mako excellent research or knowledge i learned alot I didn't know, Namaste sheri

Never heard of Messianic Jews then, have you. Or aren't they "real" Jews.

I guess you don't think they are real Jews. That's convenient

Regards, PA

btw, has anyone noticed that information supporting Christianity in any way is classified as "apologetic crap" or some other such, whereas sources aimed totally at bagging Christianity out are considered by the skeptics as good, balanced reporting. When in reality it is nothing more than biased non-Christian apologetic crap...........

Is a xian who becomes a muslim still a xian? no! or a jew who becomes a buddhist? no!you wouldn't even raise the question. When I quoted a jewish source, it was ignored. jewish sources aren't trying to convert xians, just trying to rescue jews froim assimilation and preserve jewish heritage. jews that convert are jews that convert. "messianic jewish" organizations are fronts for xian missionaries. jews don't need to "apologize", or try to convert anyone. that is the difference. Why didn't xians all follow muhammed? or, for that matter, joseph smith? or baha'i? why should we stop at xianity? I think all xians that convert to islam should refer to themselves as "completed Christians". would that not bother you! Tell the truth and shame the devil, pa. it would tear your guts out.are "completed xians", who follow muhamed, still xians? maybe a new topic?

The difference, Gideon, is that to be a Jew is also a nationality. It's like being American, or being Australian. If I move to America, I'll still be an Australian, even if I get residency over there.

I think you should come to Allah and become a completed Christian. You would understand if you read the Holy Koran and gave it a chance, and accepted that Muhammed is the next true prophet of God after Yeshu. Let Allah into your heart. Why don't you become a completeed Christian and come back to God? Take the next step.

Because Muhammed denies the divinity of Jesus, a blatantly unbiblical principle, since the Bible makes it clear that Jesus is divine. Therefore, I have no option but to think that Muhamed is not worshipping God correctly.

I think you should answer my question. Are Jews a nationality or not? Are Jews by birth, who become CHrisitan (ie, Messianic Jews), still Jews?

You are right, the divinity oif jesus is non-biblical.

You purposely misunderstood my post! You know what I meant. Muhammed's teaching is blatantly unbiblical. I edited my last post to make that obvious to anyone else who feels like ignoring what I'm actually trying to say.

However, you still didn't answer my question..........

Tags, just wondering who died and made you queen? It is standard on this forum for about three or four subjects to be discussed on a thread!

^^
It's common but it's not really polite.

but jesus's divinity was voted on at the council of nicea in 325 because it is emphatically not biblical. why do you insist he was god when he didn't believe it himself? a jew who abandons his religion and becomes an xian or anything else is an apostate, very simply. Cut off from his people as if dead. But you can repent at any time and come back to god. Haven't you ever heard of the law of return? How can any xian know nothing of judiasm? How does that work? As an outsider I have studied both. However, I can't figure why a xian wouldn't be a jew first anyway, and follow the law as jesus taught, not to be changed.

PA I guess they could say that christians and other faith do not worship God correctly either

Gideon you seem to forget that Jesus was a Jew. As a child of twelve he ammazed the Scribes in Jerusalem with his knowlege of the scriptures. He said that he did not come to 'do away with the law of Moses but to fulfill it'. Any Jew who follows Yeshu is actually more Jewish than those who dont.They have seen the Messiah, who came first to suffer for Isreals sins and the sins of the gentiles, and who will come again in Great Majesty and glory to bring peace.
Anyone who places their faith in Yeshu are the children of promise, I am a Child of Abraham and an heir to the promise. As God has said,

"As for me, this is my covenant with you: You shall be the ancestor of a multitude of nations. No longer shall your name be Abram, but your name shall be Abraham; for I have made you the ancestor of a multitude of nations. I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you, and kings shall come from you. I will establish my covenant between me and you, and your offspring after you throughout their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you."

