2 Likes
Yes, I know you were not correcting the sequence of events. I was correcting myself. Jesus did say that He did not come to judge the world, but ā¦ this of course does not seem to have meant that He did not regard the world as not needing itā¦there is a Second Coming still lurking in the wings. Jesus made assertions that He knew He had come to carry the consequences of our sins, and He made them earlier than in the Garden of Gethsemane. The angels also told Mary about it --āhe will save his people from their sinsā (Matthew 1:21). There was also a good deal of expectation in that era that some sort of Jewish messianic figure ā also divine ā was soon to come.
The Gospels include āJewish Scriptureā because that was the totality of the biblical text of that era. āHe was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and familiar with suffering ā¦ he was despised and we esteemed him not. ā¦But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.ā ā¦Isaiah 53: 3a, 5.
The concept of a Suffering Messiah was part and parcel of Jewish tradition from ancient times up until our era. See Boyarin, Hurtado, Flintā¦likely others on this. The touchy-feely āsaw it on Oprahā sort of messiah that McCabe seems to imagine-- is something for our era. Interesting footnote but not the whole story. Jesus did not die because you or I have low self-esteem or a bad hair day.
, As for the matter of āa perceived gap between the Father and the sonā while Jesus was here āthat is the stuff of many a controversy over the past 2000 years. I have heard that argument also from people who think that, now that He is back on the throne, Jesus is able to tell them (not maybe you and me, but them) many things like the date and time of His Second Comingā¦and all that based on this perceived gap.
Letās not go down that road. When Jesus said āI and the Father are Oneā¦He who has seen Me has seen the Fatherā ā¦told the priests in the Temple that He [the young Jesus] must be in His Fatherās house (which His parents, who had lost track of Him, would have presumed was Nazareth) āand various other statementsā¦thatās about as close as we can come to anything. Beyond that is a struggleā¦
All for nowā¦and Happy Easter
Thanks, Mitchell. Appreciate your thoughts. I probably should just refer you to what I just said in response to Richard. And the quote from Jesus was not from the Garden of Gethsemane but earlier. The Judaism of that era was expecting a messianic figure to come ā a la Daniel 7 and other passages. Jesus in places linked Himself to those passages. Isaiah 53 ā āthe Suffering Servantā image ā includes that idea.
And if McCabe is/was Joseph McCabe ā then I have encountered his writings elsewhere along the way. But maybe there is another McCabe out there.
HAPPY EASTERā¦HE IS RISEN!! (and I mean physically as well)
I find the model presented by Myers informative:
The Patristic Atonement Model, by Benjamin Myers.
The Suffering servant in Isaiah is Israel, originally. It was repurposed to Jesus.
Richard
1 Like
It is Herbert McCabe
There seems to be two meanings in the āsuffering servantā.
First one is Israel as you wrote and as most Jewish readers understand the texts of Jewish scriptures. Jesus took and fulfilled the task that was given to Israel, to be the light of the world.
Some passages do not fit well to a group or tribe. In these passages, the suffering servant is clearly an individual and interpreting the individual as Israel leads to problematic conclusions.
Isaiah 53 (for example, 5-7) describes the one who is suffering for the sake of others. There are clearly two players (in addition to God), someone taking the burden (described as an individual) and āweā/āusā that will benefit from what the individual is doing. If we assume that both players are Israel, the meaning of the verses would become confusing. Hitting me will save me from the hit??
1 Like
Why should they be? The others can be other nations.
Richard
Thanks GJDSā¦different McCabe then
I have heard/read that interpretation as well, RichardGā¦but there are other sources, including Jewish sources, that say the account of Isaiah 53 was messianic in interpretation ā that is, an individual character. And this is something that has a history to it.
Obviously the Messianic interpretation existed before Christ because, in theory, the Jewish nation was looking for the Messiah. The fact they did not recognise Jesus is more due to their flawed expectations than the Scripture they had as a basis.
Palm Sunday goes down as the white elephant where Christ is proclaimed the wrong type of Saviour.
Richard
Thanksā¦and agree with first paragraphā¦what do you mean by
āPalm Sunday goes down as the white elephant where Christ is proclaimed the wrong type of Saviour.ā
I think that what Richard is saying is that on Palm Sunday Jesus came to Jerusalem as a king, but not the kind of king the cheering crowds expected him to be. The Pharisees understood the implications of the crowds cheering when they told Jesus to rebuke his disciples (ie. What will the Romans think!?).
1 Like
And when He did not live up to their expectations they turned on Him. There is no harder task than to live up to the expectations people have of you.
Richard
1 Like
Thanks Liam and also RichardGā¦and true ā by entering Jerusalem as He did, Jesus was fulfilling Messianic prophecy. Thus He was recognized that way by onlookers, whose messianic hopes were oriented in the direction of wanting deliverance from Rome. For this processional to occur at Passover time was likely especially fraught with meaning for them. And while riding a donkey might have been a symbol of peace, Jesusā first act was to go in and clean out an area of the Temple, which did not win Him friends in high places, and would have upset Rome
OKā¦thanks again for the explanationā¦ have a great week
1 Like
That is possible, in theory. In reality, it would be strange that a prophet of Israel would identify himself with pagan nations (āweā, āusā) instead of Israel. During those days, there was a big difference between the people of God (Israel) and the pagan nations worshipping idols. If you served God, you did not identify yourself as a member of the pagan nations.
The problem with Is 53 is that the details do not all match. Christ had no progeny (offspring) and there is no indication that Christ was disfigured or rejected by His appearance. Perhaps it does not matter when you are dealing with prophecy?
We are His Offspring (He said so Himself) But the early part is harder to rectify directly to Christ. He did not know physical pain all His life, just for a few days. He was no shunned or rejected until that last Friday.
Donāt get me wrong, I preach IS:53 as the prophecy of Christ, but I am showing you that there is still discussion, even now, as to what Isaiah was actually prophesying.
Richard
On Palm Sunday, on his way to Jerusalem, Jesus deliberately followed the route that ancient Kings of Israel would take on their way to their coronation.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.