Johann
Well-known member
Any Scripture references?
A question just to start things off.
- Thread starter Administrator
- Start date
civic
Well-known member
thats just it the word doesn't mean propitiation but expiation- bad translation.
Propitiation vs. Expiation- The New Testament usage of hilaskomai and hilasmos, consistent with its precedent usage in the Greek Old Testament, speaks consistently of God’s atoning action in Christ directed toward sin on behalf of sinners, not human action directed toward God to satisfy God. The criterion for interpretation, Stott has said, “is whether the object of the atoning action is God or man.” “Propitiation” indicates an action by humans directed toward God, and “expiation” indicates an action by God toward sin and sinners. According to Stott's criterion, these texts favor "expiation" over “propitiation.” Given the choice of translating hilastērion either “propitiation” or “expiation,” therefore, “expiation” is preferable based on the textual evidence of both the New Testament and the Greek Old Testament. James Dunn summarizes well the case for preferring “expiation” to “propitiation” as a translation for hilastērion: Darrin W. Snyder Belousek, Atonement, Justice, and Peace: The Message of the Cross and the Mission of the Church (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2012), 247–252.
So that last part, It please God to crush Him. It means the same. It pleased Him, it was acceptable to Him, to see HIs Son bruised/crushed. Don't focus on the negative aspects of Isaiah 53 as though that is all there is. There is the praise, the glory, and the blessing heaped on the willfully obedient Son after it is over. After He has fulfilled His Father's will. As I argued with you once before, PSA is not all there is to the atonement, it is only the heart of the atonement, and an aspect. Christus victor is another aspect. Why Christus victor? Because PSA. There is also satisfaction theory, where God is satisfied by the PSA. There is also Abraham and Isaac, which is a direct analogy of Christ on the cross, where we are Isaac, and the Ram that took Isaac (our) place is the Lamb of God.
The imputation of our sin upon us is exactly the same idea as the High Priest imputing the sins of the congregation upon the scapegoat of the sacrifice of atonement. Was the scapegoat guilty of the sins of the congregation of Israel? No. However that sin was imputed upon the scapegoat, and the goat was sacrificed, and the scapegoat released in the wild as a direct analogy of Christ's sacrifice. Jesus was made sin on our behalf, that is, our sins were imputed on Him. In His death, He paid the penalty we would face for our sin, and the righteousness that is His was imputed to us. I like the way Theocracy put it in the song Mirror of Souls. At the end, after salvation, the singer says that they looked into the mirror of souls, and where once reflected was dark, decrepit, rotting flesh of sin, he now could only see Christ. When God looks upon the believer, He sees Christ and Christ's righteousness. Our sin is no more.
The main idea of PSA is that Jesus took our penalty (penal is penalty) upon Himself, and He died in our place. (Substitution). That is all it is saying. The wrath is everything that He faced prior to getting to the cross, and what He faced on the cross. However, it all ended the moment He cried "It is finished!" When Jesus talked about the cup He must drink, He spoke of the cup of wrath, that very cup He asked the Father let pass by Him, if it be His will. However, Jesus, voluntarily, all from Himself said, Not my will, but Your will be done.
Luke 22 "39 And He came out and went as was His custom to the Mount of Olives; and the disciples also followed Him. 40 Now when He arrived at the place, He said to them, “Pray that you may not enter into temptation.” 41 And He withdrew from them about a stone’s throw, and He knelt down and began to pray, 42 saying, “Father, if You are willing, remove this cup from Me, yet not My will, but Yours be done.” 43 [h]Now an angel from heaven appeared to Him, strengthening Him. 44 And being in agony He was praying very fervently, and His sweat became like drops of blood, falling down upon the ground."
He knew what He had to face to redeem His children, and accepted it willingly. That doesn't mean that has the God man, He did not experience what we would experience if we were in that position. In fact, it was such that He sweat blood.
civic
Well-known member
You and I are close on PAS with a couple exceptions. We had a good discussion and came pretty close to seeing PSA similarly on the old forum in the long thread I started. Below is where we still differ on the cup/wrath issue.
Jesus bearing God's “cup of wrath” and being despised and forsaken by the Father and Him turning His back on the Son is not found in Scripture.
