Isaiah 53:5 The chastisement of our peace was upon Him

[101G]

All of them. Do you have a manuscript you prefer or are you accepting a collection you haven't vetted yourself. I decided a long time ago to know the difference.



If I understand your question correctly.....

Christ is God Incarnate. So the answer is Christ is Eternal. Jesus was born of the seed of Eve in Mary.

God has vetted, it's his words, and 101G believe God. in Isaiah 53 the ARM of God is God Shared equally in the ECHAD of First and Last.

and two, if God is Incarnate, then who was upholding the world and everything else when he was... G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') while in flesh. Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" Philippians 2:7 "But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:"

here No reputation in the Greek means,
G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') v.
1. to make empty.
2. (figuratively) to abase, neutralize, falsify.
[from G2756]
KJV: make (of none effect, of no reputation, void), be in vain
Root(s): G2756

so, since God made himself "EMPTY", "neutralize", who was upholding the universe? your answer please.

101G.

 

[Dizerner]

so, since God made himself "EMPTY", "neutralize", who was upholding the universe? your answer please.

The Trinity could function here for an answer.

 

[101G]

Not in your words. That is why I pointed out that there is no appeal to God holding the spear nor hammer. That is all you. No need to laugh. Are you uncomfortable dealing with this?

not at all. did you see God do anything? if so who? ..... (smile).

also,

If I understand your question correctly.....

Christ is God Incarnate. So the answer is Christ is Eternal. Jesus was born of the seed of Eve in Mary.

double ERROR. first Jesus is not born, but Given, Christ now in the resurrection is ETERNAL, but not when he had blood. see this is why you don't understand Isaiah 53. listen and Learn. Isaiah 9:6 "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."

Child born, son Given, understand? if not lets make it plain. John 8:23 "And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world." QUESTION, "IF HE'S NOT OF THIS WORLD ...... HOW IS HE BORN IN THIS WORLD?". YOUR ANSWER PLEASE.

101G

 

[101G]

The Trinity could function here for an answer.

how so, if the one or person you call the son, how much of the Spirit was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō')? as soon as you give an answer, you just hanged yourself. God is not divided nor separated. for Philippians 2:6 clearly states, "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"

and form here is NATURE, and God nature is "Spirit", per John 4:24a. so tell us how much of the Spirit was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō')? .... 1/3 for the son. or 1/2, or all of the Spirit your choice.

101G.

 

[101G]

to all my trinitarians, or three persons believers. just a simple question. "WHEN GOD MADE HIMSELF G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō'), WHILE IN FLESH AND BLOOD. HOW MUCH OF THE SPIRIT WAS G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') WHILE IN THAT FLESH AND BLOOD?"

your answer please.

101G.

 

[Dizerner]

to all my trinitarians, or three persons believers. just a simple question. "WHEN GOD MADE HIMSELF G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō'), WHILE IN FLESH AND BLOOD. HOW MUCH OF THE SPIRIT WAS G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') WHILE IN THAT FLESH AND BLOOD?"

your answer please.

101G.

Only Jesus was kenoo.

The passage is clear about that.

Not the Father nor the Spirit.

 

[101G]

Only Jesus was kenoo.

The passage is clear about that.

Not the Father nor the Spirit.

is not Jesus and the Father is of ONE "Spirit?. yes, supportive scripture, Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" so, the Lord Jesus is in the "Form of God, which is nature, and that nature is Spirit, per John 4:24a. for the Greek word Form here is
G3444 μορφή morphe (mor-fee') n.
1. form.
2. (intrinsically) fundamental nature.
[perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts)]
KJV: form
Root(s): G3313

so my question still stand, "how much of the Spirit was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō')". was it 1/3 for the son? or was it 1/2 of God since u said, "Only Jesus was kenoo". so HOW MUCH OF THE SPIRIT WAS G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō'). REMEMBER THE BELIEF OF THE TRINITY.... ONE SPIRIT, BUT THREE PERSONS.

SO, TRY AGAIN....... and as soon as you give a number, then you have God divided. I can't wait for your answer..... (smile),

101G.

 

[101G]

to all,
our brother @dizerner said, "ONLY JESUS WAS kenoo. and the Lord Jesus is as they say one of the Person of the trinity. good, so if the Lord Jesus is kenoo, (which he was), then being one Spirit, either God is "DIVIDED", WHICH HE IS NOT, OR All of God was kenoo, which could not be. because someone will and would have to uphold the universe.

this is the trinity dilemma.

101G.