I could say the same to you. I started this thread funnily enough to hear others opinions on the topic in question, and not to start tit for tat petty discourses. Any way mako did you just post this for the sake of hearing yourself spout of?, because you havent even added anything of value to the thread, except criticism.

since Jesus was a myth, deliberately invented to impress the pagans of the fourth century, any Jew who follows him is a fool, an apostate. Why don't you become a Muslim or a Mormon? I coulc say you would be more of a christian if you only followed Mohammed.
Did you know that Muslims teach he was prophesied in the new testament? So, we should refer to Muslims as "Perfected Christians". If you don't like that, stop saying crap like "Yeshu was Jewish". He was no more the Messiah than Peter Pan. Peter Pan is as real, maybe more.

Being not one prone to memorization...

The Old Testament predicted that another testament would replace it (Jer. 31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in the New Testament. However, the New Testament does not, in turn, predict that it will be replaced by the teachings of Mohammed or any other Divine revelation. Instead it teaches that it is itself the final revelation. [Heb. 13:20f; 7:11-28; 8:6-13; 12:18-29]

also, doesn't this seem to speak against the prophetic nature of Islam, assuming that Ishmael originates them?

Then God said, "Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. [d] I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. 20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation. 21 But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year." 22 When he had finished speaking with Abraham, God went up from him.

Then when Gideon Mage pointed out that if you went to the original source (the Hebrew Bible written in Hebrew) that the tense was past tense, which meant that it was not a prophecy, y'all all seemed to want to argue. It was against what you wanted to believe, and even though it was from "the horse's mouth", you did not want to accept it! Strange how people ask for opinions and then ignore those that have the actual information!


Any time someone tries to falsely use history to promote their religion, I will answer and give what history actually reports. If you don't like it, well as they said in Vietnam - Sin Loi Sao (Sorry about that)!

mako, once you realize that xianity is based on ignorance of judiasm and hebrew, it makes more sense.

Point well made Gid...

Do you think that by advising me to become a Muslim will really provoke the kind of reactions you are displaying Gideon? I am entirely confident that Jesus is the Messiah, the one promised in the Jewish Scriptures and the one who came to redeem Isreal , the Gentiles and ultimetely the entire cosmos from the consequences of sin.
I am on the other hand sensing that you are not entirely confident that you are correct about Yeshu. "Taste and see that the lord is good". If you cannot see Yeshu in the tabernacle, in the passover story and in the prophets you are doing so willfully.
Look at the tabernacle, it has Yeshu written all over it! Do some research on the connections (or if you prefer, alleged connections) between it and Yeshu,- It is compelling! What you should stop doing is burying your head in the sand and face up to and acknowlege your Messiah.

I realize you feel hurt, which is what Jews feel when you guys spout your nonsense. From the virgin birth (not in Isaiah) to the revelation (a political tract to attack emperor Nero, misunderstood as world-end prophecy by the church councils). Aww, poor little Christian. the entire nt is about the worst, ill-conceived bunch of crap ever written. and you didn't spell "Israel" right. Like the nt authors, you haven't a clue about the Hebrew language or the Jewish Scriptures.you are the one burying your head. I am fine, and I am truly sorry you were hurt so much by my comments. I have been studying this stuff over thirty years. He ain't my damned messiah, and, duh, I'm not a jew. I argue on the side of logic. I try to educate people. I could argue Hinduism v.s. Buddhism if needed, but you people on this website keep bickering about Yeshu. Have you read a Jewish translation of Isaiah 53, where he speaks about the sufferings the Hebrew people are about to face? the servant is identified as "Jacob" over 60 times in Isaiah. Isaiah is certainly not speaking of the dead jew on a stick religion. go ahead, mumble something else and further prove my point. go ahead.

First I want to say GM thanks for the "dead jew on a stick" reference, I loved it.
I have to agree with you on the point that tags hasn't read the link you sent him. It amazes me too that someone is going to go to all the trouble of creating an arguement and not read all the material available. It appears he wants you to respect his view but he's not giving your view any weight at all. What a shame, what a shame and knowledge is such a good thing.

How can you speak on respect while condoning such a disrespectable statement such as.



