Isaiah 53:10 and the LXX

"Thou shalt not believe single passages."

The above is a false theology not based upon ANY passages. Which is eisegesis and not Scripture.

Of course, never mind that it is said in many places, like Christ suffering for our sins.
 
civic said:
A false theology based upon a single passage. That is Eisegesis not exegesis.
Click to expand...
I stand by what I've posted-and I notice a sudden change in the wind.
I am well aware what is eisegesis and exegesis-why should I bring in a false theology just because you don't agree? I don't say you are promulgating a false theology.
You yourself said this is not a salvific issue-right?
 
Johann said:
I stand by what I've posted-and I notice a sudden change in the wind.
I am well aware what is eisegesis and exegesis-why should I bring in a false theology just because you don't agree? I don't say you are promulgating a false theology.
You yourself said this is not a salvific issue-right?
Click to expand...
PSA is an assault / attack on Gods nature/ character. It’s a divided Trinity . The Father angered with wrath/ vengeance/ retribution upon the Son. It’s heresy.

hope this helps !!!
 
civic said:
PSA is an assault / attack on Gods nature/ character. It’s a divided Trinity . The Father angered with wrath/ vengeance/ retribution upon the Son. It’s heresy.

hope this helps !!!
Click to expand...
I disagree.
Read Isaiah 52-and 53 again, use the LXX if you want-strong, graphic verbs penned down-Perfect Tense.
 
Johann said:
I disagree.
Read Isaiah 52-and 53 again, use the LXX if you want-strong, graphic verbs penned down-Perfect Tense.
Click to expand...
I have Jesus clear teaching on the atonement and the apostles and none of them teach anything about wrath from Father to Son. Like I said it’s a misunderstood single passage that contradicts the NT, Jesus, the Apostles and the Tri- Unity of God.

hope this helps !!!
 
praise_yeshua said:
You're appealing to half truths and deception.

There are variant editions of Daniel. You're appealing to the extended version that no one takes seriously. Hebrew texts are no different. They are variant Hebrew texts among the DSS. Both sources have issues. The Hebrew tradition has MORE.

You have no idea what the original Hebrew text states. It was probably written in an ancient form of Hebrew that has not survived. Paleo-Hebrew isn't close enough and it isn't well preserved to any great degree anywhere. It is conjecture to try and establish Paleo-Hebrew as the source of the Hebrew OT. The best we have are derivative works. The Greek OT is better.



Nonsense. The appeal is to "cleansed". Same word found in

Lev 14:4 Then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two birds alive and clean, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop: Greek

Lev 14:4 the priest shall command them to take for him who is to be cleansed two live clean birds and cedarwood and scarlet yarn and hyssop.
Hebrew.

It is perfect match to the Greek source and extant Hebrew sources. It is differently treated in Isa 53. I wonder why......

You need to do more study before you make such simple errors. The best method of dealing with the differences in Greek and Hebrew texts are to LOOK AT ALL THE TIMES THE WORD IS USED. The Scriptures define themselves.
Click to expand...
Amen
 
Like I said an entire doctrine based solely upon a single isolated passage . That’s the definition of eisegesis.

Hope this helps !!!
 
civic said:
Like I said an entire doctrine based solely upon a single isolated passage . That’s the definition of eisegesis.

Hope this helps !!!
Click to expand...
I asked you to show me where is the wrath of YHVH "poured out on His Son" IN Isaiah 53 and you can't show me? Because it is NOT there.

Suffering is PENAL-there is no way out and it was the Father's boule/thelema/will/wish/pleasure for it to be so.

But it is 6.00 in the morning and I'm tired.
Shalom.
 
Johann said:
Isa 53:10 Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush Him and to cause Him to suffer; and when His soul is made a guilt offering, He will see His offspring, He will prolong His days, and the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.

YHVH's will and pleasure is synonymous/interchangeably-used twice in this verse.
Click to expand...

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

To settle this once and for all......

Isa 53:10 is an appeal to Genesis 3:15.

Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Just "who" is being referenced in brusing the seed of the women?
 
Some people think the wilderness trials versus Satan were Jesus' greatest temptation.

That stuff was peanuts.

Jesus in the garden—look at his demeanor praying versus his wilderness testing—no comparison.

