Corrupting the Old Testament at all costs?

I would like to discuss what I see as some serious corruptions of the Old Testament texts by Christians attempting to ‘prove’ that Jesus was the messiah.The most serious out-of-context quotes used by Christians are the so-called messianic prophecies that Jesus allegedly fulfilled so many of. Most of these alleged fulfilled prophecies can either be shown to be corrupted in some way, not present in the Old Testament texts, or apply to the majority of people and not specifically to one person.I don’t want this to turn into some long list of ‘amazing prophecies fulfilled by Jesus’ type of thread that has happened on so many occasions here. I propose to discuss one alleged fulfilled prophecy at a time and then move on to another after the ‘brick wall’ has been reached.Since it has been creeping into other treads and drawing them off topic, the first prophecy that I would like to discuss is the claim that Jesus was of Davidic descent and therefore a messianic candidate. I know there has been discussion of this before, but the threads have always been hopelessly drawn off topic or are too long to resurrect. I want this thread to concentrate on one specific claim at a time and not get dragged all over the place.Now, we all know that the New Testament claims that Joseph was not Jesus’ father and it was in fact God Himself that fathered Jesus.We also know that his mother Mary was supposed to have become pregnant even though she had never had sex with a man.So, how does this affect Jesus’ messianic claims in relation to the messiah coming from the bloodline of David?Well, first off, we can discard Joseph’s involvement as he is not the father of Jesus and the Bible specifically claims that it is the bloodline of David that is required.The establishment of the Davidic bloodline is outlined in 2 Samuel 7:4-16: That night the word of the LORD came to Nathan, saying: "Go and tell my servant David, 'This is what the LORD says: Are you the one to build me a house to dwell in? I have not dwelt in a house from the day I brought the Israelites up out of Egypt to this day. I have been moving from place to place with a tent as my dwelling. Wherever I have moved with all the Israelites, did I ever say to any of their rulers whom I commanded to shepherd my people Israel, "Why have you not built me a house of cedar?" '
"Now then, tell my servant David, 'This is what the LORD Almighty says: I took you from the pasture and from following the flock to be ruler over my people Israel. I have been with you wherever you have gone, and I have cut off all your enemies from before you. Now I will make your name great, like the names of the greatest men of the earth. And I will provide a place for my people Israel and will plant them so that they can have a home of their own and no longer be disturbed. Wicked people will not oppress them anymore, as they did at the beginning and have done ever since the time I appointed leaders over my people Israel. I will also give you rest from all your enemies.
" 'The LORD declares to you that the LORD himself will establish a house for you: When your days are over and you rest with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, who will come from your own body, and I will establish his kingdom. He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with the rod of men, with floggings inflicted by men. But my love will never be taken away from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me ; your throne will be established forever.' " We can see that God has promised that David’s dynasty will reign forever, and that it HAS to be a direct blood descendant of David’s who ‘will come from his body’. This is reinforced throughout the Old Testament, for example Psalm 132:11-12: The LORD swore an oath to David, a sure oath that he will not revoke: "One of your own descendants I will place on your throne if your sons keep my covenant and the statutes I teach them, then their sons will sit on your throne for ever and ever. The Old Testament clearly states that the messiah will be a direct descendant of David’s, and not an adopted son as many Christians mistakenly claim. Adopting someone does not make them of the same blood and it actually contradicts God’s promise to David. God states that the messiah will come from David’s own body and as Jesus did not have an earthly father, it is impossible for him to be the messiah. Think about it. By claiming that someone adopted by a descendant of David makes them a messianic candidate negates God’s promise that it would be a direct descendant. People who want adopted children to be possible messiahs have actually opened up the possibility that anyone at all could be the messiah, and directly contradict God’s word.With the bloodline through Joseph nullified, the only other possibility that Jesus is descended from David would be through his mother Mary. Again, this is fraught with errors.It is claimed that Mary’s genealogy is outlined in Luke chapter three. However, the New Testament never claims that this is Mary’s genealogy, it is quite clearly a different genealogy of Joseph. Look at the beginning of the text: Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli The text is explicitly claiming that Joseph was the son of Heli, and not his son in law as many people claim.How on earth can a genealogy of a man be taken through his father in law, unless you marry your sister, which would make your father in law your father as well? There is no genealogy in the entire Bible, New and Old Testaments, that trace a man’s genealogy through his father in law, and this genealogy is no different.But, Christians still insist that it is Mary’s linage that is in Luke, making her a descendant of David and hence giving Jesus a direct link, even though the New Testament never claims that Mary is the daughter of Heli.The author’s of the New Testament never give us any reason to believe that Mary was descended from David, despite some obvious places where one would expect this information to be mentioned. For example, in Luke 1:26-27 In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin's name was Mary. It is Joseph’s Davidic descent that is mentioned here and not Mary’s. Why wouldn’t this verse emphasise that Mary was also descended from David? Why not say that Gabriel was 'sent to a virgin, a descendant of David' if her bloodline was to be of any use?A cold hard fact is that Mary is never referred to anywhere in the New Testament as a descendant of David, while every possible reference to David is through Joseph.Another example of this is in Luke 2:4-5: So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. They went to Bethlehem because HE belonged to the house and line of David not because THEY belonged to the house and line of David!But still Christians maintain that this is Mary’s genealogy.If we ignore all the evidence and accept that this is Mary’s genealogy, then it actually does no good anyway, as Davidic descent passed through David’s son Solomon and not Nathan as hoped for by so many.God makes it clear that it is Solomon’s line that will have the promise of eternal kingship.2 Samuel 7:13 He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. Read in context, this reference clearly informs us that it is relating to one person. ‘He’ will build a house, ‘his’ kingdom forever. The ‘house for my name’ is the Temple built by Solomon, and it is Solomon’s kingdom that will be established forever. It doesn’t mention that ‘they’ will build a house, or I will establish ‘their’ kingdom forever, it is referring to a single person, and that person is Solomon. So, Nathan’s linage is irrelevant as it is not included in God’s promise to David.
That it is Solomon who is chosen by God is supported by 1 Chronicles 29:1: Then King David said to the whole assembly: "My son Solomon, the one whom God has chosen, is young and inexperienced The task is great, because this palatial structure is not for man but for the LORD God. Solomon was chosen to ‘build a house for God’s name’ not Nathan, and it is through the bloodline of builder of the Temple that the promise was made.There is no way to link Jesus to David, the author of Matthew’s gospel effectively killed that off with his misunderstanding of Isaiah 7:14.So, Christians, how do you establish a bloodline from Jesus to David?