In Matthew 26:39, Jesus says, "If it be your will, let this cup pass from me." Jesus tells us precisely what the cup was. It was the cup of his suffering, which meant that He would die an agonizing death as a martyr. In the passage below,
Jesus told His disciples that they would also drink of the same "cup":
Matthew 20:17- Now Jesus was going up to Jerusalem. On the way, he took the Twelve aside and said to them, 18 “We are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death 19 and will hand him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified. On the third day he will be raised to life!”20 Then the mother of Zebedee’s sons came to Jesus with her sons and, kneeling down, asked a favor of him. 21 “What is it you want?” he asked. She said, "Grant that one of these two sons of mine may sit at your right and the other at your left in your kingdom."22 “You don’t know what you are asking,” Jesus said to them. “Can you drink the cup I am going to drink?” “We can,” they answered. 23 Jesus said to them, “You will indeed drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father.”
1Thessalonians 5:9-For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.
As we see above it was not the cup of wrath Jesus was speaking about but it was the suffering He was going to have to endure for our sins. God has not appointed us to wrath and the cup means the suffering of Jesus and that the disciples would also suffer death as martyrs. In fact, many scriptures testify that believers too will suffer persecution for being a follower of Jesus. Suffering persecution is a promise for a believer who follows Jesus, it is something we should expect to happen in our life.
2 Timothy 3:12- Yes, and everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution.
John 15:20 Remember the word that I spoke to you: 'No servant is greater than his master.' If they persecuted Me, they will persecute you as well; if they kept My word, they will keep yours as well.
Matthew 5:10 - Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
2 Corinthians 4:9- persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed.
civic
Well-known member
@armylngst I'm glad you made it over here from the old forum. Welcome !
It is. However, you have to understand who Jesus was, and the significance of that. Jesus was both God and man. As someone put it, Jesus was both the High Priest and the sacrifice in one body. The divinity, the God part sanctified the sacrifice. As in the sin of atonement, it is the high priest who imputed the sins upon the sacrifice. The only difference is that with symbolism, the Jewish sacrifice had two parts to symbolize what was occurring. Jesus fulfilled both parts. He was the sacrifice and the scapegoat together. He was the sin of atonement perfected. He was "forsaken" however you have to understand the nuance. The fellowship the human nature had with the divine nature was interrupted by sin. The fellowship felt had been disrupted due to the presence of the sin. So while not technically forsaken, the feeling was such that He cried out "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken Me?" In this saying, there was no lie. He felt it. He felt it, He went through it because of OUR sin. Yet He willingly chose to face what He knew was coming in the garden, which was so much that He sweat blood. He knew what He was about to face, and faced it willingly. Remember, both God and man. Both high priest and sacrifice. The sacrifice died and paid our penalty of death, while innocent, so death could not hold Him. Yet, because He did that, we no longer have to die in our sin, or for our sin, because He did. That is the substitution.
What comes after is Christus Victor. He is our victory because He took our place. And the Father has blessed Him greatly for it. (Also found in Isaiah 53.)
The suffering was from facing the wrath that we would face. Why is God's wrath most often symbolized by a cup? And He didn't die as a martyr. He died as a sacrifice.
That cup signified persecution and death.
Don't cut out context if you see For, or therefore, or because.
"Now concerning the times and the seasons, brothers, you have no need of anything to be written to you. 2 For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord [a]will come just like a thief in the night. 3 While they are saying, “Peace and safety!” then [b]destruction [c]will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman who is pregnant, and they will never escape. 4 But you, brothers, are not in darkness, that the day would overtake you [d]like a thief, 5 for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We are not of night nor of darkness; 6 so then let us not sleep as [e]others do, but let us be awake and [f]sober. 7 For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk, get drunk at night. 8 But since we are of the day, let us be [g]sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet, the hope of salvation. 9 For God has not appointed us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, 10 who died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him. 11 Therefore, [h]comfort one another and build up one another, just as you also are doing."
That is not in keeping with the context. The suffering of Jesus came from facing the wrath of God, as seen in the violence faced prior to the cross and on the cross. This wrath was not against Christ, but against our sin which He carried. Again, guilt was not imputed, the sin was. Jesus was innocent, hence the perfect sacrifice. If He was not perfect, He could never die for our sins, because He would have to die for His.
The wrath of Satan, as permitted by God. (I tagged that on only because of Job.)
The only difference is that the wrath Jesus faced from God was due to our sin. The wrath we face will come from persecution for following Christ. The hatred and anger the world has against God.
