A message

[JudaicChristian]

Isaiah 53 is about Yahshua.

Please exclude verses 4, 5, 7, 8, and the relevant portion of verse 12 that could be interpreted as glorifying any individual facing execution. These verses contain language that might just as easily be claimed by any condemned criminal seeking to frame their death as heroic. With those sections set aside, the question remains: Can you now truly identify Jesus?

There is no point in proving anything, because you dismiss all of the facts. Bye!

[searchinmyroots]

There is no point in proving anything, because you dismiss all of the facts. Bye!

Facts??

[Robert]

"Aish" have an interesting analysis of Isaiah 53:
"Isaiah 53: The Suffering Servant",
which also contains a verse by verse commentary. 

I just want to quote one part of it here: 

'[...] throughout the Bible, the Jewish people are consistently referred to as a singular entity, using the singular pronoun. For example, when God speaks to the entire Jewish nation at Mount Sinai, all of the Ten Commandments are written as if speaking to an individual (Exodus 20:1-14). This is because the Jewish people are one unit, bound together with a shared national destiny (see Exodus 4:22, Deuteronomy chapter 32). This singular reference is even more common in biblical verses referring to the Messianic era, when the Jewish people will be fully united under the banner of God (see Hosea 14:6-7, Jeremiah 50:19). [...]

Early in the Book of Isaiah, God predicts the long and difficult exile of the Jewish people. Chapter 53 occurs in the midst of Isaiah's "Messages of Consolation," which tell of the restoration of Israel to prominence as God's chosen people.

The key to understanding this chapter lies in correctly identifying who is speaking. Though the book was written by Isaiah, verses 53:1-10 are told from the perspective of world leaders. Following in the footsteps of the previous chapter (Isaiah 52:15 – “the kings will shut their mouths in amazement”), these verses describe how world leaders will be shocked with disbelief when God’s Servant Israel – despite all contrary expectations – is vindicated and blossoms in the Messianic age.' [...]

Extract source:
https://aish.com/isaiah_53_the_suffering_servant/

I hope the following links will be of assistance to the general reader in understanding the requirements in Judaism for the Messiah:
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_c...f-Days.htm


Requirements in Judaism for the Messiah:

'The Messiah must be descended on his father's side from King David (see Genesis 49:10, Isaiah 11:1, Jeremiah 23:5, 33:17; Ezekiel 34:23-24). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father - and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father’s side from King David (1) [...]'

(Please see website for its citations)

Extract source:
https://aish.com/why-jews-dont-believe-in-jesus/

[Yahya Sharif]

There is no point in proving anything, because you dismiss all of the facts. Bye!

Which facts?
 Christians may not fully grasp the implications of atonement. The doctrine suggests that through Jesus, G-d is entirely reconciled with believers. Yet, this notion appears difficult to reconcile with the reality that Christians still suffer and die—just as all humans do. If Jesus truly atoned for Adam’s original sin, why do its consequences persist in the lives of those who believe?

It is not my responsibility that death is inherited as a biological aspect of humanity. I may have placed my faith in Jesus, who is said to have made atonement for the very sin that continues to cause suffering and mortality. From this perspective, I have fulfilled my obligation—so where is the promised transformation? What practical difference has Jesus’ atonement made?

Historically, even before the time of Jesus, devout Jews—despite bearing the burden of original sin—lived ethical lives and were understood to have a share in the world to come. The Jewish covenantal system endured for millennia and provided a moral and spiritual framework that was effective and meaningful.

If the primary distinction introduced by Jesus was a form of universal forgiveness or moral leniency, it invites serious theological reflection. And if eternal life was already accessible through earlier traditions, what, ultimately, did Jesus' atonement change?

[JudaicChristian]

There is no point in proving anything, because you dismiss all of the facts. Bye!

Which facts?
 Christians may not fully grasp the implications of atonement. The doctrine suggests that through Jesus, G-d is entirely reconciled with believers. Yet, this notion appears difficult to reconcile with the reality that Christians still suffer and die—just as all humans do. If Jesus truly atoned for Adam’s original sin, why do its consequences persist in the lives of those who believe?