When it is in Isaiah 7:14.The virgin birth prophecy is probably the claim that does the most disservice to the Old Testament.The problems are very well-known, but I want to go through some of them and highlight exactly where Christians have corrupted the Old Testament texts once again.It is necessary to read Isaiah 7:1-17 to get the background to the prophecy. When Ahaz son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, was king of Judah, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel marched up to fight against Jerusalem, but they could not overpower it.
Now the house of David was told, "Aram has allied itself with Ephraim"; so the hearts of Ahaz and his people were shaken, as the trees of the forest are shaken by the wind.
Then the LORD said to Isaiah, "Go out, you and your son Shear-Jashub, to meet Ahaz at the end of the aqueduct of the Upper Pool, on the road to the Washerman's Field. Say to him, 'Be careful, keep calm and don't be afraid. Do not lose heart because of these two smoldering stubs of firewood-because of the fierce anger of Rezin and Aram and of the son of Remaliah. Aram, Ephraim and Remaliah's son have plotted your ruin, saying, "Let us invade Judah; let us tear it apart and divide it among ourselves, and make the son of Tabeel king over it." Yet this is what the Sovereign LORD says:
" 'It will not take place, it will not happen, for the head of Aram is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is only Rezin. Within sixty-five years Ephraim will be too shattered to be a people. The head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is only Remaliah's son. If you do not stand firm in your faith, you will not stand at all.' "
Again the LORD spoke to Ahaz, "Ask the LORD your God for a sign, whether in the deepest depths or in the highest heights."
But Ahaz said, "I will not ask; I will not put the LORD to the test."
Then Isaiah said, "Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of men? Will you try the patience of my God also?