God is the real one to fear, not Satan, capable of a mere bruise.
 
dizerner said:
Some people think the wilderness trials versus Satan were Jesus' greatest temptation.

That stuff was peanuts.

Jesus in the garden—look at his demeanor praying versus his wilderness testing—no comparison.

God is the real one to fear, not Satan, capable of a mere bruise.
Click to expand...
Really? Jesus feared God in the garden and on the cross? Is that what you're saying?

Jesus hated the shame the cross brought Him. Jesus suffered at the hands of sinners.

We don't have to guess at how this worked.

Heb 12:3 Think of him who endured such opposition against himself by sinners, so that you may not grow weary in your souls and give up.
Heb 12:4 You have not yet resisted to the point of bloodshed in your struggle against sin.
 
praise_yeshua said:
Really? Jesus feared God in the garden and on the cross? Is that what you're saying?

Jesus hated the shame the cross brought Him. Jesus suffered at the hands of sinners.

We don't have to guess at how this worked.

Heb 12:3 Think of him who endured such opposition against himself by sinners, so that you may not grow weary in your souls and give up.
Heb 12:4 You have not yet resisted to the point of bloodshed in your struggle against sin.
Click to expand...
Amen
 
praise_yeshua said:
To settle this once and for all......
Click to expand...
Yeah-let's settle the score-

"between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed"

There has been much discussion among commentators about this verse. In a larger canonical context it seems to refer to the children (i.e., "seed," BDB 282) of the evil one (cf. Matt. 13:38; John 8:44) and the children of the Messiah (cf. LXX and Irenaeus).

But because the next verse uses the SINGULAR form "he" and "you" it seems to refer to the tension between God and the evil one symbolized in the redemptive work of the coming Messiah (cf. LXX and Irenaeus).

It is obvious that Adam and Eve did not understand the ramification of this (i.e., Eve thought the birth of Cain may have fulfilled this, cf. Gen. 4:1), nor probably did Moses, although Moses recognized in Deut. 18:18 that a prophet greater than himself was coming. I think that it probably does have a veiled allusion to the virgin birth, though this was surely unknown to the original human author, but known to the divine author (Holy Spirit). As mankind fell through the impulsiveness of the woman, mankind will be redeemed through the obedience of a woman in the supernatural conception of the Messiah by the Holy Spirit (cf. Isa. 7:14; Matt. 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-38, see A Guide To Biblical Prophecy, pp. 78 and 80). The Vulgate changes the "he" in the next phrase to "she," which is totally inappropriate, but it may catch the gist of the fuller significance.

As this prophecy is not fully understood until its historical fulfillment in the virgin birth of Jesus, the same is to be said about the interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2. History reveals the truthfulness of revelation as the continuing scientific study of our earth shows the intricacy and inter-relatedness of God's creative acts! There is no conflict, just a more complete knowledge on mankind's part as to God's activities!



NASB   "He shall bruise you on the head"
NKJV   "He shall bruise your head"
NRSV   "he will strike your head"
TEV   "Her offspring will crush your head"
NJB   "It will bruise your head"
REB, JPSOA   "They will strike at your head"
LXX   "he will watch your head"
Peshitta   "her posterity shall tread your head under foot"

The term "bruise" can mean "crush," "pound," "rub off," "grind," or "strike" (BDB 1003, KB 1446, Qal IMPERFECT MASCULINE, SINGULAR, used twice, cf. Job 9:17). Notice the SINGULAR PERSONAL PRONOUN (BDB 214, cf. Rom. 16:20). The battle will eventually come down to individuals.

NASB   "And you shall bruise him on the heel"
NKJV   "and you shall bruise His heel"
NRSV, Peshitta   "and you will strike his heel"
TEV   "and you will bite her offsprings' heel"
NJB   "and you will strike its heel"
REB, JPSOA   "you will strike at their heel"
LXX   "you will watch his heel"

The same VERB (BDB 1003, KB 1446, Qal IMPERFECT MASCULINE SINGULAR) is used for both, but it is obvious that Satan gets the worst end of the deal. This seems to refer to the crucifixion as the means of the substitutionary atonement for all humans when understood from the NT perspective.

