Where's the wrath??

Joe

Active member
Where is the wrath?

Nowhere in the bible is it mentioned that God the Father poured wrath out upon His own Son that He sent to save us?

Surely, something as important as that would be the central theme expounded upon by the NT authors.

So where is it taught by any NT writer?

To put things into perspective from the KJV.
The word punish is used one time in the NT. (Acts 4:21)
The word punished is used four times in the NT. (Acts 22:5, Acts 26:11, 2Th 1:9, 2Pe 2:9)
The word punishment is used four times in the NT. (Matt 25:46, 2Cor 2:6, Heb 10:29, 1 Pe 2:14)
The word wrath is used 38 times in the NT

Of all these instances, not one time are any of these words used towards our Lord not once.

What about purgatory. Is it a truthful doctrine? Nothing is mentioned about purgatory and yet it is believed by many people.

No matter your belief, the bible is the baseline for doctrine. If it is not in it, then don't believe it.

Jesus never suffered the wrath of God. You cannot find it stated, implied, or taught by any NT author, and the Apostle Paul is very concise and clear in his letters.

Just like purgatory is an erroneous doctrine fashioned by the uninspired thoughts of man, so too is the doctrine of PSA and God pouring wrath out upon His Son.

If you disagree, then the onus is upon you to use the bible in context and prove it.

What you will find is the purpose of His death and resurrection, and none of it had to do with God killing His Son to appease His anger for our sins.

Think about it just a minute. Would you being angry at someone to the point of killing them take that anger out on your own son who always did you right and kill him instead, so you could feel better about the person who made you angry? I certainly hope not! What kind of person does that? More importantly, what kind of message does that speak about God if we think He did that?...And most importantly, this is never mentioned in the bible!

We are saved because God loves us and shown us mercy. No wrath required to love us and save us.

God Bless
 
It's quite simple really. Uses the same logic that builds the doctrine of the Trinity and the Deity of Christ.

The judgment of sin is wrath; we see this hundreds, nay, thousands of places in the Bible.

Jesus dies, he suffers, for sin.

Not just because sin is around and it's hurtful that it exists, that is not the meaning.

Thus we see the judgment of wrath associated with sin is connected to suffering for sin, as sin's punishment.
 
It's quite simple really. Uses the same logic that builds the doctrine of the Trinity and the Deity of Christ.

The judgment of sin is wrath; we see this hundreds, nay, thousands of places in the Bible.

Jesus dies, he suffers, for sin.

Not just because sin is around and it's hurtful that it exists, that is not the meaning.

Thus we see the judgment of wrath associated with sin is connected to suffering for sin, as sin's punishment.
But not punished by the Father but at the hands of sinful,wicked, rebellious Christ haters who finally killed Him
 
Where is the wrath?

Nowhere in the bible is it mentioned that God the Father poured wrath out upon His own Son that He sent to save us?

Surely, something as important as that would be the central theme expounded upon by the NT authors.

So where is it taught by any NT writer?

To put things into perspective from the KJV.
The word punish is used one time in the NT. (Acts 4:21)
The word punished is used four times in the NT. (Acts 22:5, Acts 26:11, 2Th 1:9, 2Pe 2:9)
The word punishment is used four times in the NT. (Matt 25:46, 2Cor 2:6, Heb 10:29, 1 Pe 2:14)
The word wrath is used 38 times in the NT

Of all these instances, not one time are any of these words used towards our Lord not once.

What about purgatory. Is it a truthful doctrine? Nothing is mentioned about purgatory and yet it is believed by many people.

No matter your belief, the bible is the baseline for doctrine. If it is not in it, then don't believe it.

Jesus never suffered the wrath of God. You cannot find it stated, implied, or taught by any NT author, and the Apostle Paul is very concise and clear in his letters.

Just like purgatory is an erroneous doctrine fashioned by the uninspired thoughts of man, so too is the doctrine of PSA and God pouring wrath out upon His Son.

If you disagree, then the onus is upon you to use the bible in context and prove it.

What you will find is the purpose of His death and resurrection, and none of it had to do with God killing His Son to appease His anger for our sins.

Think about it just a minute. Would you being angry at someone to the point of killing them take that anger out on your own son who always did you right and kill him instead, so you could feel better about the person who made you angry? I certainly hope not! What kind of person does that? More importantly, what kind of message does that speak about God if we think He did that?...And most importantly, this is never mentioned in the bible!

We are saved because God loves us and shown us mercy. No wrath required to love us and save us.