Can you say hypocrite

Lighten up old boy. (handing you the jug)

Hah. Tell that to the rioteers in the middle east currently. I don't think seeing that statement as offensive is being too sensitive.

I think they need to lighten up too (hands them the jug)

good call C

I think you have missed my point here Gid,- I am not hurt in the slightest! And because of your childish posts I may as well join you (as I dont think you will or can stop) and say; Aww poor little whatever you are. You have been studying this 'stuff' for thirty years, (whatever 'stuff' means, youd think that if you studied something for such a long time youd be able to define it!) and you still have not worked out that Isaiah 53 is actually not yet fullfilled?
And before everyone jumps on me the aspects regarding the nature of messiahs death etc has been fullfilled but the element where the jewish people state;
4 Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows,
yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.

5 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.

these aspects are still to be fullfilled at the second coming of Christ when the Jewish Nation will realise their mistake in not regarding Jesus as Messiah!

Have to agree with Gideon and Mako, the tense used in the Hebrew "bible" (written in Hebrew) is past tense, something that happened in the past, not the future and as such could not refer to a person living half a millenium later. Evdentially those scribes putting together the Christian bible realized this and changed the tense - afterall, who other than churchmen could read, the first thing the Christians destroyed was the education system! - the Wolf

The tense is ambiguous, as far as I can tell. It could be past, present or future!

It is clearly in the past tense. Whenever Yeshayahu the prophet speaks of the servant he means Israel, the people. He says the servant is "Jacob, my chosen" many, many times.

Yes this is one interpretation, however it is one which many well respected Rabbis in the past have disagreed with. Fact.

Fact???

you were going to quote a rabbi who disagrees with Isaiah saying "Jacob"? But Isaiah clearly says Jacob, every time he mentions the servant.

Thats not the point, the fact is Isaiah 53 has been accepted as a messianic prophecy. You were arguing earlier that the servant was the nation of Isreal. And yes Beckys Mom 'Fact'.

Then quote a Rabbi. You don't have one to refer to, which means you are resorting to Eusebius's technique and lying outright. Go ahead, be a typical lying hypocritical xian. Continue. Nest, my prediction is you will say something really stupid like, "Most Jews today really believe that Jesus was the Messiah. They are just afraid to admit it or the
Mosad will hunt them down and kill them."

Gideon I have taken alot of personal abuse from you, so have fellow Christians whom you vehemently and ignorantly redicule and insult. Although I have words to describe you I will not type them because I have a respect for others, instead I will just say this, you have absolutly no manners and are really unappealling to converse with. Not because you have a different opinion to me (i enjoy discussion with people whom have different views to me), but because of your insulting, childish, foolish and hurtful comments. If you do not enjoy hearing other peoples comments, and cannot control your insults then maybe a discussion forum is not the place for someone like you.

But here is your few Rabbinical quotes you desire frome this site

http://www.cbn.com/spirituallife/biblestud...p?option=print;

"What do the early rabbis say?

Some of the first written interpretations or targums (ancient paraphrases on biblical texts) see this passage as referring to an individual servant, the Messiah, who would suffer. Messianic Jewish talmudist, Rachmiel Frydland, recounts those early views:(3)

"Our ancient commentators with one accord noted that the context clearly speaks of God's Anointed One, the Messiah. The Aramaic translation of this chapter, ascribed to Rabbi Jonathan ben Uzziel, a disciple of Hillel who lived early in the second century c.e., begins with the simple and worthy words:


'Behold my servant Messiah shall prosper; he shall be high, and increase, and be exceeding strong: as the house of Israel looked to him through many days, because their countenance was darkened among the peoples, and their complexion beyond the sons of men (Targum Jonathan on Isaiah 53, ad locum).'"

"We find the same interpretation in the Babylonian Talmud:


What is his [the Messiah's] name? The Rabbis said: His name is "the leper scholar," as it is written, "Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him a leper, smitten of God, and afflicted." (Sanhedrin 98b)

"Similarly, in an explanation of Ruth 2:14 in the Midrash Rabbah it states:


He is speaking of the King Messiah: "Come hither" draw near to the throne "and dip thy morsel in the vinegar," this refers to the chastisements, as it is said, "But he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities."