Not from OUR perspective.
 
praise_yeshua said:
Isa 53:10 is an appeal to Genesis 3:15.
Click to expand...
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).
Can you explain to me what is the QAL PERFECT? Thanks.

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!
 
Johann said:
Yeah-let's settle the score-

"between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed"

There has been much discussion among commentators about this verse. In a larger canonical context it seems to refer to the children (i.e., "seed," BDB 282) of the evil one (cf. Matt. 13:38; John 8:44) and the children of the Messiah (cf. LXX and Irenaeus).

But because the next verse uses the SINGULAR form "he" and "you" it seems to refer to the tension between God and the evil one symbolized in the redemptive work of the coming Messiah (cf. LXX and Irenaeus).

It is obvious that Adam and Eve did not understand the ramification of this (i.e., Eve thought the birth of Cain may have fulfilled this, cf. Gen. 4:1), nor probably did Moses, although Moses recognized in Deut. 18:18 that a prophet greater than himself was coming. I think that it probably does have a veiled allusion to the virgin birth, though this was surely unknown to the original human author, but known to the divine author (Holy Spirit). As mankind fell through the impulsiveness of the woman, mankind will be redeemed through the obedience of a woman in the supernatural conception of the Messiah by the Holy Spirit (cf. Isa. 7:14; Matt. 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-38, see A Guide To Biblical Prophecy, pp. 78 and 80). The Vulgate changes the "he" in the next phrase to "she," which is totally inappropriate, but it may catch the gist of the fuller significance.

As this prophecy is not fully understood until its historical fulfillment in the virgin birth of Jesus, the same is to be said about the interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2. History reveals the truthfulness of revelation as the continuing scientific study of our earth shows the intricacy and inter-relatedness of God's creative acts! There is no conflict, just a more complete knowledge on mankind's part as to God's activities!



NASB   "He shall bruise you on the head"
NKJV   "He shall bruise your head"
NRSV   "he will strike your head"
TEV   "Her offspring will crush your head"
NJB   "It will bruise your head"
REB, JPSOA   "They will strike at your head"
LXX   "he will watch your head"
Peshitta   "her posterity shall tread your head under foot"

The term "bruise" can mean "crush," "pound," "rub off," "grind," or "strike" (BDB 1003, KB 1446, Qal IMPERFECT MASCULINE, SINGULAR, used twice, cf. Job 9:17). Notice the SINGULAR PERSONAL PRONOUN (BDB 214, cf. Rom. 16:20). The battle will eventually come down to individuals.

NASB   "And you shall bruise him on the heel"
NKJV   "and you shall bruise His heel"
NRSV, Peshitta   "and you will strike his heel"
TEV   "and you will bite her offsprings' heel"
NJB   "and you will strike its heel"
REB, JPSOA   "you will strike at their heel"
LXX   "you will watch his heel"

The same VERB (BDB 1003, KB 1446, Qal IMPERFECT MASCULINE SINGULAR) is used for both, but it is obvious that Satan gets the worst end of the deal. This seems to refer to the crucifixion as the means of the substitutionary atonement for all humans when understood from the NT perspective.

Not from OUR perspective.
Click to expand...

Are these your comments or are you referencing someone else?

Given what you have stated before, I'm skeptical that these are your words.

"It is obvious that Adam and Eve did not understand the ramification of this" ..... really? A husband and wife chased forced out of their life of comfort into the "unknown" and you believe they didn't understand what God said?
 
Johann said:
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).
Can you explain to me what is the QAL PERFECT? Thanks.

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!
Click to expand...

I understood your position the first time you shared it. I don't see anything "new" to respond to.
 

Similar threads

The Rogue Tomato
Isaiah 53 from the dead sea scrolls
Replies
2
Views
380
Johann
Johann
3
The impossible
Replies
2
Views
29
360watt
3
David Koberstein
Painting in Hebrew
Replies
0
Views
37
David Koberstein
David Koberstein
civic
Isaiah 53 the origin of PSA
25 26 27
Replies
537
Views
12K
civic
civic
Dizerner
My full defense of PSA
4 5 6
Replies
110
Views
866
Pancho Frijoles
Pancho Frijoles
Back
Top Bottom