God Bless
ditto its never mentioned nor implied the Father was ANGRY which is what wrath means along with retribution, vengeance, indignation, fury, rage, revenge. Its back to the greek and pagan gods of anger that need to be appeased/soothed for their wrath. its whay they sacrificed children to molech.
 
Where is the wrath?

Nowhere in the bible is it mentioned that God the Father poured wrath out upon His own Son that He sent to save us?

Surely, something as important as that would be the central theme expounded upon by the NT authors.

So where is it taught by any NT writer?

To put things into perspective from the KJV.
The word punish is used one time in the NT. (Acts 4:21)
The word punished is used four times in the NT. (Acts 22:5, Acts 26:11, 2Th 1:9, 2Pe 2:9)
The word punishment is used four times in the NT. (Matt 25:46, 2Cor 2:6, Heb 10:29, 1 Pe 2:14)
The word wrath is used 38 times in the NT

Of all these instances, not one time are any of these words used towards our Lord not once.

What about purgatory. Is it a truthful doctrine? Nothing is mentioned about purgatory and yet it is believed by many people.

No matter your belief, the bible is the baseline for doctrine. If it is not in it, then don't believe it.

Jesus never suffered the wrath of God. You cannot find it stated, implied, or taught by any NT author, and the Apostle Paul is very concise and clear in his letters.

Just like purgatory is an erroneous doctrine fashioned by the uninspired thoughts of man, so too is the doctrine of PSA and God pouring wrath out upon His Son.

If you disagree, then the onus is upon you to use the bible in context and prove it.

What you will find is the purpose of His death and resurrection, and none of it had to do with God killing His Son to appease His anger for our sins.

Think about it just a minute. Would you being angry at someone to the point of killing them take that anger out on your own son who always did you right and kill him instead, so you could feel better about the person who made you angry? I certainly hope not! What kind of person does that? More importantly, what kind of message does that speak about God if we think He did that?...And most importantly, this is never mentioned in the bible!

We are saved because God loves us and shown us mercy. No wrath required to love us and save us.

God Bless
PSA goes right along with the ULI in tulip- an assault of the nature/character of God and throw double predestination in there along with divine determinism that the WCF and other creeds of calvinism teaches,

And I wear my opposition to them as a badge of honor. Some paint it as hate calling this a calvinist hate site. I call it standing against everything, all strongholds that set themselves up against Christ and tearing them down. Those same sites belittle the non calvinists. I don't belittle anyone just the heretical teachings about the character and nature of our Good and Loving God who desires no one to perish but all to come to repentance. He forces no one to come because that would be unloving like those doctrines teach.

2 Cor 10
For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. 4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 6 And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your obedience is complete.

against the knowledge of God] For this phrase see Proverbs 2:5; Hosea 6:6; 1 Corinthians 15:34; Colossians 1:10, and the kindred phrase in Isaiah 11:9; 2 Peter 2:20. Here it signifies that by which we know God, i.e. the Gospel. See 1 Corinthians 2:10; 1 Corinthians 13:12; Galatians 4:9. cambridge commentary

against the knowledge of God—True knowledge makes men humble. Where there is exaltation of self, there knowledge of God is wanting [Bengel]. Arrange the words following thus: "Bringing every thought (that is, intent of the mind or will) into captivity to the obedience of Christ," that is, to obey Christ. The three steps of the apostle's spiritual warfare are: (1) It demolishes what is opposed to Christ; (2) It leads captive; (3) It brings into obedience to Christ (Ro 1:5; 16:26). The "reasonings" (English Version, "imaginations") are utterly "cast down." The "mental intents" (English Version, "thoughts") are taken willing captives, and tender the voluntary obedience of faith to Christ the Conqueror. JFB commentary

hope this helps !!!
 
Last edited:
It's quite simple really. Uses the same logic that builds the doctrine of the Trinity and the Deity of Christ.

The judgment of sin is wrath; we see this hundreds, nay, thousands of places in the Bible.

Jesus dies, he suffers, for sin.

Not just because sin is around and it's hurtful that it exists, that is not the meaning.

Thus we see the judgment of wrath associated with sin is connected to suffering for sin, as sin's punishment.
Again, you have deviated from providing scriptural proof, the smoking gun of belief, and using it contextually that God needed to wrathfully kill His Son to feel good about us. Nothing biblical so far that supports God pouring wrath upon His own Son.

What you're saying is God judged His own Son of sin when He never sinned. And you don't see the biblical wrong in that?