I did my best at CARM to show you how the wrath faced by Christ is what we see in scripture, and nothing more. It isn't God beating Jesus to a pulp. That isn't what it is. It is Jesus, facing wrath for our sin, a wrath not aimed at Him, but at the sin which He bore on the cross. We brought it on Him, which is why the verse that says that He made Him who knew no sin, to be sin for us carries so much meaning. He had no personal sin. He was innocent. He carried our sin, by extension, the penalty we face for our sin upon Himself in our place. This is all it is. Upon His cross, the Father nailed the handwriting of ordinances that was against us.
Johann
Well-known member
52:14
NASB, NKJV, LXX "were astonished at you"
NRSV "were astonished at him"
NJB "were aghast at him"
JPSOA "were appalled at him"
REB "recoil at the sight of him"
Peshitta "amazed at him"
NET "were horrified by the sight of you"
The MT has "you," עליך (also LXX), but "him," עליו is read by the Targums and some Syriac versions. The UBS Text Project, p. 142, gives "you" a B rating, p. 142.
There is a fluidity between the corporate focus ("you") and the individual ("him") in the Servant Songs. The individual ideal Israelite paid the price for corporate Israel (cf. Isa. 53:8) as well as corporate humanity (cf. Gen. 3:15)!
"My people" This is not in the Masoretic Hebrew text. The Servant is not identified with corporate Israel but an individual, an ideal Israelite (i.e., Messiah.
"His appearance was marred more than any man,
And His form more than the sons of men"
The term "marred" (BDB 1008, KB 644) is found only here. BDB has "disfigurement of face." KB has "ugly in form," from an Arabic root.
The same root consonants are used in Lev. 22:25 for "corruption."
The same root consonanta are used in Ezek. 9:1 for "destruction."
Jesus was beaten very badly, almost unrecognizable, first by the Sanhedrin and then by the Roman soldiers. The rabbis used this verse to say that the Messiah will have leprosy.
52:15
NASB, NKJV "sprinkle"
NRSV, JPSOA, NET "startle"
NJB, LXX "astonished"
Peshitta "purify"
The MT (NASB) has a sacrificial term (BDB 633 I, KB 683, Hiphil imperfect, cf. Exod. 29:21: Lev. 4:6,17; 5:8; 6:27; 8:11,30; 14:7,16,27,51; 16:14,15,19; Num. 8:7; 19:4,18,19,21). It can also mean "spattered" (cf. Lev. 6:27; 2 Kgs. 9:33; Isa. 63:3). Many modern translations have "startle" (BDB 633 II, "cause to leap"), which comes from an Arabic root. The UBS Text Project, p. 142, gives the MT a "B" rating (some doubt).
The question is "What do the kings hear and see?"
a marred man (Isa. 52:14; 53:5)
a high, lifted up, and greatly exalted man (Isa. 52:13)
Does the verb of Isa. 52:15a mean:
startle with joy
startle with shock
sprinkled as a sacrifice (cf. Isa. 53:4-5,10)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: ISAIAH 53:1-3
1Who has believed our message?
And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
2For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot,
And like a root out of parched ground;
He has no stately form or majesty
That we should look upon Him,
Nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him.
3He was despised and forsaken of men,
A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;
And like one from whom men hide their face
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
53:3 "He was despised" This verb (BDB 102, KB 117, Niphal participle) is used as a title, "The Despised One" in Isa. 49:7. The Qal passive participle is used in Ps. 22:6, which Christians believe describes Jesus' crucifixion (cf. Matt. 27:35,39,43,46; Mark 15:29,34; Luke 23:34; John 19:24; 20:25).
So many of the texts in this section of Isaiah are used in the NT. Isaiah clearly reveals God's redemptive plan for all humans.
The last two lines of Isa. 53:3 have been interpreted in several ways.
some of the rabbis said the Messiah would have leprosy (cf. Isa. 53:11)
some relate it to 52:14 and see it referring to the beatings Jesus received at the hands of Herod's and Pilate's guards
some relate it to Jesus' words in Matt. 26:31; Mark 14:27 (from Zech. 13:7) or John 16:32
"sorrows" This word (BDB 456) can mean
physical pain ‒ Exod. 3:7
emotional pain ‒ Ps. 38:17-18; Jer. 45:3
It is used in this context (53:13-14) of the Servant suffering on behalf of Israel (cf. Isa. 53:8) and all mankind (cf. Isa. 53:6).
