish martyrs and possibly all martyrs when he writes about Jesus no matter what modern promoters of Christianity are saying about it. They can't unwrite Isaiah, yet somehow they reverse him.
Missionaries do say Jesus lives a sinless life and thus is the messiah. Its poor scholarship. I'm not going to defend it. I can say that while you make a salient point its in a way a straw argument, since the things that missionaries say today aren't what they have always been saying. Your argument applies to our time and to our Jesus, but for the sake of clarity its only applicable in contexts where people make this silly argument. The main problem with this argument is that it depends upon an NT that explains Judaism and Christianity both, and the NT is not intended for this purpose. If it were we wouldn't be hearing so many denials of the Jews being the suffering servant.
This was part of your reply to MJFlores. There is a mistake in the article where it claims "NT writers frequently quote it to explain the cross..." which is not true. Perhaps missionaries quote it to misexplain some things, but the NT writers are not explaining anything. The NT writers have no idea that their writings will be translated in two millennia to English and transmitted to an ignorant group of new readers unfamiliar with Judaism and its reference system, suddenly mass produced on printing machines and mistaken for an explanation of anything.
I must point out that this prophet or these writers of Isaiah all know the text of Deuteronomy and chapter 30 which suggests that these things happen multiple times not only one time. Therefore when it says "He grew like a sapling or a root from dry ground" it must be referring to multiple events, but if it refers only to a single event then which one is it? I would assume the one happening in the prophet's time; but its almost certain it refers to every time Jews are exiled or oppressed. Similarly when you say "The Jewish struggle in exile" are you referring to just one or all of them?
Here is the problem though with applying this only strictly to Jewish people. Other people can also suffer for doing the right thing, not only Jews. Yes it applies to Jews, but are they really the only ones whom it can apply to? If that were the case wouldn't it be more specific? Suppose Quakers are oppressed for refusing to fight and are systematically destroyed. Does the prophecy not apply to them as well? Does their sacrifice not also count? I think Isaiah will think it does. That is where these NT authors seem to be going, and they seem to be extending Abraham's family through their arguments. Their interpretation appears to be that Abraham blesses the world through adoption.
I don't see this argument very clearly. Is the phrase in fact 'Universally rejected' ? I have seen Jews rejected but never universally. There always seems to be at least one or two who sticks up for them though not many.
Definitely I agree. Its a ridiculous argument and yet another indicator that the gospels are being used abnormally.
It underscores the point that Mary is the first disciple to accept that Jesus will be killed, but this portion of the story has a different emphasis unrelated to the argument. Peter has three names in the gospels. He begins as Simon which means "The Reed" an allusion to Isaiah 42:3 "...a bruised reed he will not break..." Peter also denies Jesus in this story while all of the twelve disciples also run away, abandoning Jesus. This symbolizes the universal rejection to which you refer. Here is Joseph rejected by all family, and here are the Jews rejected by the world. Why do they reject and deny? The gospel is addressing the question "Why must saints put up with it?" Simon is a bent reed, but rather than correcting him directly he is left untouched. He is not straightened, since there is a risk it will break him. He then receives direct wisdom from heaven (and not through any person or interpreter) and becomes the Rock not made with hands. His name alludes to the image of the dream seen by king Nebuchadnezzar in the book of Daniel. All of this gets explained in the letter 1 Peter. Apparently the only way to win souls is through endurance, and so the gospel argues the reason for the present crisis is that it is to benefit people and bless the world. The point is that the suffering is for a reason and is not pointless. When Peter objects to Jesus suffering (and that of all martyrs) he is named Satan, because there must be martyrs. I think the gospel is arguing that progress cannot be made without them.
To your point that Peter doesn't expect Jesus to suffer and die, true. Think of it like this. Peter is named three times, and so there are three Peters. One is the bent reed, one is the Satan, and one is the Rock. Yes you are correct in the context of arguing with missionaries that Peter doesn't expect Jesus to die. On the other hand missionaries are generally shallow in their reading of this gospel and have no clue usually what its saying as far as I can tell. I think that is a shame, because they are taking such a direct route in trying to straighten what they see as bent reeds. They will inevitably cause harm.
How might you explain the contrast between the plural and singular
"all of US like sheep have gone stray but the Lord laid the iniquity of us all on HIM"
Seems highly repeated
Cutting through the distortions and mistranslations of this enigmatic text.
The 53rd chapter of Isaiah
The suffering servant is throughout the OT. David speaks of him as he who has his arms and feet pierced,
the one given gall to drink. Zechariah speaks of the Jewish nation mourning that their king who has come
to them is the same one whom they pierced.
No Jew other than Jesus could be the spotless lamb who gives his life for his people.
This copy and past tract simply tries to explain away the Son of God.
Then you would know that he's speaking of Israel being the servant of God.
The Bible is NOTHING if not repetitive, There is but one theme in the OT that repeats and repeats from the flood to the Exodus to the Babylonian exile.
Read Isaiah without prejudice.
Are you talking about Psalms 22:16?
This has NOTHING to do with explaining away Jesus.
This is about integrity. Christians have hijacked Isaiah's Servant Song to attribute it to Jesus when the SERVANT all thru Isaiah is Israel.