There is a difference between someone willingly sacrificing for the good of others. In the case of our Lord, He willingly gave up His life in love and obedience to God and love for us as a sin offering that effectively removed our sins. The reason why is, His death was purposed explicitly to redeem us from the curse of the Law, putting us under grace...."Adam’s one sin brings condemnation for everyone, but Christ’s one act of righteousness brings a right relationship with God and new life for everyone." (Rom 5:18)

God did not punish His Son. God did not curse His Son. God did not think of His Son as the worst sinner ever as PSA teachers spread. It is never mentioned in the bible one time. God does not need to do those things to bring us into relationship with Him.

Jesus did willingly die for our sins to bring us to God; this is true. Why? Because our sins alienated us from God.

God did condemn sin in the flesh; this is true. Why? So that we who believe would be led by His Spirit.

God never condemned His own Son; this is true. Why? Because it is never mentioned in the bible.

God Bless
 
Again, you have deviated from providing scriptural proof, the smoking gun of belief, and using it contextually that God needed to wrathfully kill His Son to feel good about us. Nothing biblical so far that supports God pouring wrath upon His own Son.

What you're saying is God judged His own Son of sin when He never sinned. And you don't see the biblical wrong in that?

There is a difference between someone willingly sacrificing for the good of others. In the case of our Lord, He willingly gave up His life in love and obedience to God and love for us as a sin offering that effectively removed our sins. The reason why is, His death was purposed explicitly to redeem us from the curse of the Law, putting us under grace...."Adam’s one sin brings condemnation for everyone, but Christ’s one act of righteousness brings a right relationship with God and new life for everyone." (Rom 5:18)

God did not punish His Son. God did not curse His Son. God did not think of His Son as the worst sinner ever as PSA teachers spread. It is never mentioned in the bible one time. God does not need to do those things to bring us into relationship with Him.

Jesus did willingly die for our sins to bring us to God; this is true. Why? Because our sins alienated us from God.

God did condemn sin in the flesh; this is true. Why? So that we who believe would be led by His Spirit.

God never condemned His own Son; this is true. Why? Because it is never mentioned in the bible.

God Bless
And all Gods children said : AMEN !
 
Just tell me what the Bible says,

the Law brings wrath

No, tell me what the Bible says,

the Law brings wrath

I swear I really wanna know

the Law brings wrath

I'm more sincere than you, you know

the Law brings wrath

I don't just preach what I've been taught

the Law brings wrath

I pray and think all for myself

the Law brings wrath

If you could only prove your point

the Law brings wrath

Maybe I'd admit you're right

the Law brings wrath

But all you got is eisegesis

the Law brings wrath

I purely read the words of Jesus

the Law brings wrath

So I'll dismiss ya, you got nuthin'

the Law brings wrath

Get a verse or you are frontin'

the Law brings wrath

yeah, you... you jus' got nuthin'

For the law brings wrath (Rom. 4:15)
 
Just tell me what the Bible says,

the Law brings wrath

No, tell me what the Bible says,

the Law brings wrath

I swear I really wanna know

the Law brings wrath

I'm more sincere than you, you know

the Law brings wrath

I don't just preach what I've been taught

the Law brings wrath

I pray and think all for myself

the Law brings wrath

If you could only prove your point

the Law brings wrath

Maybe I'd admit you're right

the Law brings wrath

But all you got is eisegesis

the Law brings wrath

I purely read the words of Jesus

the Law brings wrath

So I'll dismiss ya, you got nuthin'

the Law brings wrath

Get a verse or you are frontin'

the Law brings wrath

yeah, you... you jus' got nuthin'

For the law brings wrath (Rom. 4:15)
You keep quoting a portion of verse 15 as if that makes your case but far from it. The context of the Apostle Paul's lesson was to teach the Roman believers that Abraham was justified by faith in God not by doing good deeds.

"For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness," (Rom 4:3-5)

The Apostle continues to explain that "the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression.

That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring—not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”—in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist.
(Rom 4:13-17)

Context is everything. You are doing nothing different than the modalist who takes John 10:30 " I and the Father are one.”and uses it to substantiate their belief that Jesus is the Father. You have taken four words out of context to try and prove your belief that God the Father punished Jesus His Son for our sins. And that is not what it the Apostle Paul was teaching whatsoever.

You will never find in the bible where God the Father punished Jesus His Son for our sins. It is simply not there. If it were, you would not use verses out of context to prove your belief.

Personally, I love the point of verse 15, "where there is no law there is no transgression."