"bore. . .carried" These two verbs are parallel.
bore ‒ BDB 669, KB 724, Qal perfect, used of bearing one's guilt, Gen. 4:13; Lev. 5:1,17; 7:18; Num. 5:31; 14:34; Ezek. 14:10; 44:12, but it is also used of someone or some animal bearing another's guilt, cf. Lev. 10:17; 16:22; Num. 14:33; Ezek. 4:4,5,6 and of the suffering Servant's redemptive ministry in Isa. 53:4
carried ‒ BDB 687, KB 741, Qal perfect; this is literally "bear a heavy load," it is used of the Servant in Isa. 53:4 and Isa. 53:11 (Qal imperfect)
Notice the series of verbs in Isa. 53:4-6 of what YHWH did to the Servant for humanity's benefit.
smitten by God, Isa. 53:4 ‒ BDB 645, KB 697, Hophal participle
afflicted (by God), Isa. 53:4 ‒ BDB 776, KB 853, Pual participle
pierced through for our transgressions, Isa. 53:5 ‒ BDB 319, KB 320, Poal participle
crushed for our iniquities, Isa. 53:5 ‒ BDB 193, KB 221, Pual participle
the chastening for our well being (no verb) upon Him, Isa. 53:5
by His scourging we are healed, Isa. 53:5
This is the textual foundation for the doctrine of the vicarious, substitutionary atonement.
"Smitten of God" It was God's will that Jesus die (cf. Isa. 53:10; John 3:16; Mark 10:45; 2 Cor. 5:21). Jesus' trial and death were not accidents or mistakes, but the plan of God (cf. Acts 2:23; 3:18; 4:28; 1 Pet. 1:20).
53:5 "pierced. . .crushed" As "bore" and "carried" in Isa. 53:4 were parallel, so too, these verbs.
pierced ‒ BDB 319, KB 320, Poal participle usually by a sword in battle, but not here. The same root means "polluted" for mankind's purification and forgiveness.
crushed ‒ BDB 193, KB 221, Pual participle; this verb is used several times in Isaiah
Isa. 57:15 ‒ Niphal participle, "the heart of the contrite"
Isa. 3:15 ‒ Piel imperfect, "crushing My people"
Isa. 19:10; 53:5 ‒ Pual participle, "to be crushed"
Isa. 53:10 ‒ Piel infinitive construct, "to crush"
It denotes one who is humbled. In this context by YHWH Himself for the greater good of all mankind.
53:6 This is the OT counterpart to Rom. 3:9-18,23; 5:12,15,18; 11:32; Gal. 3:22. This shows the terrible development of the Fall of Genesis 3 (cf. Gen. 6:5,11-12; Ps. 14:3; 143:2).
"the iniquity of us all to fall on Him" Jesus died for the sins of the entire world. Everyone is potentially saved by Christ (cf. John 1:29; 3:16-17; 12:47; Rom. 5:18; 1 Tim. 4:10; Titus 2:11; Heb. 2:9; 7:25; 1 John 2:2; 4:14). Only willful unbelief keeps anyone from God.
Some commentators have tried to make a restrictive theological distinction between the "all" [twice] of Isa. 53:6 and "the many" of Isa. 53:11d and 12e. However, the parallelism of Rom. 5:18, "all" and "the many" of Isa. 5:19, clearly shows that they refer to the same group (i.e., fallen humanity made in the image and likeness of YHWH, Gen. 1:26-27).
God desires all humans to be saved ‒ John 4:42, 1 Tim. 2:4; 4:10; 2 Pet. 3:9).
Amazing chapter.
Johann
Johann
Well-known member
53:10 "But the Lord was pleased
To crush Him, putting Him to grief"
YHWH was pleased (lit. "it was the will of" ‒ BDB 342, KB 339, Qal perfect). This verb means "to delight in" (cf. Isa. 58:2; 62:4) or "desire" (55:11). It is even used of YHWH's pleasure to put someone to death in 1 Sam. 2:25. It is shocking to use a verb like this in connection with the unfair, painful treatment of the righteous Servant. YHWH had an eternal redemptive plan!
YHWH's will and purpose was "to crush" (Piel infinitive construct, cf. Isa. 53:5) and "put to grief" (Hiphil perfect, BDB 317, KB 311). The verb means "to make sick" (JPSOA) or "sore by hitting." There was a high and costly price to pay for human redemption (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21)! YHWH and His Servant paid it fully and freely!
