Brother AACOOLDRE : ISAIAH 53 wasn't talking about Jesus

Discussion in 'AACOOLDRE' started by AACOOLDRE, Apr 18, 2016.

  1. AACOOLDRE

    AACOOLDRE Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2001
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    364
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Teacher
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +400
    ISAIAH 53 Suffering Servant isn’t JESUS

    By Andre Austin

    When a thinking mind is compartmentalized he/she is unable to see the full picture. You are the judge of the data input into your brain. If you only receive part of the information you have been manipulated and brainwashed. When a new religion like Christianity spring boards off of another religion Judaism we have to ask the Hebrew Rabbi’s were they correct in hijacking their passages and verses. The answer is no.

    Rabbi Michael Skobac, director of Education and counseling, brings up 12 problems as to why Isaiah 53 isn’t talking about Jesus as the suffering servant. Feel free to go on youtube and peek out his lecture in full or go to the jewsforjudaism.com website. Here I will highlight the highlights of Jews knowing their own scriptures better than the distortions of Paul. Isaiah 53 is one of 4 poems in Isaiah. Isaiah 53 actually begins in chapter 52 verse 13. Point G is mine.


    A. The main reason Isaiah 53 isn’t talking about a single person. The suffering servant is the people of Israel. The Christian glove doesn’t fit so you must acquit and take Jesus out of the equation of the Talmud.

    B. Mistranslation of key important words. The suffering servant isn’t wounded for sins.

    C. The suffering servant is said to have a physical seed of children having a long life. Christianity has Jesus as a non-sexual monk dying at age 30.

    D. Suffering servant is dependent and contingent upon accepting this role by his own freewill. Christianity portrays Jesus as having no choice in the matter of suffering and dying.

    E. Isaiah 53:11 invokes knowledge as being part of the suffering servant. Knowledge is out of the equation in Christianity its his blood alone saving from sins.

    F. The suffering servant done no violence. The gospel depict Jesus whipping people in the temple and over turning tables, set pigs over a cliff, cursing fig tree’s etc.

    G. This has profound implications because in Acts 8:32-35 we have the Ethiopian eunuch reading a passage from Isaiah 53:7-8 and Paul applies to a Jesus he never met.

    There are many examples of God talking about Israel singularly but meaning it plural:

    Isaiah 49:3 + Isaiah 43:10

    Isaiah 54:17 Hosea 11:1

    Isaiah 41:8-9, Psalm 44:3, Exodus 3:20, Exodus 4:22

    Rabbi Michael Skobac suggest we also read Psalm 44:12-21 because it will help further explain what Isaiah 53 was all about.

    Rabbi Skobac further goes on to explain that nobody can be a substitute for your own individual sins. In other lectures he explains that repentance and turning away from sin was the key not animal sacrifices were just symbolic.

    Rabbi Skobac is upset that the Christians redefined the definition of Christ/Messiah in the OT we had Moses, David and King Cyrus that delivered the Jewish people from slavery, Political Persecution and Physical harm and abuse not saving from sins. Christianity made a 180 degree turn from its original definition and told people to endure slavery, political persecution and physical harm not to be saved or released from it. For example see:

    1 Sam 7:8

    Deuteronomy 22:27

    Exodos 14:30 & 15:2

    Judges 6:14

    Psalms 20:6

    In other lectures Skobac proves that Jesus didn’t have to die on the cross and that the book of Daniel wasn’t talking about Jesus either. He explain how Isaiah never talked about a Virgin birth and that Paul misquotes Isaiah 59: 20 in Romans 11:26 for the turning away from transgression/sin then redemption. Or in Hebrews 10:5-10 misquoting Psalms 40:7 has no mention of a body being prepared. Paul taught by tricks, lies and hate. I would go as far as to say that the original atonement idea came out of the war between the Jews and Romans between 66-70 AD where famine/starvation was the key element in defeating the Jews. There was cannibalism that went on with a famous starving Mary from the house of hyssop (sacrifice). This Mary eats her half her baby Lazarus. She predicts this cannibalism would be a “Byword” to the world and a Jewish calamity (War of the Jews Book 6 Chapter 3:201-219), another clamity of an adult Lazarus in in Book 7, 6, 194). I saw another context of the word Byword being used in Psalm 44:13-14 meaning reproach, scorn by their neighbors and the nation. The dictionary said Byword means one that personifies a Type, impression or model of something noteworthy or notorious. With Jesus being a composite I could see him like Lazarus “they made him a supper” (John 12:2-3). For the Jew cannibalism was a sin of military defeat:

    1. Lev 26:29

    2. Deuteronomy 28:45-57 Military seize results in Cannibalism

    3. Ezekiel Chapter 4 Siege of Jerusalem

    4. 2.Kings 6:25 Famine people eat a Donkey’s head for the same price for anointing the dead Lazarus who was made a supper John 12:2-3

    5. Isaiah Chapter 44 Idol made of wood and roasted half of the bread eaten resemble story in War of the Jews Book 6 Chapter 3:4 201-219 which becomes a parody of New Testament eating of Jesus. Roasted lamp in Exodus 12 and boil manna in Exodus 16

    Now you know what Gospels mean in Greek “Good news of military victory”. Which proves Paul was slinging OT passages out of context being a puppet from Rome.