God Bless
 
Punishment is not mentioned in Rom 3:25-26

and hilasteron has been translated mercy seat, atoning sacrifice, expiation, propitiation

NIV84 God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished

LEB whom God made publicly available as the mercy seat through faith in his blood, for a demonstration of his righteousness, because of the passing over of previously committed sins

NRSV whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed;

RSV whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins;

NET God publicly displayed him at his death as the mercy seat accessible through faith. This was to demonstrate his righteousness, because God in his forbearance had passed over the sins previously committed.

CSB God presented him as the mercy seat by his blood, through faith, to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his restraint God passed over the sins previously committed.72% difference

NAB whom God set forth as an expiation, through faith, by his blood, to prove his righteousness because of the forgiveness of sins previously committed,

YLT whom God did set forth a mercy seat, through the faith in his blood, for the shewing forth of His righteousness, because of the passing over of the bygone sins in the forbearance of God—51% difference

NJB God appointed him as a sacrifice for reconciliation, through faith, by the shedding of his blood, and so showed his justness; first for the past, when sins went unpunished because he held his hand;

ISV whom God offered as a place where atonement by Christ’s blood could occur through faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because he had waited patiently to deal with sins committed in the past

EHV whom God publicly displayed as the atonement seat through faith in his blood. God did this to demonstrate his justice, since, in his divine restraint, he had left the sins that were committed earlier unpunished.
 
I know my sins deserve punishment.

I guess only God can reveal that.

It's why unsaved and even some believers think hell is just too harsh.
 
Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased Hashem to bruise him; He hath put him to suffering; when Thou shalt make his nefesh an asham offering for sin, he (Moshiach) shall see zera [see Psalm 16 and Yn 1:12 OJBC], He shall prolong his yamim (days) and the chefetz Hashem (pleasure, will of Hashem) shall prosper in his [Moshiach's] hand.
Isa 53:11 He [Hashem] shall see of the travail of his [Moshiach's] nefesh, and shall be satisfied; by knowledge of him [Moshiach] shall Tzadik Avdi ["My Righteous Servant," Moshiach, Zecharyah 3:8, Yirmeyah 23:5; Zecharyah 6:11-12, Ezra 3:8 Yehoshua, Yeshua shmo] justify many (Ro 5:1); for he [Moshiach] shall bear their avon (iniquities).
Isa 53:12 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 nefesh unto mavet (death); and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he nasah (Lv 16:22, carried) (like the Yom Kippur scapegoat) the sin of many, and made intercession [did the work of a mafgi'a, intercessor] for the transgressors [see Lk 23:34 OJBC].
 
Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased Hashem to bruise him; He hath put him to suffering; when Thou shalt make his nefesh an asham offering for sin, he (Moshiach) shall see zera [see Psalm 16 and Yn 1:12 OJBC], He shall prolong his yamim (days) and the chefetz Hashem (pleasure, will of Hashem) shall prosper in his [Moshiach's] hand.
Isa 53:11 He [Hashem] shall see of the travail of his [Moshiach's] nefesh, and shall be satisfied; by knowledge of him [Moshiach] shall Tzadik Avdi ["My Righteous Servant," Moshiach, Zecharyah 3:8, Yirmeyah 23:5; Zecharyah 6:11-12, Ezra 3:8 Yehoshua, Yeshua shmo] justify many (Ro 5:1); for he [Moshiach] shall bear their avon (iniquities).
Isa 53:12 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 nefesh unto mavet (death); and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he nasah (Lv 16:22, carried) (like the Yom Kippur scapegoat) the sin of many, and made intercession [did the work of a mafgi'a, intercessor] for the transgressors [see Lk 23:34 OJBC].
I support Christus Victor over Penal Substitutionary Atonement, so I agree with the basic CONCLUSIONS of the OP ... However, I prefer HONEST discussion and I thank you for both:
  1. Presenting SCRIPTURE (so we can look at the WORD rather than debate opinions)
  2. Recognizing that PSA is not without Biblical support (or it would not exist).
So a BIG (y).
 
Now to see if anyone will take up the gauntlet and honestly address Isaiah 53 from the "no WRATH" position.
Back to one of the most used passages to support PSA.

Is 53:10 which can also mean meek , humble not not just crushed . See Brown Driver and Briggs OT lexicon for proof .

Isaiah 53:10
Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand

Below we see the same Hebrew word has various meanings.

Psalm 34:18
The LORD is near to the brokenhearted; He saves the contrite in spirit.

Jeremiah 44:10
To this day they have not humbled themselves or shown reverence, nor have they followed my law and the decrees I set before you and your ancestors.

