03-06-2024, 08:55 PM
Now I want to explain why Isaiah 53:9, in the range of translations given in my first post and all those used by counter-missionaries to represent the meaning of the text, actually fits perfectly with the NT description of the burial of Jesus.
Everything is according to the NT description, in strict translations, Catholic and Protestant. I will not clutter this up with all of the references. The passages are easy to find in Matthew 27, Mark 15, Luke 23 and John 19
(1) Jesus was killed in a Roman criminal execution. As such, taking the criminal off the cross was under the soldiers' authority and responsibility to make sure that the criminal was really dead. Letting a civilian Jew do that task is frankly unthinkable.
(2) The Jewish leaders were very anxious, and thus the Romans, too, that the criminals be taken off the crosses and buried before sundown, because the next day was a sabbath. Therefore, they would be very unwilling to let any criminal remain on the cross after his death. They broke the legs of the two thieves to hasten their death for that reason, but found that Jesus was already dead. Therefore, they must have proceeded to bury him first in their criminal burial pit, as soon as they confirmed his death. Undoubtedly, the burial pit was already dug before the soldiers would have been allowed the luxury of dividing up the criminals' clothes. It was part of their job, and there must have been 100 soldiers there since the leader was a centurion.
(3) Joseph of Arimathea decided to ask Pilate for permission to bury Jesus' body after seeing Jesus die. The text says that he gathered his courage, as it must have been scary to ask the governor to bury an executed criminal. I see another probable reason for him to wait until then, because he didn't know if there would be enough time between Jesus' death and sundown. This also explains why the women did not buy spices. They didn't know if their would be time OR opportunity to use them. When he saw that Jesus died early, he suddenly realized that there was enough time to give Jesus a decent Jewish burial, if only Pirate would agree in time. This means that when Joseph left for Pilate's office, Jesus was already dead.
(4) Now, think about the detailed sequence of events recorded in Mark 15:42-46. Joseph surely ran to Pilate. I understand that it was perhaps less than a mile, but it was not at the crucifixion site. Then, the text does not say, but we can be sure that Joseph had to ask permission for an audience with Pilate. He got in and stated his petition to bury Jesus, but Pilate couldn't believe that Jesus was already dead. So, he called the centurion on his cell phone--- He sent a messenger to call the centurion, then the centurion had to come like Joseph. I can imagine Joseph eyeing the daylight saying, "Hurry, Hurry up," in Aramaic. So far we have 3 trips from the crucifixion site -AFTER Jesus died- by the time the centurion gets there to tell Pilate that Yes, Jesus is already dead. They were in a hurry to get the bodies off the cross into the grave. The grave was already dug. It is impossible that Jesus was not already buried in the grave. by the time the centurion arrived, and if I had been the centurion, I would not have dared to tell Pilate that Jesus was dead, if I had not seen him buried under dirt first.
(5) So, in the time it took to make four trips, for Joseph to get back with the centurion to receive Jesus' body, the thieves with the broken legs were surely already dead and in the burial pit, too. Jesus literally made, put, set his grave with/to the wicked, among the wicked, however they want to honestly translate it. He shared the grave with the wicked.
So, why have Christian scholars, as far as I can see, always said that Joseph took Jesus' body down from the cross and straight to his rich man's tomb? There are 2 verses that seem to give this idea. Mark 15:46 and Luke 23:53. They both say that Joseph took the body down. When I read this challenge from the counter-missionaries, I had never thought about Isaiah 53:9 that deeply. I just observed that there was a juxtaposition of with the wicked and with the rich, remarkable. When I read their challenge that shouldn't Jesus have been buried with the wicked, if he is supposed to be the servant of Isaiah 53? I took it to heart. I first checked with a few Christian leaders, including John Wesley, and found that they had just made excuses about the tomb being not far from the wicked. If you do a Google Search of Jesus coming down from the cross and click on images, there must be hundreds of paintings of Joseph on his ladder bringing Jesus down from the cross, sometimes with Nicodemus helping. But I have learned NOT to accept millenia of tradition over Scriptures' plain statements, even though I have to read translations. I looked at the text, expecting to see "down from the cross" and found just "down". Only in some paraphrases have they dared to add " from the cross", even though that is an almost universal belief of Christians.
So, after considering all of these solid reasons for saying that Jesus must have been already buried with the thieves and was dug up by the soldiers to give the body to Joseph, what did Joseph take the body down from? Golgotha hill, of course!
Then they say that Isaiah 53:9 could not refer to Jesus because it speaks of "deaths" and individuals only die once' right? I knew the answer right away, because in I Peter 3:18, it says that Jesus was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit. Some translations say "alive by the spirit", but I also studied Romans 6-8 a lot, where in refers to multiple kinds of death, spiritual and physical as well as death to God death to the law death to sin, etc. It certainly is possible for one man to die multiple times in multiple sense or ways.
So, there is absolutely no reason why Jesus does not fit Isaiah 53:9. Jews don't care? I can't help that, but counter-missionaries, Tovia Singer, Michoel Drazin, everyone involved, take it off your list! You are deceiving people. If you want to convince Jews to reject Jesus, do it honestly. Maybe you have other valid points. Fine. But if you do not take off points that you can see have no basis, you have no position to be accusing Paul of lying.
That is the first reason why I posted this. The second reason is to explain why I do not accept religious authority, after seeing something so universally affirmed by the top scholars for centuries that is so obviously wrong, I am not in a mood to just believe. The third reason why I explain this is to help Christians who cannot believe that a doctrine that is so obviously wrong, according to the New Testament, could be so universally believed. It is time to make adjustments.