​

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. He will eat curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right. But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. The LORD will bring on you and on your people and on the house of your father a time unlike any since Ephraim broke away from Judah-he will bring the king of Assyria." The context is straightforward. There has been an alliance between Israel and Syria to overpower the kingdom of Judah. A sign that the alliance against Ahaz will fail is that a virgin will give birth to a son and before that boy is old enough to know right from wrong the alliance will be defeated.Christians interpret this to foretell of Jesus’ birth about 700 years later and thus the fulfilment of yet another messianic prophecy for him.In the Old Testament, Isaiah 7:14 is not viewed as a messianic prophecy, it is only seen as what it was meant for, a sign for king Ahaz that the alliance would fail.How could the birth of Jesus 700 years later be a sign for Ahaz that the alliance would fail, it is ludicrous?Christians imagine that the ‘virgin’ referred to in the prophecy is to be a girl who hasn’t had sex yet, however, this is not the meaning of the word translated incorrectly as ‘virgin’.The word used in 7:14 is ‘almah’ and indicates an age range,
specifically ‘young girl’ and not whether that young girl is a virgin in the sexual sense or not.If Isaiah meant that a sexual virgin would conceive and give birth to a son, then he would have used the word ‘bethulah’, which means virgin in the sexual sense.Obviously the ‘almah’ could be a virgin, but the use of the word doesn’t explicitly inform us one way or another so if it was to be a sexual virgin that gave birth then Isaih would have used ‘bethulah’ so there would be no ambiguity about it at all. For example, Isaiah uses the word ‘bethulah’ in other verses in his book, 23:4,12, 37:22, 47:1, 62:5There is one major problem that I very rarely see Christians addressing here, or even showing any sign that they are aware of this problem.It centres on the fact that Christians claim that Jesus had a unique birth, but if Isaiah was speaking about a sexual virgin in 7:14 then there was a virgin birth in the Bible 700 years before Jesus appeared on the scene!To have Isaiah talk of a sexual virgin conceiving and giving birth as a sign for Ahaz is to have a virgin birth long before Jesus as the woman in question gives birth to Immanuel in the next chapter.Another problem here is that the child of the prophecy will need to be of a certain age before he knows the difference between right and wrong. This would imply that there was a time that Jesus didn’t know the difference between right and wrong and the possibility that he sinned would be a very real one.So, the belief that Isaiah 7:14 was a messianic prophecy that foretold of Jesus’ birth is yet another corruption of the Old Testament.The prophecy was obviously for Ahaz and a birth 700 years later would hardly be a sign for him.If a virgin was supposed to have given birth as a sign for Ahaz, then Jesus’ birth is not unique.Brian.

Hi Mike, If they are true positions then you should be able to demonstrate that. Oh, and it isn’t a few verses it is literally hundreds of verses, as will be seen as the thread unfolds. He clearly wasn’t the messiah that the Old Testament speaks of. What do you expect it to say? They are selling a product they are going to make it sound good. It shouldn’t bother you, do you think that my musings will affect what a Christian thinks? But it is handpicked, as the messianic prophecies need to be mutilated to fit Jesus. Your theology cannot be located? I have no idea where you get this from Mike, I know it isn’t based on Isaiah alone, I was a Christian for a long time and know the score. My OP says that I will be posting other mutilated texts. You can tell me where I am mistaken in the prophecies that I post here. I welcome any criticism of my posts as I can amend any errors I make. Some NT ones maybe. But Jesus is invisible in the OT. Don’t panic, I will be mentioning them and explaining the real meaning of the texts. I would be wrong IF I had said such a thing, but I haven’t said it and have no idea where you are getting this from. We will see as the thread develops exactly what verses can only pertain to Jesus. It’s no big deal that almost al the prophecies concerning Jesus are false, excellent. You aren’t a lesser being. You believe what you want to believe, that’s fair enough. That it has little to do with the Old Testament is a different matter. Good. No one? I do understand it, I just don’t agree with it. The thread is about how the NT authors have corrupted the Old Testament texts, if you believe that they haven’t then you could show me where I am going wrong.Cheers.Brian

Hi Mike,I will be posting on the suffering servant soon, and demostrate yet again that Jesus was not and cannot have been the suffering servant, so watch this space.You seem to be unaware that I am only discussing one prophecy at a time and will eventually explain why over 200 OT prophecies have nothing to do with Jesus, so please do not think that these two examples are all that there is.Cheers.Brian.