The word means humbled, contrite, meek see BDB- Brown Driver Briggs lexicon of the O.T.

So Isaiah 53:10 can read it was the Lords will to humble him and cause him to suffer.


The fact is the Father did not kill the Son nor was He responsible for His death. The Son did not suffer any wrath from the Father . The NT evidence from Jesus and the Apostle’s say otherwise.

hope this helps !!!
 
To put things into perspective from the KJV.
The word punish is used one time in the NT. (Acts 4:21)
The word punished is used four times in the NT. (Acts 22:5, Acts 26:11, 2Th 1:9, 2Pe 2:9)
The word punishment is used four times in the NT. (Matt 25:46, 2Cor 2:6, Heb 10:29, 1 Pe 2:14)
The word wrath is used 38 times in the NT
How about "propitiation"?

propitiation [Merriam-Webster]: the act of gaining or regaining the favor or goodwill of someone or something : the act of propitiating : appeasement (a sacrifice in propitiation of the gods); something that propitiates or appeases: an atoning sacrifice.
 
How about "propitiation"?

propitiation [Merriam-Webster]: the act of gaining or regaining the favor or goodwill of someone or something : the act of propitiating : appeasement (a sacrifice in propitiation of the gods); something that propitiates or appeases: an atoning sacrifice.
The Bible leans on Expiation rather than propitiation in both N.T. and O.T. understanding.

Thayers
ἱλασμός
, ἱλασμοῦ, ὁ (ἱλάσκομαι);

1. an appeasing, propitiating, Vulg.propitiatio (Plutarch, de sera num. vind. c. 17; plural joined with καθαρμοι, Plutarch, Sol. 12; with the genitive of the object τῶν θεῶν, the Orphica Arg. 39; Plutarch, Fab. 18; θεῶν μῆνιν ἱλασμοῦ καί χαριστηριων δεομένην, vit. Camill. 7 at the end; ποιεῖσθαι ἱλασμόν, of a priest offering an expiatory sacrifice, 2 Macc. 3:33).
; προσοίσουσιν ἱλασμόν, for חַטָּאת, Ezekiel 44:27; περί τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν, of Christ, 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10 (κριός τοῦ ἱλασμοῦ, Numbers 5:8; (cf. ἡμέρα τοῦ ἱλασμοῦ, Leviticus 25:9); also for סְלִיחָה, forgiveness, Psalm 129:4 (); Daniel 9:9, Theod.). (Cf. Trench, § lxxvii.

1 John 2:2- Propitiation- Cambridge
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.


Better Translations of 1 John 2:2

New American Bible

He is expiation for our sins, and not for our sins only but for those of the whole world.

NET Bible
and he himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for our sins but also for the whole world.

New Revised Standard Version
and he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.

New International Version
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Berean Standard Bible
He Himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

International Standard Version
It is he who is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the whole world's.

Here is the only other use from 1 John 4:10 that the NASB translated as propitiation.

Below love is used 13 times which is the overwhelming evidence it means atoning sacrifice, expiation and not propitiation which would be in direct contradiction to the context of the passage and Johns emphasis on Gods love used 13 times in the passage. Context determines the meaning of a word and its clear from the context hilasmos means expiation and not propitiation.

1 John 4:7-12
7 Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. 9 This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. 10 This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. 11 Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. 12 No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us. NIV

Now here is the interesting thing its used in the context of Gods love, not Gods anger/wrath that needs appeasing. There are better translations of the Greek word below. The "context" makes it clear in 1 John 4 that its Gods love and not His anger/wrath that needs appeasing that is the emphasis in the passage.

New International Version
This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.

New American Bible
In this is love: not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as expiation for our sins.

NET Bible
In this is love: not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.

New Revised Standard Version
In this is love, not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.

hope this helps !!!
 
Isaiah 53:10
Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand

Below we see the same Hebrew word has various meanings.

Psalm 34:18
The LORD is near to the brokenhearted; He saves the contrite in spirit.

Jeremiah 44:10
To this day they have not humbled themselves or shown reverence, nor have they followed my law and the decrees I set before you and your ancestors.

The word means humbled, contrite, meek see BDB- Brown Driver Briggs lexicon of the O.T.

So Isaiah 53:10 can read it was the Lords will to humble him and cause him to suffer.
"The experts all translated it into English incorrectly" is a weak explanation. [Just my opinion.]

What are YOUR credentials that we can compare your retranslation of Isaiah 53:10 to the credentials of the other translation teams?
Do you have another modern English translation that renders it "humble"?
 
Back
Top Bottom