"The Zohar, in its interpretation of Isaiah 53, points to the Messiah as well:


There is in the Garden of Eden a palace named the Palace of the Sons of Sickness. This palace the Messiah enters, and He summons every pain and every chastisement of Israel. All of these come and rest upon Him. And had He not thus lightened them upon Himself, there had been no man able to bear Israel's chastisements for the trangression of the law; as it is written, "Surely our sicknesses he has carried." (Zohar II, 212a)

The early sages expected a personal Messiah to fulfill the Isaiah prophecy. No alternative interpretation was applied to this passage until the Middle Ages. And then, a completely different view was presented. This view was popularized by Jewish commentator Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Itzchaki), who lived one thousand years after Jesus. "

Another part of the site states;

"Isaiah 53 is a well-known passage of Scripture to the avid student of the Bible. But most people are not avid Bible students and have not read this controversial passage. A recent informal survey illustrates this point.(1) One hundred Jews on the streets of Tel Aviv were asked, "Who do you think the 53rd chapter of Isaiah describes?" Most were unfamiliar with the passage and were asked to read it before answering. After doing so, many conceded that they did not know to whom it referred.
Some thought it was Jesus, but when it sunk in that the passage was a citation from the Tenach, they were put off. Others shrugged off the passage as too difficult to understand. Some repeated what they had heard from Jews more religious than themselves: that it referred to the Jewish people or perhaps even the gentile nations. All seemed to think that whomever it referred to, it wouldn't make much difference in their daily lives.

Israel is unique inasmuch as it is probably the only place on earth where you can spend a couple of hours on a public street and be assured of getting one hundred Jewish opinions. (Not that our people outside of Israel are adverse to giving opinions, it's just difficult to find such a high concentration of us in any one place.) But Israel is not unique when it comes to the Jewish response to Isaiah 53. There is really no consensus based on personal knowledge of the passage. People either have not read it or they have accepted a status quo interpretation, or both.

One might think the passage is obscure and irrelevant based on the fact that so many people are unfamiliar with it. That unfamiliarity in part stems from the fact that Isaiah 53 does not appear in the regular synagogue calendar readings. Yet it could be argued that the very fact that it is left out shouts out the importance of this passage. Even the reasons for omitting it point to the uniqueness of this passage. For example, one Jewish scholar, Claude Montefiore, explained: "Because of the christological interpretation given to the chapter by Christians it is omitted from the series of prophetical lessons for the Deuteronomy Sabbaths … the omission is deliberate and striking."(2)

Why is the omission so striking? Because when we finish the cycle of readings for the year, we haven't really finished it. We've left out a portion from our own prophets, ostensibly because of what Christians think about it. Since when does the Christian interpretation of Jewish Scripture have a bearing on what is or is not read in synagogues all over the world?

The omission is striking because of what Montefiore does not quite say. It is not simply because of the Christian interpretation that the Isaiah passage is omitted. After all, the services from which it is omitted are not for Christian ears. They are for Jews. What does that imply? The problem is not what Christians think of the passage. The problem (according to those who omitted the passage) is what Jews might think."

Has Gideon nothing to say?

Gideon, to say the prophecy was about Israel is pretty funny because let's be honost, Israel was not sinless and without sin. Infact, they were a sinful nation. Also funny how you said that you have the "true" way it should be translated. Funny because I read how a Jewish man who wanted to discover who this Jesus was that the Rabbis kept speaking negatively about, and he discovered the Isaiah 53 prophecy was one of the least verses known by Jews, and the Rabbis never mention that verse. Turns out the guy thought that the translation must be wrong, but he read it in Hebrew, and what do you know, it was exactly the same.

Might want to also take a look at this site...
http://www.jewsforjesus.org/publications/i...s/13_6/isaiah53

And the people who keep stating the Bible is nothing but fables, at least say why with some facts because opinion based on nothing has means nothing.