Hi Mike, Yes I have, you just don’t acknowledge it. Other people have acknowledged it. So you say, but hang around. I said in the OP that I would address one prophecy at a time, I don’t want this to get dragged all over the place. I will address your quote when I come to that prophecy, don’t worry about it. Mary’s lineage is immaterial. Bloodline doesn’t go through mothers. Many people have suffered, Jesus’ few hours on a cross isn’t that big a deal, relatively speaking. Hey Mike LOL nothing I write would convince you, do you think I am unaware of that?My intent is to show how the OT has been corrupted by NT authors and I have quite clearly shown that.Tell you what, I will make the suffering servant the next corruption to be examined. I’ll post it on Sunday as I will not be posting tomorrow because I have a football game to go to and drinks after that.Cheers.Brian.

I am not claiming that faith can be disproven. The aim is to show that the OT texts have been corrupted. I have LOL, that was a hard shift for that poor guy! But histories can be completely false Phat. Portraying someone as a servant doesnt mean he was. Feck, we all suffer Phat.Try teaching 32 13 year olds about the resurrection when all they want to do is get out of school.Jesus was lucky, he only had to go through the crucifixion once, I have to do it 3 or 4 times a year. But Christianity is a cult.Anyway, there are other things that Jesus could have been. A revolutionary for example, or a con man. Indeed, and not always a blessing on mankind I may add.Brian.

Hi,I think it would make sense for Christians to accept that the author of Matthew made a boob when he misunderstood Isaiah 7:14, then there is no problem with a bloodline.But to deny the virgin birth is to deny fertilisation by the Holy Spirit, and I think most christians would not do that.But, there are other 'prophecies' that have been invented by the author of Matthew that make his testimony less than reliable.Brian.

Hi Mike, Yep, but Jospeh passed on no blood to baby Yeshua, so no messiah here. Not to you it isn's Mike, but you have already made up your mind that there cannot be an error.However, people such as myself, whi are completely objective, see huge problem, especially when Xians tell me that the Messiah was ot be born of a virgin, and Jesus was. I canot help it if they are ignorant of the Bible, I have made the effort to be familair with it so why can't they? I know, but I am not concentrating on these few words, this is only the beginning of the thread. YAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN.How many times do you need to be shown that Joseph was not his father, and thus there is no bloodline, keep dreaming Mike. yes, complete fairy tales Oh, let me see, we should ignore every OT prophecy that negates Jesus because we are not reading it correctly?Gzus H, for that matter Mike I could be the messiah Revelation is not a prophetic book.BTW, if prophecy is cryptic how do you know the correct answer? Do we need the mind numbing Holy Spirit to help us arrive at the true meaning?If it is cryptic, then the bible is no better than Nostradamus' prophecies.Brian.

Hi Mike,I will give you a decent answer tomorrow before I go out, I have had a wee bit too much whisky tonight to give you a respectable answer.Catch you later.Brian.

Hi Mike, Every Christian that believes that Jesus is the Messiah will say this Mike, as this is the chapter that presents us with the Davidic Covenant. This is not just a messianic prophecy Mike, it is *THEE* messianic prophecy as it is the one that informs us that the messiah will be descended from David. And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee The Samuel quote, through the Nathan Prophecy, tells us of the establishment of David’s eternal dynasty: and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever. Even when David was near the end of his life he still recalled the promise that God made to him.2 Samuel 23:5 Although my house be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant It obviously does relate to Solomon, read the verses that I provided.1 Chronicles 29:1: Then King David said to the whole assembly: "My son Solomon, the one whom God has chosen, is young and inexperienced The task is great, because this palatial structure is not for man but for the LORD God. What do you think the task is Mike, given that it is a palatial structure for God? Obviously the Temple, which we all know was built by Solomon.Remember, it is the person who builds a house for God’s name whose throne is established forever. He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.David was not permitted to build the Temple, but Solomon was, so the covenant that David had with God is honoured. Solomon was David’s son, so David’s seed has been ‘set up’.You may possibly claim that Samuel is not talking about Solomon, but I have no idea how it can apply to anyone else, and every commentary I have read on Samuel agree on it. Why does it have to apply to Solomon? Any messianic prophecy only needs to apply to a descendant of Solomon’s, and thus a person from the bloodline of David.The rest of the post is concerning Isaiah, which we haven’t arrived at yet.Cheers.Brian.

