Isaiah 53 Verse 10

[searchinmyroots]

Tenak Talk just released what appears to be an older video of Rabbi Singer explaining the guilt offering.

It backs up my claim that Christians should think twice before trying to use Isaiah 53 as a proof text.

Unless of course as I mentioned previously, they agree Jesus was guilty of committing sin.

Rabbi Singer starts talking about the guilt offering at around 7:20 of the video.

[veil23]

I just want to confirm the meaning of the Hebrew word "asham" used in this verse.

From what I understand it means guilt and it is also related to the guilt offering, meaning the person is guilty of sin.

In this case, it is the servant.

If that is true, then how could any Christian possibly think Isaiah 53 is about Jesus?

The servant is guilty of sin, and Christian theology teaches Jesus was sinless.

He is the offering for sin.  He is not guilty of the sin.  If you do not see Jesus as the suffering servant in Is 53 what about in Is 49?

[searchinmyroots]

I just want to confirm the meaning of the Hebrew word "asham" used in this verse.

From what I understand it means guilt and it is also related to the guilt offering, meaning the person is guilty of sin.

In this case, it is the servant.

If that is true, then how could any Christian possibly think Isaiah 53 is about Jesus?

The servant is guilty of sin, and Christian theology teaches Jesus was sinless.

He is the offering for sin.  He is not guilty of the sin.  If you do not see Jesus as the suffering servant in Is 53 what about in Is 49?

Then this verse isn't about Jesus then. You clearly don't understand the Hebrew it is written in.

[veil23]

You are painting yourself into a corner here. Or is it neglecting the 800 lb gorilla in the room. The verse is clearly speaking of the Messiah becoming
the guilt or trespass offering. Like innocent ram or lamb used in the guilt offering the sin transfers to the sacrifice to atone for it. And as the Messiah does not commit the sin but is MADE TO BE THE SIN as demonstrated by innocent animals used in Leviticus. Since the sin was not his own but on behalf of others the Messiah has fulfilled the 2nd table of the law -loving neighbor as himself and as Deut 28 says: blessed is the fruit of his body which is the seed that shall be born and rise with his dead body as Is 26 says. The Messiah has physical seed it is just that life begins in the spirit so followers of him today don't receive new bodies yet. But they will. G-d breathed life into Adam and that life was supposed to pass on to all his seed (physical seed) but could not because of his sin. The Messiah fixes this through becoming the offering, taking on the guilt, so this life could be breathed into those who call on him to be saved (Joel 2). The word is not up in heaven to say of who will get it for us but is in your heart and mouth (to call on him). G-d made Adam spirit and body and is fixing the trouble he (Adam) caused in Is 53. As Psalm 22 says -a seed shall serve him and it is accounted for a generation.

[searchinmyroots]

Again, that is your interpretation and it shows you clearly do not understand the Hebrew it is written in.

If you actually watched the video i posted you would understand what a guilt offering really is.

[veil23]

Again, that is your interpretation and it shows you clearly do not understand the Hebrew it is written in.

If you actually watched the video i posted you would understand what a guilt offering really is.

I watched the whole video.  The context from Isaiah 52:13 to the end of 53 clearly shows someone stepping into the shoes of another to bear their judgment.  Have you read this section all of the way through?  Seriously, you have to twist a lot of Hebrew words to shoehorn in another interpretation.

[searchinmyroots]

Again, that is your interpretation and it shows you clearly do not understand the Hebrew it is written in.

If you actually watched the video i posted you would understand what a guilt offering really is.

I watched the whole video.  The context from Isaiah 52:13 to the end of 53 clearly shows someone stepping into the shoes of another to bear their judgment.  Have you read this section all of the way through?  Seriously, you have to twist a lot of Hebrew words to shoehorn in another interpretation.

I guess you understand the Hebrew language better than those who speak and study it.

Of course, you are entitled to your opinion.

I don't see any point in having any further discussions since your understanding of the Hebrew bible and language is much different.

That's okay, but I think I'll stick with the Jewish understanding of the Hebrew bible.

[veil23]

Again, that is your interpretation and it shows you clearly do not understand the Hebrew it is written in.

If you actually watched the video i posted you would understand what a guilt offering really is.

I watched the whole video.  The context from Isaiah 52:13 to the end of 53 clearly shows someone stepping into the shoes of another to bear their judgment.  Have you read this section all of the way through?  Seriously, you have to twist a lot of Hebrew words to shoehorn in another interpretation.

I guess you understand the Hebrew language better than those who speak and study it.

Of course, you are entitled to your opinion.

I don't see any point in having any further discussions since your understanding of the Hebrew bible and language is much different.

That's okay, but I think I'll stick with the Jewish understanding of the Hebrew bible.

OK, we can leave it here.  I may continue replying or posting on some of these threads as I will watch the Judaism vs. Christianity video and check out one other Rabbi you suggested. And if you don't interact again with me: "I want nothing but the best for you".

[searchinmyroots]

Thank you.

And the best to you as well.

[ThomasDGW]

I just want to confirm the meaning of the Hebrew word "asham" used in this verse.

From what I understand it means guilt and it is also related to the guilt offering, meaning the person is guilty of sin.

In this case, it is the servant.

If that is true, then how could any Christian possibly think Isaiah 53 is about Jesus?

The servant is guilty of sin, and Christian theology teaches Jesus was sinless.

He is the offering for sin.  He is not guilty of the sin.  If you do not see Jesus as the suffering servant in Is 53 what about in Is 49?

Then this verse isn't about Jesus then. You clearly don't understand the Hebrew it is written in.

Searchin, your statement, "The servant is guilty of sin, and Christian theology teaches Jesus was sinless." is correct, and a watertight conclusion from this is that Isaiah 53:10 cannot refer to the Jesus of Christian theology. But that does not mean that it is automatically about Israel.  There might be another servant. It might be that Christian theology is wrong about Jesus.

The definition of "asham" that you present is right in line with what James Strong put in his Hebrew dictionary: "Asham means "guilt offering; offense; guilt; gift of restitution; gift of atonement."... The noun implies the condition of guilt incurred through some wrongdoing..."

But 53:9 says that this servant did no violent wrongdoing nor deceit.  So, any candidate to be this servant has to be innocent of violent wrongdoing and deceit AND have guilt of sin. This seems impossible. Israel has guilt, but did Israel commit no violent wrongdoing nor deceit? According to the NT, Jesus did no sin (I Peter 2:22, quoting Isaiah 53:9 as expressed in the Greek translation). However, I Peter 2:24 goes on to say that Jesus bore our sins in his own body on the tree. II Corinthians 5:21 says that God made Jesus, who knew no sin to be sin for us. God made Jesus guilty. This is not the normal way a person becomes guilty of sin, because it is a special work of God. So, who has the theological authority to say that Jesus had no guilt? We have to say that Jesus had guilt incurred through wrongdoing, although our wrongdoing, and so he wasn't sinless as he died on the cross. Instead of contradicting Isaiah 53:9-10, the NT is in complete harmony with it. But Christian theology errs because they do not hold firmly to the Hebrew Scriptures.

[I believe that the reason that the Hebrew text uses the word "chamas" = violent wrongdoing instead of "chatta-ah"= sin may be that Jewish scholars under Rabbi Akiva altered the text to be able to more easily maintain the identity of the servant as Israel.  They may have sincerely believed that they were correcting a copy error. The text was changing from the original "paleo-Hebrew to the modern Hebrew letters. To me, the modern letters are somewhat similar between the two. In this case, I believe that the Greek translation made before that time, and the quote given by Peter, preserves the true meaning.]