NASB "If He would render Himself as a guilt offering"
NKJV, NRSV "When You make His soul an offering for sin"
TEV "His death was a sacrifice to bring forgiveness"
NJB "if he gives his life as a sin offering"
JPSOA "if he made himself an offering for guilt"
Peshitta "he laid down his life as an offering for sin"
REB "who had given Himself as a sacrifice for sin"
LXX "If you give an offering for sin"
This phrase is so simple yet so profound. It involves
the will of YHWH
the will of the Servant
the sinful ones who chose to receive this guilt offering (implied)
This is the Hebrew theological concept of "corporality." It is illustrated by
the sacrificial system (Leviticus 1-7), but especially the Day of Atonement (cf. Leviticus 16)
the sin of Achan affecting the Israeli army (Joshua 7)
the clear explanation in Romans 5:12-21
another great example in 2 Cor. 5:21
One innocent One paid the price to set free all the guilty ones!
"He will prolong His days" It is obvious that the Servant dies (cf. Isa. 53:8,9,12). Therefore, this verse must refer to life after death!
Notice all the things that YHWH will do for Him.
He will see His offspring (lit. "seed"), Isa. 53:10
He will prolong His days (this must refer to His afterlife), Isa. 53:10
the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand (i.e., YHWH's plan to restore fellowship with mankind), Isa. 53:10
He will see it and be satisfied, Isa. 53:11 (refers to YHWH's good pleasure [will]), Isa. 53:10e
He will justify the many, Isa. 53:11
allot Him a portion with the great, Isa. 53:12
He will divide the booty with the strong, Isa. 53:12
Poetry is always difficult to interpret. Some of these items are uncertain!
53:11
NASB "He will see it"
NKJV, Peshitta "He shall see the travail of His soul"
NRSV, NJB, REB "he shall see light"
LXX, DSS "to show him light"
The MT has "of the travail of his soul he shall see." Notice there is no "it" but it seems to refer to "the anguish of His soul." The JPSOA footnote suggests "it" refers to "the arm of the Lord" from v. 1, which is also a feminine noun.
The UBS Text Project thinks "light" may have dropped out of the text and gives a "B" rating for its inclusion. To see light is idiomatic for "to live" (i.e., resurrection").
"By His knowledge" the NRSV has "he shall find satisfaction through his knowledge." The question of "what knowledge" seems to relate to
see His offspring (Isa. 53:10d)
prolong His life (Isa. 53:10e)
prospering of YHWH's will (Isa. 53:10f)
results of His anguish (Isa. 53:11a)
"the Righteous One. . .justify" These are both formed from one root (BDB 842, 843). YHWH's sin-bearing (cf. Isa. 53:11e) Servant will accomplish righteousness for all who believe and receive (cf. John 1:12; 3:16; Rom. 10:9-13).
"the many" See note at "all" of Isa. 53:6.
"He will bear their iniquities" The same verb (BDB 687, KB 741, Qal imperfect) was also used in Isa. 53:4. See note there.
53:12a,b "He will divide the booty with the strong" This is a war idiom of victory. It is not to be taken literally, but figuratively of spiritual victory (cf. Isa. 52:13)!
"He poured out Himself to death" This verb (BDB 788, KB 881, Hiphil perfect) is literally "be naked" or "be bare" or "to empty." It is used in Isaiah in several senses.
to uncover a weapon, Isa. 22:6
for the Spirit being given (i.e., poured out), Isa. 32:15
BDB calls it a metaphor in this text reflecting the Piel usage #3 (cf. Ps. 141:8)
KB calls it "to tip out," a metaphor "to throw away one life to death"
"And was numbered with the transgressors" Luke 22:37 quotes this verse as being spoken by Jesus in Gethsemane when the soldiers and guards came to arrest Him.
Notice the same word (BDB 833) was used of Israel's sin in Isa. 53:8 and all humans' sin in Isa. 53:5.
"He Himself bore the sin of many" This means substitutionary, vicarious atonement (cf. Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; 14:24; 2 Cor. 5:21; Gal. 1:4; 1 Tim. 2:6; Titus 2:14; 1 John 2:2). The UBS Text Project thinks "sin" should be plural (B rating).
"And interceded for the transgressors" And He still does (cf. Rom. 8:27,34; Heb. 7:25; 9:24; 1 John 2:1)!
Astonishing chapter-Isaiah 53!
To YHVH and Yeshua be the glory forever more.
Johann.