Hi Mike, Their answer is as flawed as AiG’s.This thread is about the corruption of the OT, the other one is about Jesus cursed lineage, which is pointless as he doesn’t have David’s blood. Of course it satisfies you, it keeps your faith intact. I understand, good luck to you. You are free to be satisfied with this answer if you are truly satisfied, it’s cool with me. The curse thing is easily solved by reading the Bible and other Jewish literature.The simple answer is that the curse was lifted.In Haggai 2:21-23 Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, I will shake the heavens and the earth;
And I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms, and I will destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the heathen; and I will overthrow the chariots, and those that ride in them; and the horses and their riders shall come down, every one by the sword of his brother.
In that day, saith the LORD of hosts, will I take thee, O Zerubbabel, my servant, the son of Shealtiel, saith the LORD, and will make thee as a signet: for I have chosen thee, saith the LORD of hosts.This promise to make Zerubbabel ‘as a signet’ is obviously a reversal of the Jehoiakim situation where he was no longer to be a signet on God’s right hand.Jeremiah 22:24 As I live, saith the LORD, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were the signet upon my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence People who argue that God’s curse was to last forever have obviously forgotten about God’s power to forgive people who repent.God has obviously lifted the curse because in Haggai 2:21 we find that Zerubabbel was governor of Judah and in Jeremiah 22:30 God declares that Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah. Clearly, Zerubabbel has prospered, and he is ruling in Judah as governor.Jeremiah 22:20 also says that Jehoiakim was a man that ‘shall not prosper in his days’, yet we find this contradicted in 2 Kings 25:27-28: And it came to pass in the seven and thirtieth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the twelfth month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, that Evilmerodach king of Babylon in the year that he began to reign did lift up the head of Jehoiachin king of Judah out of prison;
And he spake kindly to him, and set his throne above the throne of the kings that were with him in Babylon .Jehoiakim obviously prospered in Babylon, thus indicating that God’s declaration that Jehoiakim would not prosper would be false, unless the curse had been lifted. Well, it is crystal clear that the bloodline goes through Solomon and you blindly deny this.But, as we will see, the suffering servant of Isaiah cannot be Jesus. But, is this what God actually said, or does it mean that Jehoiakim’s seed should not prosper and sit on the throne during Jehoiakim’s days? This is not what has caused the problem, the problem was caused by the author of Matthew’s misunderstanding Isaiah 7:14. Which is nonsense, the curse obviously had to have been lifted or Zerubabbel would not have propsepred and God would not have *CHOSEN* him. No matter how many times an apologist blindly accepts this trash it simply is not true. Read 1 Chronicles 22:9-10: Behold, a son shall be born to thee, who shall be a man of rest; and I will give him rest from all his enemies round about: for his name shall be Solomon, and I will give peace and quietness unto Israel in his days.

​

He shall build an house for my name; and he shall be my son, and I will be his father; and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel for ever. How explicit a text do you need before you realise that these people are corrupting the Bible?Where in the Bible does it say that Nathan’s line is eligible? But, adoption DOES NOT legally entitle you to inherit the throne. Adopting does not make you of your father’s blood and Numbers 1:18 tells us that bloodlines only pass through the father. And they assembled all the congregation together on the first day of the second month, and they declared their pedigrees after their families, by the house of their fathers, according to the number of the names, from twenty years old and upward, by their polls If a Levite adopts a Benjamite, this doesn’t make the adopted child a Levite, the child does not have Levite blood, which is required. Again, contrary to scripture. Avoid Its Garbage.Burying you head in the sand and pretending that these problems do not exist is fine Mike, but forgive us lesser beings for being a little more inquisitive.Take care.Brian

The Suffering Servant mentioned in Isaiah has wrongfully been identified by certain Christians (not all) with an individual person, namely Jesus.But, on closer inspection, we can see that Isaiah’s Suffering Servant is not an individual at all, but the personification of a remnant of Israel.**In Judaism, Isaiah 53 is NOT viewed as a messianic prophecy.**To understand the context of Isaiah 53 it should be noted that this is only a small part of one of four servant songs that can be found in Isaiah.The four songs can be found in Isaiah 42:1-4, Isaiah 49:1-6, Isaiah 50:4-9, and Isaiah 52:13-53:12.We can see that the song in which Mike’s quote can be found actually begins at Isaiah 52:13 and ends at 53:12. So, it would be a good idea to read the entire song to understand the context of the partial quote.Servant Song 52:13-53:12 Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high.