Well for one thing the stories are repeated from fables and myths. The bibles have embellished the stories to fit their purpose. If you study mythology and pagan fables you will find the similarities are very close.

Example being...

Virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection ect... just to name a few.

You failed to answer when all you can quote is from cbn. Who cares what they say? And paper tiger, a jew for jesus is a christian; there is no distinction. The "jews for Jesus" movement is funded by fundie xian churches, to the tune of millions of dollars a year.


did any of you even try:

http://p069.ezboard.com/fmessiahtruthfrm1

I doubt it. I would shake your "faith" to much to hear what real Jews think about this trash.
Let's see what Isaiah says about the servant, starting in Chapter 41:

later, in Chapter 44,


these are but two examples. If you read the entire book of Isaiah, instead of what your preacher or priest told you to read, you might learn something. Oh yes, find a Jewish translation.

http://www.chabad.org/library/article.asp?AID=63255

free, on the web! learn something and stop being a parrot.

Polly want a cracker?

Gideon now that you have your quotes you say 'who cares what they say'!! Oh foolish man, please comment on the rabbi statements within the article, surely you give some credance or respect to what they say. As you have asserted earlier that no rabbi has every interreted isaiah 53 as messianic and i have proven you wrong, do I get an apology? i think not. Shame on you Gid, You have let yourself down, in both your attitude to others here and in your unwillingness to concede that you are wrong!!!

Here one last time for you and all to see is the Rabbi thoughts on Isaiah 53; enjoy Gid,
and please do reply, I could do with a laugh! (its not cbn this time.)

from
http://www.hearnow.org/isa_com.html


Isaiah 53:How Do the Rabbis Interpret This?

Rabbi Moses Alschech(1508-1600) says:
"Our Rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the Messiah, and we shall ourselves also adhere to the same view."

Abrabanel (1437-1508) said earlier:
"This is also the opinion of our own learned men in the majority of their Midrashim."

Rabbi Yafeth Ben Ali ( second half of the 10th Century):"As for myself, I am inclined to regard it as alluding to the Messiah."

Abraham Farissol ( 1451- 1526) says:"In this chapter there seem to be considerable resemblances and allusions to the work of the Christian Messiah and to the events which are asserted to have happened to Him, so that no other prophecy is to be found the gist and subject of which can be so immediately applied to Him."

Targum Jonathan ( 4th Century ) gives the introduction on Isa. 52:13:
"Behold, my servant the Messiah..."

Gersonides (1288-1344) on Deut. 18:18:
"In fact Messiah is such a prophet, as it is stated in the Midrasch on the verse,'Behold, my servant shall prosper...' (Isa. 52:13)."

Midrash Tanchuma:
"He was more exalted than Abraham, more extolled than Mose, higher than the archangels" (Isa.52:13).

Yalkut Schimeon ( ascribed to Rabbi Simeon Kara, 12th Century ) says on Zech.4:7:
"He ( the king Messiah ) is greater than the patriarchs, as it is said, 'My servant shall be high, and lifted up, and lofty exceedingly' (Isa. 52:13)."

Maimonides (1135-12O4) wrote to Rabbi Jacob Alfajumi:
"Likewise said Isaiah that He (Messiah) would appear without acknowledging a father or mother: 'He grew up before him as a tender plant and as a root out of a dry ground' etc. (Isa.53:2)."

Tanchuma:
"Rabbi Nachman says: ,The Word MAN in the passage, 'Every man a head of the house of his father' (Num.1,4), refers to the Messiah, the son of David, as it is written, 'Behold the man whose name is Zemach'(the Branch) where Jonathan interprets,'Behold the man Messiah' (Zech.6:12); and so it is said,'A man of pains and known to sickness' (Isa.53:3)."

Talmud Sanhedrin (98b):"Messiah ...what is his name? The Rabbis say,'The leprous one'; those of the house of the Rabbi (Jehuda Hanassi, the author of the Mishna, 135-200) say: 'Cholaja' (The sickly), for it says, 'Surely he has borne our sicknesses' etc. (Isa.53,4)."