Everything is according to the NT description, in strict translations, Catholic and Protestant. I will not clutter this up with all of the references. The passages are easy to find in Matthew 27, Mark 15, Luke 23 and John 19
(1) Jesus was killed in a Roman criminal execution. As such, taking the criminal off the cross was under the soldiers' authority and responsibility to make sure that the criminal was really dead. Letting a civilian Jew do that task is frankly unthinkable.
(2) The Jewish leaders were very anxious, and thus the Romans, too, that the criminals be taken off the crosses and buried before sundown, because the next day was a sabbath. Therefore, they would be very unwilling to let any criminal remain on the cross after his death. They broke the legs of the two thieves to hasten their death for that reason, but found that Jesus was already dead. Therefore, they must have proceeded to bury him first in their criminal burial pit, as soon as they confirmed his death. Undoubtedly, the burial pit was already dug before the soldiers would have been allowed the luxury of dividing up the criminals' clothes. It was part of their job, and there must have been 100 soldiers there since the leader was a centurion.
(3) Joseph of Arimathea decided to ask Pilate for permission to bury Jesus' body after seeing Jesus die. The text says that he gathered his courage, as it must have been scary to ask the governor to bury an executed criminal. I see another probable reason for him to wait until then, because he didn't know if there would be enough time between Jesus' death and sundown. This also explains why the women did not buy spices. They didn't know if their would be time OR opportunity to use them. When he saw that Jesus died early, he suddenly realized that there was enough time to give Jesus a decent Jewish burial, if only Pirate would agree in time. This means that when Joseph left for Pilate's office, Jesus was already dead.
(4) Now, think about the detailed sequence of events recorded in Mark 15:42-46. Joseph surely ran to Pilate. I understand that it was perhaps less than a mile, but it was not at the crucifixion site. Then, the text does not say, but we can be sure that Joseph had to ask permission for an audience with Pilate. He got in and stated his petition to bury Jesus, but Pilate couldn't believe that Jesus was already dead. So, he called the centurion on his cell phone--- He sent a messenger to call the centurion, then the centurion had to come like Joseph. I can imagine Joseph eyeing the daylight saying, "Hurry, Hurry up," in Aramaic. So far we have 3 trips from the crucifixion site -AFTER Jesus died- by the time the centurion gets there to tell Pilate that Yes, Jesus is already dead. They were in a hurry to get the bodies off the cross into the grave. The grave was already dug. It is impossible that Jesus was not already buried in the grave. by the time the centurion arrived, and if I had been the centurion, I would not have dared to tell Pilate that Jesus was dead, if I had not seen him buried under dirt first.
(5) So, in the time it took to make four trips, for Joseph to get back with the centurion to receive Jesus' body, the thieves with the broken legs were surely already dead and in the burial pit, too. Jesus literally made, put, set his grave with/to the wicked, among the wicked, however they want to honestly translate it. He shared the grave with the wicked.
So, why have Christian scholars, as far as I can see, always said that Joseph took Jesus' body down from the cross and straight to his rich man's tomb? There are 2 verses that seem to give this idea. Mark 15:46 and Luke 23:53. They both say that Joseph took the body down. When I read this challenge from the counter-missionaries, I had never thought about Isaiah 53:9 that deeply. I just observed that there was a juxtaposition of with the wicked and with the rich, remarkable. When I read their challenge that shouldn't Jesus have been buried with the wicked, if he is supposed to be the servant of Isaiah 53? I took it to heart. I first checked with a few Christian leaders, including John Wesley, and found that they had just made excuses about the tomb being not far from the wicked. If you do a Google Search of Jesus coming down from the cross and click on images, there must be hundreds of paintings of Joseph on his ladder bringing Jesus down from the cross, sometimes with Nicodemus helping. But I have learned NOT to accept millenia of tradition over Scriptures' plain statements, even though I have to read translations. I looked at the text, expecting to see "down from the cross" and found just "down". Only in some paraphrases have they dared to add " from the cross", even though that is an almost universal belief of Christians.
So, after considering all of these solid reasons for saying that Jesus must have been already buried with the thieves and was dug up by the soldiers to give the body to Joseph, what did Joseph take the body down from? Golgotha hill, of course!
Then they say that Isaiah 53:9 could not refer to Jesus because it speaks of "deaths" and individuals only die once' right? I knew the answer right away, because in I Peter 3:18, it says that Jesus was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit. Some translations say "alive by the spirit", but I also studied Romans 6-8 a lot, where in refers to multiple kinds of death, spiritual and physical as well as death to God death to the law death to sin, etc. It certainly is possible for one man to die multiple times in multiple sense or ways.
So, there is absolutely no reason why Jesus does not fit Isaiah 53:9. Jews don't care? I can't help that, but counter-missionaries, Tovia Singer, Michoel Drazin, everyone involved, take it off your list! You are deceiving people. If you want to convince Jews to reject Jesus, do it honestly. Maybe you have other valid points. Fine. But if you do not take off points that you can see have no basis, you have no position to be accusing Paul of lying.
That is the first reason why I posted this. The second reason is to explain why I do not accept religious authority, after seeing something so universally affirmed by the top scholars for centuries that is so obviously wrong, I am not in a mood to just believe. The third reason why I explain this is to help Christians who cannot believe that a doctrine that is so obviously wrong, according to the New Testament, could be so universally believed. It is time to make adjustments.