    The best way to be forever deceived is by the corruption of the input of information flow, compartmentalization. Be like a Judge who gets all the facts, exhibits, documents and evidence from all sides then renders a judgement. The internet is like a courtroom allowing us an all-access pass of theological facts and opinions. When all is said and down I find it no possible way for a Jesus to be the suffering servant in Isaiah 53.
     
  2. AACOOLDRE

    AACOOLDRE Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2001
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    364
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Teacher
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +400
    THE BIGGEST CONTRADICTION OF THE BIBLE

    By Andre Austin


    “One source of counteracting a prejudicial attack is the use of arguments that might refute an unpleasant suspicion. For example: One should look to see if the opposite arguments are true of the opposite subject ,thus refuting the argument if it is not, confirming it if it is”- Aristotle

    In the Bible there are too many contradiction for me to handle. I have documented many of them in my pamphlet, Christianity On Trial. I accidentally came upon this contradiction the other day. It’s ironic that I came across this information as it was nearing Christmas. I titled this essay as a Big Contradiction because it cast serious doubts to the jugular vein, or the main tenets of Christianity. This essay exposes flaws in the belief that Jesus died on the cross in a manner and fashion of God wanting him to. You will discover contradictory information concerning the alleged ‘execution’ of Jesus. If these contradictions about Jesus’ death hold true, the information below will prove that God didn’t want Jesus to die. Christianity is ninety-nine percent based on the belief that Jesus died for mankind’s sins. If you don’t believe this principle, you can’t go to heaven. But if I prove this to be untrue, I will have attacked Christianity at its heart and proved it they recklessly applied OT quotes to Jesus life.


    It appears that Jesus is contradicting himself in the Bible; Or that somebody has tampered with the Bible, because Jesus is a man of God and He wouldn’t contradicted His Gospel of “truth” according to God’s will. Note, my Christian friend, to keep in mind three key words: (Pleased & Left or forsaken), because they are synonymous with each other as it relates to this essay and others.


    The Contradiction begins in two stages. The first stage is a pop quiz. When Jesus so called said: “My god, my god why hast thou forsaken me? Was this in (a) Hebrew Eli, Eli Matthew 27:46 or in Aramaic Eloi, Eloi Mark 15:34 ? Eli is short for Elohim root meaning power. The second stage of the contradiction comes out gradually with documents piling on top of eachother. Lets begin with a quote. “And he that sent me is with me; the father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him” (John 8:29). Now compare this quote with another. “ And he (Jesus) made his grave with the wicked and with the rich in his death... yet it pleased the lord to bruise him... when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin” (Isaiah 53:5?10). These two verses contradict Jesus’ statement when he was hanging on the cross alledgedly saying: “My God my God, why hast thou forsaken, me? (Matthew 27:46). If Jesus were one with God he wouldn’t have needed to ask God why he left him. Jesus couldn’t of asked this question because it makes the other two Bible verses untrue. Jesus was talking about his Ba (soul/air for breathing) was departing his Ka/Body). Right after he said his power (Ba) was leaving they said he gave up the ghost his wind for breathing air into his lungs.


    Notes:


    The Human Birth of Osiris


    Hymn 1:

    I say by Nut, the brilliant, the great: This is my son, my first-born, opener of my womb; this is my beloved, with whom I am pleased.


    This passage, first in the long sequence of Pyramid Text passages, is startling in its parallel with the New Testament record.


    Matt 3:17 -- And lo, a voice from heaven, saying, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased."

    Thayer's Greek Lexicon of the New Testament says that the usage is peculiar to Biblical writers, followed by en tini, to be well pleased with, take pleasure in, a person or thing. Mercer translates satisfied where Faulkner uses pleased.

    We can see the striking parallels, with exact similarity of phrasing:


    PT -- This is my son, . . . my beloved, . . . with whom I am pleased.

    NT -- This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.
     
Loading...

Users found this page by searching for:

  1. is isaiah 53 talking about blacks