It is not my responsibility that death is inherited as a biological aspect of humanity. I may have placed my faith in Jesus, who is said to have made atonement for the very sin that continues to cause suffering and mortality. From this perspective, I have fulfilled my obligation—so where is the promised transformation? What practical difference has Jesus’ atonement made?

Historically, even before the time of Jesus, devout Jews—despite bearing the burden of original sin—lived ethical lives and were understood to have a share in the world to come. The Jewish covenantal system endured for millennia and provided a moral and spiritual framework that was effective and meaningful.

If the primary distinction introduced by Jesus was a form of universal forgiveness or moral leniency, it invites serious theological reflection. And if eternal life was already accessible through earlier traditions, what, ultimately, did Jesus' atonement change?

There is no pain or suffering in the second life. Pain and suffering is necessary in this life.

[Yahya Sharif]

There is no point in proving anything, because you dismiss all of the facts. Bye!

Which facts?
 Christians may not fully grasp the implications of atonement. The doctrine suggests that through Jesus, G-d is entirely reconciled with believers. Yet, this notion appears difficult to reconcile with the reality that Christians still suffer and die—just as all humans do. If Jesus truly atoned for Adam’s original sin, why do its consequences persist in the lives of those who believe?

It is not my responsibility that death is inherited as a biological aspect of humanity. I may have placed my faith in Jesus, who is said to have made atonement for the very sin that continues to cause suffering and mortality. From this perspective, I have fulfilled my obligation—so where is the promised transformation? What practical difference has Jesus’ atonement made?

Historically, even before the time of Jesus, devout Jews—despite bearing the burden of original sin—lived ethical lives and were understood to have a share in the world to come. The Jewish covenantal system endured for millennia and provided a moral and spiritual framework that was effective and meaningful.

If the primary distinction introduced by Jesus was a form of universal forgiveness or moral leniency, it invites serious theological reflection. And if eternal life was already accessible through earlier traditions, what, ultimately, did Jesus' atonement change?

There is no pain or suffering in the second life. Pain and suffering is necessary in this life.

Then what, exactly, did Jesus add? From Adam to Jesus time—including Noah, Abraham, Jacob the righteous Jews, and the righteous gentiles—none of them relied on a redeemer for the forgiveness of sins. They followed the commandments, the very same commandments that Jesus himself affirmed.
If the same religious framework for Jews and gentiles were to continue today, what new element does Jesus introduce? A person who commits evil—whether it be murder, theft, or adultery—is called to sincere repentance, not to search for a redeemer. G-d is merciful, and repentance has always been the path to forgiveness.

[JudaicChristian]

Yahshua added the New Covenant and Baptism for Yahwah.

[Yahya Sharif]

Yahshua added the New Covenant and Baptism for Yahwah.

You haven’t addressed my question.
What exactly did Jesus—the so-called savior—offer to his followers? What is it that he is said to have saved them from? And what, specifically, is the "Good News"?
Moreover, how is it just that someone can steal, or even take a life, and yet be completely unconditionally forgiven by God in the name of a new covenant?

[JudaicChristian]

Yahshua added the New Covenant and Baptism for Yahwah.

You haven’t addressed my question.
What exactly did Jesus—the so-called savior—offer to his followers? What is it that he is said to have saved them from? And what, specifically, is the "Good News"?
Moreover, how is it just that someone can steal, or even take a life, and yet be completely unconditionally forgiven by God in the name of a new covenant?

I did answer your question.

Also, if there was no forgiveness, then no one would enter heaven.

[Yahya Sharif]

Also, if there was no forgiveness, then no one would enter heaven.

According to traditional Christian doctrine, those who do not enter heaven are believed to be condemned to hell—a place of eternal punishment. However, if one were to deeply reflect on the nature of such a fate, it could challenge belief in the doctrine itself. The concept of unending, legendary torment is so extreme that it seems unjustifiable, regardless of a person's sins. In this light, the idea of atonement—whether through Jesus or any other figure—may appear unnecessary for two main reasons: first, because such a punishment likely does not exist; and second, because living righteously and doing good should be sufficient in itself, without the need for sacrificial redemption.