 

[101G]

To all, GINOLJC.
to understand the ECHAD of God in the New Testament, one need to understand the Greek term "ANOTHER", G243 ALLOS.
Allos, 101G will highlight the Rending of G243 Allos. using the Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, there are two words in the Greek for ANOTHER that we need to understand. [ 1,,G243 G2087 ,allos heteros ] each have a difference in meaning, which despite a tendency to be lost, is to be observed in numerous passages. Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort;" heteros expresses a qualitative difference and denotes "another of a different sort." G243 Allos answers the Godhead question. and G2087 answers the "GREATER THAN I" question.

Read these two definitions carefully. "a numerical difference" indicate a ECHAD in a numerically EQUAL SHARE of "ONE PERSON". and "another of the same sort" indicates the same one person who is "a numerical difference" of himself. and this "numerical difference" is expressed as "FIRST, LAST". and that's Ordinal First and Last in TIME, PLACE, ORDER, and RANK. also, this "numerical difference" is expressed as, beginning and end, alpha, and omega, or root and offspring. and, "of, of, of, the same SORT is the SAME one person who is the ECHAD of himself...... "God" the Spirit.

so, by understanding, and knowing the ECHAD of the OT completely, and understanding & knowing the term "ANOTHER", or G243 ALLOS of the NT. one can discern the GODHEAD perfectly. starting with these definitions all Godhead questions are answered and revealed.

PICJAG, 101G.

 

[Frank Russell]

I dunno, getting blasted apart by a lecture by God sounds far more harsh than being crucified.

Fear not him who can kill the body only .. as the saying goes.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

The Hebrew word מוּסָר mûsâr (moo-sawr) is used in Isa 53:5 and means chastisement, which in Hebrew means instruction, training, correction given by parents upon their children to perfect-to complete them. Chastisement includes learning by suffering. One can chasten his son by causing him to suffer to one degree or another with the purpose to teach him something that he might otherwise not learn. This is called discipline as well.

Now that Isa 53:5 has been fulfilled, we know God told man ahead of time He would perfect His Son to be the Author of Salvation through the sufferings that brought us peace with Him. Our Lord's real experiences of humbling Himself to come into our form and living in our human weakness, suffering and giving up His life unto death on account of our sins is what purifies us of our sins and reconciled-restored our relationship to God.

Here we are informed that God made our Lord, the Author of our salvation "perfect" through suffering.

"For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the Author of their salvation perfect through suffering." (Heb 2:10)​

Again, we are informed that our Lord "learned obedience through what He suffered", and was "made perfect" by it, becoming the source of salvation.

"In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, being designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek." (Heb 5:7-10)​

Here we are informed the oath of God "appoints a Son forever who has been perfected".

"For such a high priest was fitting for us: holy, guiltless, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; who doesn’t need, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices daily, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. For he did this once for all, when he offered up himself. For the law appoints men as high priests who have weakness, but the word of the oath which came after the law appoints a Son forever who has been perfected." (Heb 7:26-28)​

The Hebrew understanding of chastisement does not mean penal punishment like us westerners have been led to think. It means instruction, training, or correction to perfect a person, to make them complete.

The suffering and death that Jesus our Lord experienced taught Him in all ways what it was to be in the weakness of humanity, so that He could fully sympathize with us; this being what He learned that qualifies Him to be "the source of eternal salvation for all who obey Him". This chastisement-being perfected through suffering-was upon Him for our peace, for our sakes ulitmately.

God Bless

This interpretation smacks of heresy and gnosticism. It is not at all the point of these passages. You are honestly trying to say that Jesus, God Himself, came to earth because he lacked something? That only by experiencing life as a human and being obedient that he could then somehow be completed and perfect? I can't believe so many are agreeing with this nonsense.

First, we have to consider Isaiah 53:3 - in context.
[Isa 53:5 LSB] 5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our peace [fell] upon Him, And by His wounds we are healed.

You didn't deal with the whole verse. Isaiah states the same concept multiple times in different ways. pierced, crushed, wounds - these are violent actions. "Chastening" is much more than just "instruction" and "correction". And notice the chastening is for "our well being". It had nothing to do with making him a better person.

It's unfortunate that the Greek New Testament text is so nebulous. The problem with the verb "perfect" is that it has a transitive and intransitive sense. It depends if there is an object being acted on or not. It can have the sense of making something complete or whole. Or, it can have the sense of being fulfilled, accomplished, completed. This second sense is also contained in the Greek word.