To crush Him, putting Him to grief"
YHWH was pleased (lit. "it was the will of" ‒ BDB 342, KB 339, Qal perfect). This verb means "to delight in" (cf. Isa. 58:2; 62:4) or "desire" (55:11). It is even used of YHWH's pleasure to put someone to death in 1 Sam. 2:25. It is shocking to use a verb like this in connection with the unfair, painful treatment of the righteous Servant. YHWH had an eternal redemptive plan!
YHWH's will and purpose was "to crush" (Piel infinitive construct, cf. Isa. 53:5) and "put to grief" (Hiphil perfect, BDB 317, KB 311). The verb means "to make sick" (JPSOA) or "sore by hitting." There was a high and costly price to pay for human redemption (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21)! YHWH and His Servant paid it fully and freely!
NASB "If He would render Himself as a guilt offering"
NKJV, NRSV "When You make His soul an offering for sin"
TEV "His death was a sacrifice to bring forgiveness"
NJB "if he gives his life as a sin offering"
JPSOA "if he made himself an offering for guilt"
Peshitta "he laid down his life as an offering for sin"
REB "who had given Himself as a sacrifice for sin"
LXX "If you give an offering for sin"
This phrase is so simple yet so profound. It involves
the will of YHWH
the will of the Servant
the sinful ones who chose to receive this guilt offering (implied)
This is the Hebrew theological concept of "corporality." It is illustrated by
the sacrificial system (Leviticus 1-7), but especially the Day of Atonement (cf. Leviticus 16)
the sin of Achan affecting the Israeli army (Joshua 7)
the clear explanation in Romans 5:12-21
another great example in 2 Cor. 5:21
One innocent One paid the price to set free all the guilty ones!
"He will prolong His days" It is obvious that the Servant dies (cf. Isa. 53:8,9,12). Therefore, this verse must refer to life after death!
Notice all the things that YHWH will do for Him.
He will see His offspring (lit. "seed"), Isa. 53:10
He will prolong His days (this must refer to His afterlife), Isa. 53:10
the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand (i.e., YHWH's plan to restore fellowship with mankind), Isa. 53:10
He will see it and be satisfied, Isa. 53:11 (refers to YHWH's good pleasure [will]), Isa. 53:10e
He will justify the many, Isa. 53:11
allot Him a portion with the great, Isa. 53:12
He will divide the booty with the strong, Isa. 53:12
Poetry is always difficult to interpret. Some of these items are uncertain!
53:11
NASB "He will see it"
NKJV, Peshitta "He shall see the travail of His soul"
NRSV, NJB, REB "he shall see light"
LXX, DSS "to show him light"
The MT has "of the travail of his soul he shall see." Notice there is no "it" but it seems to refer to "the anguish of His soul." The JPSOA footnote suggests "it" refers to "the arm of the Lord" from v. 1, which is also a feminine noun.
The UBS Text Project thinks "light" may have dropped out of the text and gives a "B" rating for its inclusion. To see light is idiomatic for "to live" (i.e., resurrection").
"By His knowledge" the NRSV has "he shall find satisfaction through his knowledge." The question of "what knowledge" seems to relate to
see His offspring (Isa. 53:10d)
prolong His life (Isa. 53:10e)
prospering of YHWH's will (Isa. 53:10f)
results of His anguish (Isa. 53:11a)
"the Righteous One. . .justify" These are both formed from one root (BDB 842, 843). YHWH's sin-bearing (cf. Isa. 53:11e) Servant will accomplish righteousness for all who believe and receive (cf. John 1:12; 3:16; Rom. 10:9-13).
"the many" See note at "all" of Isa. 53:6.
"He will bear their iniquities" The same verb (BDB 687, KB 741, Qal imperfect) was also used in Isa. 53:4. See note there.
53:12a,b "He will divide the booty with the strong" This is a war idiom of victory. It is not to be taken literally, but figuratively of spiritual victory (cf. Isa. 52:13)!
"He poured out Himself to death" This verb (BDB 788, KB 881, Hiphil perfect) is literally "be naked" or "be bare" or "to empty." It is used in Isaiah in several senses.
to uncover a weapon, Isa. 22:6
for the Spirit being given (i.e., poured out), Isa. 32:15
BDB calls it a metaphor in this text reflecting the Piel usage #3 (cf. Ps. 141:8)
KB calls it "to tip out," a metaphor "to throw away one life to death"
"And was numbered with the transgressors" Luke 22:37 quotes this verse as being spoken by Jesus in Gethsemane when the soldiers and guards came to arrest Him.