Pesiqta Rabbati (ca.845)on Isa. 61,10:"The world-fathers (patriarchs) will one day in the month of Nisan arise and say to (the Messiah): 'Ephraim, our righteous Anointed, although we are your grandparents, yet you are greater than we, for you have borne the sins of our children, as it says: 'But surely he has borne our sicknesses and carried our pains; yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted. But he was pierced because of our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was laid upon him and through his wounds we are healed'(Isa.53,4-5)."

Rabbi Simeon Ben Jochai (2.Century), Zohar,, part II, page 212a and III, page 218a, Amsterdam Ed.):
"There is in the garden of Eden a palace called : 'The palace of the sons of sickness, <, this palace the Messiah enters, and summons every sickness, every pain, and every chastisement of Israel: they all come and rest upon Him. And were it not that He had thus lightened them off Israel, and taken them upon Himself, there had been no man able to bear Israels chastisement for the transgression of the law; this is that which is written, 'Surely our sicknesses he has carried' Isa.53,4).- As they tell Him (the Messiah) of the misery of Israel in their captivity, and of those wicked ones among them who are not attentive to know their Lord, He lifts up His voice and weeps for their wickedness; and so it is written,'He was wounded for our transgressions' (Isa.53,5). Midrash (on Ruth 2,14): "He is speaking of the King Messiah - 'Come hither', i.e.">Draw near to the throne<; 'eat of the bread', i.e.>, The bread of the kingdom.' This refers to the chastisements<, as it is said, 'But he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities' (Isa.53,5). Rabbi Elijah de Vidas (16.Century) :
"The meaning of 'He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities' is, that since the Messiah bears our iniquities which produce the ef fect of His being bruised, it follows that whoever will not admit that Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself."

Siphre:
"Rabbi Jose the Galilean said, 'Come and learn the merits of the King Messiah and the reward of the Just - from the first man who received but one commandment, a prohibition, and transgressed it. Consider how many deaths were inflicted upon himself, upon his own generation, and upon those who followed them, till the end of all generations. Which attribute is greater, the attribute of goodness, or the attribute of vengeance?'- He answered, 'The attribute of goodness is greater, and the attribute of vengeance is the less.' - 'How much more then, will the King Messiah, who endures affliction and pains for the transgressions (as it is written, 'He was wounded,'etc.), justify all generations. This is the meaning of the word, 'And the LORD made the iniquity of us all to meet upon Him' (Isa.53:6)."

Rabbi Eleazer Kalir (9.Century) wrote the following Musaf Prayer:
"Our righteous Messiah has departed from us. Horror has seized us and we have no one to justify us. He has borne our transgressions and the yoke of our iniquities, and is wounded because of our transgressions. He bore our sins upon His shoulders that we may find pardon for our iniquity. We shall be healed by His wounds, at the time when the Eternal will recreate Him a new creature. Oh bring Him up from the circle of the earth, raise Him up from Seir, that we may hear Him the second time."

Rabbi Moses, 'The Preacher'(11. Century) wrote in his commentary on Genesis (page 660):
"From the beginning God has made a covenant with the Messiah and told Him,'My righteous Messiah, those who are entrusted to you, their sins will bring you into a heavy yoke'..And He answered, 'I gladly accept all these agonies in order that not one of Israel should be lost.' Immediately, the Messiah accepted all agonies with love, as it is written: 'He was oppressed and he was afflicted'."

Pesiqta (on Isa. 61:10):
"Great oppressions were laid upon You, as it says: 'By oppression and judgement he was taken away; but who considered in his time, that he was cut off out of the land of the living, that he was stricken because of the sins of our children' (Isa.53:8), as it says:'But the LORD has laid on him the guild of us all'(Isa.53:6)."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brith Hachadasha (The New Testament) gives the following references to Isaiah 53:

Isaiah 53:1
-"Even after he had done so many miraculous signs in their presence, they still would not believe in him. This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet: 'LORD, who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?'" (John 12:37&38).

Isaiah 53:1
-"But not all the Israelites accepted the good news. For Isaiah says, "LORD, who has believed our message?" - Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of God" (Rom.10:16&17).