​

As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men:

​

So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

​

Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?

​

For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

​

He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

​

Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

​

But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

​

All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

​

He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

​

He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

​

And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

​

Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

​

He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

​

Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.If we go back to the beginning of Isaiah 521:12, we can understand the context of the Servant songs. Isaiah 52
Awake, awake, O Zion, clothe yourself with strength. Put on your garments of splendour, O Jerusalem, the holy city. The uncircumcised and defiled will not enter you again. Shake off your dust; rise up, sit enthroned, O Jerusalem. Free yourself from the chains on your neck, O captive Daughter of Zion.

​

For this is what the LORD says: "You were sold for nothing, and without money you will be redeemed." For this is what the Sovereign LORD says:

​

"At first my people went down to Egypt to live; lately, Assyria has oppressed them.

​

"And now what do I have here?" declares the LORD .

​

"For my people have been taken away for nothing, and those who rule them mock," declares the LORD . "And all day long my name is constantly blasphemed. Therefore my people will know my name; therefore in that day they will know that it is I who foretold it. Yes, it is I."

​

How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of those who bring good news, who proclaim peace, who bring good tidings, who proclaim salvation, who say to Zion,

​

"Your God reigns!"

​

Listen! Your watchmen lift up their voices; together they shout for joy. When the LORD returns to Zion, they will see it with their own eyes. Burst into songs of joy together, you ruins of Jerusalem, for the LORD has comforted his people, he has redeemed Jerusalem. The LORD will lay bare his holy arm in the sight of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth will see the salvation of our God.

​

Depart, depart, go out from there! Touch no unclean thing! Come out from it and be pure, you who carry the vessels of the LORD . But you will not leave in haste or go in flight; for the LORD will go before you, the God of Israel will be your rear guard. This reference speaks about Israel and not an individual. Israel has been oppressed by Assyria, and sold for nothing and their rulers mock them. But God has declared that things are going to improve for the Israelites, in fact, the LORD will deliver Israel into a better future as He shows his salvation to the ends of the earth.Keep in mind that the next line is 52:13, the beginning of the servant song referred to by Mike. But, of course, the Hebrew texts do not have the chapter and verse divisions and this Song is still speaking of the persecution that Israel has been under, and the promise of deliverance. It does not just suddenly jump forward to speak of some future messiah, neither does it just start referring to another event, it is referring to the oppression of Israel, who is God’s servant:Isaiah 49:3 And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.The ‘he’ of Isaiah 53 is a personification of Israel, it does not speak of an individual.Look at 53:3: He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: What nation has been more despised and rejected throughout history than Israel? Although Jesus was said to be despised and rejected, he still was loved by many others at the same time. He was followed by huge crowds of people, people even grieved at his execution, he was NOT despised and rejected of men, there was never a time when he was rejected by all.In 53:7: He was oppressed and he was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth. Like a lamb that is led to slaughter This, again is obviously talking of the nation of Israel. Isaiah 52:4 Assyria has oppressed them.‘Yet he did not open his mouth’ when being oppressed and afflicted! Jesus hardly shut up for a minute during his alleged oppression and affliction.In John 18:22-23 for example And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me? Jesus also chattered away on the cross, so he can hardly be compared to the suffering servant.‘Like a lamb to the slaughter’ has been likened to Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross but Israel has been described as such in Psalm 44:22 Yea, for thy sake are we killed all the day long; we are counted as sheep for the slaughter. .Isaiah 53:9 because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.How can anyone convince themselves that Jesus had done no violence?Matthew 21:12 And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves Jesus’ tantrum at the Temple is well-known; he certainly was violent on this occasion, so how can this be the servant of Isaiah 53?There are other facts from Isaiah that negate the possibility that the servant is Jesus, but two facts stand out above all others. First, the servant ‘shall see his seed, and ‘he shall prolong his days’ (53:10).The Hebrew word for ‘seed’ is ‘zera’ and always refers to children who are direct offspring, and, as we know, Jesus never had any children.Finally, ‘he shall prolong his days’ cannot apply to Jesus as he died relatively young, in his early 30’s. Christians usually counter this by saying that Jesus is eternal, but this has problems. Firstly, how can an eternal being prolong his days to beyond eternity? Secondly, To begin with, the Hebrew words ya’arich yamim (long life) in this verse do not mean or refer to an eternal life which has no end, but rather a lengthening of days which eventually come to an end. These Hebrew words are therefore never applied in Tanach to anyone who is to live forever. In fact, the words ya’arich yamim appear in a number of places throughout Jewish scriptures, including Deuteronomy 17:20, Deuteronomy 25:15, Proverbs 28:16, and Ecclesiastes 8:13. In each and every verse where this phrase appears, these words refer to an extended mortal life, not an eternal one. When the Jewish scriptures speak of an eternal resurrected life, as in Daniel 12:2, the Hebrew words used are l’chayai olam. Therefore, read in context, it is obvious that the Suffering Servant refers to the remnants of Israel, and in no way can it be referring to Jesus or any individual at all.Mike says that But I have read Isaiah, and am convinced it prophecizes Christ. Only blinding my eyes could change that. We don’t have to blind your eyes Mike, but you certainly need to open them.Jesus’ batting average in the messianic championship is not very good.Brian.