Notice the same word (BDB 833) was used of Israel's sin in Isa. 53:8 and all humans' sin in Isa. 53:5.
"He Himself bore the sin of many" This means substitutionary, vicarious atonement (cf. Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; 14:24; 2 Cor. 5:21; Gal. 1:4; 1 Tim. 2:6; Titus 2:14; 1 John 2:2). The UBS Text Project thinks "sin" should be plural (B rating).
"And interceded for the transgressors" And He still does (cf. Rom. 8:27,34; Heb. 7:25; 9:24; 1 John 2:1)!
Astonishing chapter-Isaiah 53!
To YHVH and Yeshua be the glory forever more.
Johann.
Dizerner
Well-known member
We had an interesting discussion on verse 9 on carm:
Was Jesus "assigned a grave with the wicked"?
Christians generally believe Isaiah 53 is a prophecy about Jesus. In there we read: Isaiah 5:9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked... However, the gospels indicate Jesus was, instead, buried in a new and unused tomb. I am curious how Christians reconcile this. John 19: 41 At the place...
forums.carm.org
Johann
Well-known member
I think Gill answers powerfully-
And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death,.... These words are generally supposed to refer to a fact that was afterwards done; that Christ, who died with wicked men, as if he himself had been one, was buried in a rich man's grave.
Could the words admit of the following transposition, they would exactly agree with it, "and he made his grave with the rich; and with the wicked in his death"; for he died between two thieves, and was buried in the sepulchre of Joseph of Arimathaea, a rich man. Or the meaning perhaps in general is, that, after his death, both rich men and wicked men were concerned in his sepulchre, and about his grave; two rich men, Nicodemus and Joseph, in taking down his body from the cross, in embalming it, and in laying it in the tomb of the latter; and wicked men, Roman soldiers, were employed in guarding the sepulchre, that his disciples might not take away the body.
Or the sense is, "he" the people, the nation of the Jews, through whose enmity against him he suffered death, "gave", intended, and designed, that "his grave" should be with "the wicked"; and therefore accused him to the Roman governor, and got him condemned capitally, and condemned to a Roman death, crucifixion, that he might be buried where such sort of persons usually were; and then it may be supplied, "but he made it"; that is, God ordered and appointed, in his overruling providence, that it should be "with the rich in his death", as it was.
Aben Ezra observes, that the word במתיו, which we translate "in his death", signifies a structure over a grave, "a sepulchral monument"; and then it may be rendered impersonally thus, "his grave was put or placed with the wicked, but his tomb", or sepulchral monument, was "with the rich"; his grave was indeed put under the care and custody of the wicked soldiers; yet a famous tomb being erected over it, at the expense of a rich man, Joseph of Arimathaea, which was designed for himself, made the burial of Christ honourable: which honour was done him-
19:41 "Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden" It is crucial that we understand the haste with which Joseph and Nicodemus worked. Jesus died at 3:00 P.M. and had to be in the grave by 6:00 P.M., which was the beginning of the Jewish Passover Sabbath.
"a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid" This is a PERIPHRASTIC PERFECT PASSIVE PARTICIPLE. We learn from Matt. 27:60 that this was Joseph's own tomb. This is a fulfillment of Isaiah 53:9 quoted in Matthew 27:57.
Johann.
Last edited:
sethproton
Active member
Bible says the life is in the blood. Thanks for speaking truth
sethproton
Active member
Civic, been hearing my whole Christian life that the NASB is one of the most accurate formal translations, unless lexicon's disagree with it, it is the one I go withthats just it the word doesn't mean propitiation but expiation- bad translation.
Propitiation vs. Expiation- The New Testament usage of hilaskomai and hilasmos, consistent with its precedent usage in the Greek Old Testament, speaks consistently of God’s atoning action in Christ directed toward sin on behalf of sinners, not human action directed toward God to satisfy God. The criterion for interpretation, Stott has said, “is whether the object of the atoning action is God or man.” “Propitiation” indicates an action by humans directed toward God, and “expiation” indicates an action by God toward sin and sinners. According to Stott's criterion, these texts favor "expiation" over “propitiation.” Given the choice of translating hilastērion either “propitiation” or “expiation,” therefore, “expiation” is preferable based on the textual evidence of both the New Testament and the Greek Old Testament. James Dunn summarizes well the case for preferring “expiation” to “propitiation” as a translation for hilastērion: Darrin W. Snyder Belousek, Atonement, Justice, and Peace: The Message of the Cross and the Mission of the Church (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2012), 247–252.
t
civic
Well-known member
this below from the Greek Experts/ Scholars also agree with my previous post.