Isaiah 53:4
-"He healed all the sick. This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: 'He took our infirmities' and carried our diseases' (Matth. 8:16&17)."

Isaiah 53:5-6
-"He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls" (1 Peter 2:24&25).

Isaiah 53:7-8
-"The passage of the Scripture which he reads was this: "He was led like a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb before the shearer is silent, so he did not open his mouth. In his humiliation he was deprived of justice. Who can speak of his descendants? For his life was taken from the earth<. The eunuch asked Philip, "Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?" Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus." (Acts 8,32-35).

Isaiah 53:9
-"He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth" (1 Peter 2:22).

Isaiah 53:7-8
-"The passage of the Scripture which he read was this: He was led like a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb before the shearer is silent, so he did not open his mouth. In his humiliation he was deprived of justice. Who can speak of his descendants? For his life was taken from the earth.' The eunuch asked Philip, "Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?" Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus" (Acts 8:32-35).

Isaiah 53:9
-"He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth" (1 Peter 2:22).

Isaiah 53:12
-"It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching fulfillment" (Luke 22:37).

Isaiah 53:12
-"They crucified two robbers with him, one on his right and one on his left. And the Scripture was fulfilled, which says: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors" (Mark 15:27 & 28)

As has been repeatedly pointed out, notice the past tense, not future tense of the "prophecy"....But then what can we expect from those that refuse to see that this religion is patently false and dying.

Why can the piece not be future tense? Do explain to us all clearly.

So you haven't even been to one Jewish website? Jews for Jesus are not Jews.

Okay, time for English as a second language lecture 207: Today we will study the three tenses; Past – Present – Future. We will use a translation of Yeshayahu (Isaiah) from the Hebrew bible which gives the original wording, not the much changed wording of the King James Version of the Christian bible which was translated from Greek and Latin.

“1. Who would have believed our report, and to whom was the arm of the Lord revealed?” ‘Would have believed and whom was' are past tense. Future tense would have been will believe and whom will be

“2. And he came up like a sapling before it, and like a root from dry ground, he had neither form nor comeliness; and we saw him that he had no appearance. Now shall we desire him?” ‘came up, had neither, and had no appearance ‘ are all past tense. Future tense would have been ‘will come up, will have neither, and will have no appearance’

“3. Despised and rejected by men, a man of pains and accustomed to illness, and as one who hides his face from us, despised and we held him of no account.” ‘Despised and rejected, accustomed to pain, and we held him of no account’ are all past tense. Future tense would have been ‘will be despised and rejected, will be accustomed to pain and we will hold him accountable’.

“4. Indeed, he bore our illnesses, and our pains-he carried them, yet we accounted him as plagued, smitten by God and oppressed.” ‘He bore, he carried , we accounted, plagued, smitten and oppressed’ are all past tense. Future tense would have been ‘he will bear, he will carry, we will account, will be plagued, smitten and oppressed’.

I could continue this all the way through the 12 verses, but hopefully you can now see the difference between past tense and future tense. Too bad you missed the day that your grade school teacher taught that subject.

This prophecy is recording what the Jews will say when Yeshua returns at his second coming OK. The prophecy is regarding a future event,-obviously this event entails the Jewish nation looking back and saying these things in the past tense. Indeed as you point out;
‘Despised and rejected, accustomed to pain, and we held him of no account’ are all past tense. Future tense would have been ‘will be despised and rejected, will be accustomed to pain and we will hold him accountable’.

“4. Indeed, he bore our illnesses, and our pains-he carried them, yet we accounted him as plagued, smitten by God and oppressed.” ‘He bore, he carried , we accounted, plagued, smitten and oppressed’ are all past tense. Future tense would have been ‘he will bear, he will carry, we will account, will be plagued, smitten and oppressed’.

Are you seeing the point now??? There is absolutly no reason why the prohesy cannot be in the future. It is simple if you only stop and think about it, instead of jumping in and making rash comments.
My English class is over. Thank you.
But post if you need any more help!!!