The Aramaic text of the Peshitta is very clear that in the passages in Hebrews, the intransitive sense is being used. The Messiah isn't being "perfected". He is fulfilling or accomplishing that which he came to do. He has accomplished the mission he was sent to do through the trials and suffering. He fulfilled the many prophecies in the Old Testament. Due to this fact that it was all completed, that is what allows us to have salvation.

These actions are not needed for him to "level up". These actions were done to complete God's holy requirements for justice and his demonstration of his limitless love.

 

[civic]

This interpretation smacks of heresy and gnosticism. It is not at all the point of these passages. You are honestly trying to say that Jesus, God Himself, came to earth because he lacked something? That only by experiencing life as a human and being obedient that he could then somehow be completed and perfect? I can't believe so many are agreeing with this nonsense.

First, we have to consider Isaiah 53:3 - in context.
[Isa 53:5 LSB] 5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our peace [fell] upon Him, And by His wounds we are healed.

You didn't deal with the whole verse. Isaiah states the same concept multiple times in different ways. pierced, crushed, wounds - these are violent actions. "Chastening" is much more than just "instruction" and "correction". And notice the chastening is for "our well being". It had nothing to do with making him a better person.

It's unfortunate that the Greek New Testament text is so nebulous. The problem with the verb "perfect" is that it has a transitive and intransitive sense. It depends if there is an object being acted on or not. It can have the sense of making something complete or whole. Or, it can have the sense of being fulfilled, accomplished, completed. This second sense is also contained in the Greek word.

The Aramaic text of the Peshitta is very clear that in these passages, the intransitive sense is being used. The Messiah isn't being "perfected". He is fulfilling or accomplishing that which he came to do. He has accomplished the mission he was sent to do through the trials and suffering. He fulfilled the many prophecies in the Old Testament. Due to this fact that it was all completed, that is what allows us to have salvation.

These actions are not needed for him to "level up". These actions were done to complete God's holy requirements for justice and his demonstration of his limitless love.

Acts done by the hands of wicked men, not God- the Jewish leaders as taught by Jesus and the Apostles.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

Acts done by the hands of wicked men, not God- the Jewish leaders as taught by Jesus and the Apostles.

And what is the point? God makes use of evil actions for the fulfillment of His plan.

For example:
[Rev 17:17 LSB] 17 "For God gave [it] in their hearts to do His purpose both by doing [their own] common purpose and by giving their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God will be finished.

 

[civic]

And what is the point? God makes use of evil actions for the fulfillment of His plan.

For example:
[Rev 17:17 LSB] 17 "For God gave [it] in their hearts to do His purpose both by doing [their own] common purpose and by giving their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God will be finished.

The point is this section is PSA. So it’s relevant to this thread. The Bible doesn’t teach the doctrine , Calvin and Luther did and so do their followers.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

The point is this section is PSA. So it’s relevant to this thread. The Bible doesn’t teach the doctrine , Calvin and Luther did and so do their followers.

What is the point as a reaction to my refutation of the heresy contained in the original post? I don't see any connection or relevance.

 

[civic]

What is the point as a reaction to my refutation of the heresy contained in the original post? I don't see any connection or relevance.

He doesn’t ordain or predestined evil or sin to occur. Many will conflate foreknowledge with predestination. I just want to be clear about that in this thread. I’m not sure what you believe on that topic.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

He doesn’t ordain or predestined evil or sin to occur. Many will conflate foreknowledge with predestination. I just want to be clear about that in this thread. I’m not sure what you believe on that topic.

I believe what the Scriptures teach. That which was given in the Hebrew Old Testament and the Aramaic New Testament.

 

[Dizerner]

Acts done by the hands of wicked men, not God- the Jewish leaders as taught by Jesus and the Apostles.

A lot more happened on the Cross than Jesus getting beat up by some Romans.

Our old nature was crucified there with him, where he bare all our sins.

 

[Dizerner]

either God is "DIVIDED", WHICH HE IS NOT, OR All of God was kenoo, which could not be. because someone will and would have to uphold the universe.

this is the trinity dilemma.

Well, it's a mistake in logic.

God is divided in Person not Being.

That allows for him to do some things beyond the human understanding.

 

[Dizerner]

I believe what the Scriptures teach. That which was given in the Hebrew Old Testament and the Aramaic New Testament.

For once I can support the Aramaic Scriptures in their interpretation of Isaiah 53, lol.

You ever have the thought that maybe the OT was originally all Aramaic as well?

Then you'd get the entire Bible in one single language.