And He is the propitiation] Or, And He Himself is a propitiation: there is no article in the Greek. Note the present tense throughout; ‘we have an Advocate, He is a propitiation’: this condition of things is perpetual, it is not something which took place once for all long ago. In His glorified Body the Son is ever acting thus. Contrast ‘He laid down His life for us’ (1 John 3:16). Beware of the unsatisfactory explanation that ‘propitiation’ is the abstract for the concrete, ‘propitiation’ (ἱλασμός) for ‘propitiator’ (ἱλαστήρ). Had S. John written ‘propitiator’ we should have lost half the truth; viz. that our Advocate propitiates by offering Himself. He is both High Priest and Victim, both Propitiator and Propitiation. It is quite obvious that He is the former; the office of Advocate includes it. It is not at all obvious that He is the latter: very rarely does an advocate offer himself as a propitiation.
The word for ‘propitiation’ occurs nowhere in N. T. but here and in 1 John 4:10; in both places without the article and followed by ‘for our sins’. It signifies any action which has expiation as its object, whether prayer, compensation, or sacrifice. Thus ‘the ram of the atonement’ (Numbers 5:8) is ‘the ram of the propitiation’ or ‘expiation’, where the same Greek word as is used here is used in the LXX. Comp. Ezekiel 44:27; Numbers 29:11; Leviticus 25:9. The LXX. of ‘there is forgiveness with Thee’ (Psalm 130:4) is remarkable: literally rendered it is ‘before Thee is the propitiation’ (ὁ ἱλασμός). So also the Vulgate, apud Te propitiatio est. And this is the idea that we have here: Jesus Christ, as being righteous, is ever present before the Lord as the propitiation. With this we should compare the use of the cognate verb in Hebrews 2:17 and cognate substantive Romans 3:25 and Hebrews 9:5. From these passages it is clear that in N. T. the word is closely connected with that special form of expiation which takes place by means of an offering or sacrifice, although this idea is not of necessity included in the radical signification of the word itself. See notes in all three places.
for our sins] Literally, concerning (περἱ) our sins: our sins are the matter respecting which the propitiation goes on. This is the common form of expression in LXX. Comp. Numbers 29:11; Exodus 30:15-16; Exodus 32:30; Leviticus 4:20; Leviticus 4:26; Leviticus 4:31; Leviticus 4:35, &c. &c. Similarly, in John 8:46, ‘Which of you convicteth Me of sin?’ is literally, ‘Which of you convicteth Me concerning sin?’ Comp. John 16:8; John 10:33. Notice that it is ‘our sins’, not ‘our sin’: the sins which we are daily committing, and not merely the sinfulness of our nature, are the subject of the propitiation.
sethproton
Active member
He onCe for aLL SET DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF THE FATHER.
If you are claiming that Jesus is still making atonemnet and propitiation. It makes no sense in His story.
it was once for all
Dizerner
Well-known member
Yes, what we say is Christ "mediates" his finished propitiation.
Like he "applies" it to us, he "communicates" his intercessory work to us on a real time basis.
sethproton
Active member
I get in touble for this one but the word mediate is a court word. We still use it today.The mediator is neither the plaintiff or defendant.
Being God and man, Jesus mediates beween God and man. He did it once in His blood. and there was an agreement reached, once for all time.
If He was still mediateing, he would have to still be shedding blood,
What Jesus is is an intercessor and a high priest, those functions continue.
Look in the NT for versions of the word mediate, mediator and mediation. Let the context inform you about the meaning
Dizerner
Well-known member
sethproton
Active member
I got a lot of flack for it. but you can't take the word mediator and just claim it means whatever you want.I remember our discussions on this and your eccentric view brother!
All good.
You have to look in the lexicons and the verses where the word appears. Have you done that? beause until you look for yourself, whose argument are you putting forth?
Dizerner
Well-known member
Yes, I've done that brother.
Both ancient and modern mediators actively mediate between parties, they do not do a one-time negotiation.
In fact, I have recently had to have a mediator with my grandfather's will, as the uncle is trying to steal all the money.
Once he is appointed, he continues to work between the parties.
Whatever definition you seem to have found somewhere—and you said you don't recall and can't produce any concrete evidence of—was inaccurate.
