Who buried with whom? Isaiah 53:9

[rosends]

1: The debate pushed by counter-missionaries is about who is talking about whom in Isaiah 53, and when and how it was/will be fulfilled, and I am examining evidence for the various claims.  They are challenging those of other faiths to defend their position. Do you expect me to just believe and remember a conclusion that I am not convinced of yet, just because rabbis know Hebrew better than I do?

1 -- Yes. You should defer to experts who have been studying a text for thousands of years in the original language and context.

In Isaiah 53:9, the Hebrew word Aleph-Thau is found twice and as far as I can see it always has the meaning of a close association.

 -- The word has no actual definition in Hebrew but is used as a variety of things. None of them is "walking distance." I never mentioned a robbery.

2: If you just stick with the text, it does not state who is speaking. The text mentions Isaiah, daughter of the Chaldeans, Jerusalem, Israel, kings shutting their mouth, "my servant", and God, and others. Which of those could be speaking regarding whom in which passages is what people have decided based on the content of each passage. How do you know that God is speaking in verse 11, for example? It isn't because the text says, "Thus says God..." but because the content says "my righteous servant" and we know that it is God's servant.  Why did you decide that the speakers in verse 3, for example, are the kings referring to Israel? Not because it says, "Thus say the kings..." but because you believe that you know that Israel is despised by the kings and no one else fits that content.

2 -- Actually, it has to do with the grammar, the words and the syntax of the text. Understanding that comes from study in the original and in context. But, hey, if you just want to innovate a new reading because it makes more sense to you, have fun. That will have no bearing on what the text actually means. The Drazin book is one place that goes through teh chapter and shows how it can't apply to Jesus but does to Israel. There are other sites that break down the phrases and explain them. If you wanted to look for all sorts of explanations that you can reject because they don't agree with your beliefs, you can do that also.

3: Hosea 11 is an interesting example, because after referring to Israel in the singular, it then begins to refer to Ephraim in the plural, then in verse 5, back to the singular.  I never have denied that the singular servant could refer to the nation Israel. I am just asking you to look at the content and see if that interpretation is justified. I used the spelling "deaths" because that is what the counter-missionaries used. It seems that you are saying that the counter-missionaries are cherry-picking interpretations that will give missionaries the hardest time and hiding the fact that there are other interpretations.

3 -- to a degree, that is a possibility. By pointing out the complexities of explanations it can be shown that the parameters of meaning can't include Jesus. But no one is hiding anything. Is it up to those who ask questions to keep studying, not up to those who explain to give every possibility.

In fact, Jesus did die more than one death, and I can show this, too.

Jews don't care. The text has nothing to do with Jesus. Or Harry Potter.