Hi Mike, No probs mate.See you some other time Brian.

The laddie doesn’t know the game yet. The true Messiah of course, the one that will be a descendant of David, deliver Israel from her oppressors, who will have a long life and see his children. People have always loved Jesus, there never was a time when he was totally rejected.I don’t think anyone nowadays despises Jesus, certainly no humanist scholar that I know despises him, they just don’t see him as being a god. He had some good attributes, but he was known for plagiarising other people’s material. There have also been many more people who have suffered a lot more than Jesus did. So his contributions to humanity have been greatly exaggerated. Yes, it is called reading the text in context and not selecting little bits and pieces that you think supports your case. It is not difficult, just think for yourself and stay away from AiG. Israel has been rejected by all on several occasions throughout her history, who came to Israel’s assistance during the Judges period? The text is talking about a time when Israel was rejected (or felt they had been) and would be liberated by God in the future. I don’t see where Israel speaks? The blasphemy is not said to be spoken by Israel.Isa 52:5-"For my people have been taken away for nothing, and those who rule them mock," declares the LORD.
"And all day long my name is constantly blasphemed.Where does it say that Israel responds?Isa 52:7-8= How beautiful on the mountains
are the feet of those who bring good news, who proclaim peace, who bring good tidings,
who proclaim salvation, who say to Zion, "Your God reigns!"
Listen! Your watchmen lift up their voices;
together they shout for joy. This is after they have been saved by God, it is not during the time of affliction and oppression. They proclaim that they have been saved and sing for joy. In the Old Testament, every time that you see ‘LORD’ in capitals it refers to YAWHEH. How do you know none of them were hurt, and how does someone have to be hurt to qualify an incident as violent, or that someone’s behaviour is violent? Yes he took it personal and had a violent tantrum. Remind me again what personification is.Remind me again how old Jesus was when he died, and how many children he had.It takes some real mental contortions to see Jesus in Isaiah 53 Phat, but that’s the beauty of self fulfilling prophecy, you will see just exactly what you think you will see.Brian.

Where do you get the idea that 'Almah' refers to a harlot?Almah simply means 'young woman', she may or may not be a virgin.However, if someone wanted to highlight the fact that a girl was a virgin they would call her a 'bethulah'Here are another 6 examples of almah being used for a young woman. If you want to see Moses' sister as a harlot then God have mercy on your soul Genesis 24:43
Exodus 2:8
Proverbs 30:19
Psalm68:26
Song of Solomon 1:3 and 6:8Edited to change 'almah' to 'bethulah'.This message has been edited by Brian, 01-15-2005 02:21 AM