DOC PREVIEW
LECTURE

This preview shows page 1-2-3 out of 9 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 9 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 9 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 9 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 9 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

1 Robert Vannoy, Major Prophets, Lecture 18 We just finished Isaiah 53 verse 4: “Surely he has borne our griefs, carried our sorrows.” We discussed the translation of that and more properly understood it is a reference to the healing ministry of Christ. Then in spite of these healings, those who saw his miracles did not understand who he was; we esteemed him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted when he was crucified. Let’s go onto verse 5 that gives the explanation. Here is the explanation of why he suffered, why he was stricken, why he was smitten. “He was wounded for our transgressions. He was bruised for our iniquities. The chastisement for our peace was upon him, with his stripes we are healed.” Verse five is the answer to the question of why this one was afflicted and why he suffered. It’s in verse five that you have the description of the atonement. 1 Peter 2:24 refers back to this as the atoning work of Christ. So verse five presents the idea of substitutionary atonement, and you get four parallel statements of that idea included in this one verse. “He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon him and with his stripes we are healed.” Those four parallel lines all present the idea of substitutionary atonement. That flows on into verse six, “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned everyone to his own way, and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.” This is probably the most familiar verse of the passage where this idea of substitutionary atonement is continued, and it’s made clear that the guilt of our iniquities were what were laid on Christ. “The Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.” So verses five and six teach the substitutionary atonement. Verse seven, “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth. He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter; and as a sheep before shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth.” You have the similar idea as in the previous passage in Isaiah 50 verse 6: “I gave my back to the smiters, my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair.” It’s voluntary submission. Here again is an indication that the one who is described2 in these verses is not the nation Israel. Now you get back to that issue of who is the servant? Is it Israel, or is it one distinguished from Israel, an individual? Clearly, this doesn’t apply well to Israel. “He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth. He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter; as a sheep before his shearers is dumb, and so he opened not his mouth.” That statement contrasts with the involuntary suffering of Israel in the exile. In previous chapters in Isaiah you find the complaints of Israel that hardly fit with the silent submissiveness statement of this verse. Verse eight speaks of the seeming hopelessness of his death: “He was taken from prison and from judgment; who shall declare his generations? For he was cut off out of the land of the living. For the transgression of my people was he stricken.” The seeming hopelessness of his death is seen in the rhetorical question: “Who shall declare his generations?” He died young; he had no descendants and no posterity. There were a small group of disciples that had been with him during the time of his ministry, but they all deserted him at the time of his death. And “he is cut off from the land of the living.” It seems hopeless. “He was taken from prison, from judgment who shall declare his generation? He’s cut off out of the land of the living.” The NIV says, “Who can speak of His descendants.” I think the point is, here’s a person who’s put to death and he doesn’t have any descendants. It seems like that’s the end. Then in the last phrase, the question is asked: Why? Why did this happen? The last phrase answers with substitutionary atonement again. It’s “for the transgression of my people that he was stricken.” Many Jewish people would probably see in these verses their whole history as being one of persecution and anti-semitic actions of one sort or another as they had been subjected to all kinds of abuse. Let’s go onto verse nine. Verse nine in the King James, the first phrase, reads, “And he made his grave with the wicked and with the rich in His death.” Look at your citations, page 32, again. I’ve taken a couple more paragraphs from MacRae. He has a very interesting discussion of verse nine that I think really helps understand, or bring out, the point that’s being made in verse nine relating it to the work of Christ. “The first half of verse nine is a remarkable prediction of an unusual3 circumstance that would occur in connection with the crucifixion of Christ. Here the translation of the King James Version is somewhat inaccurate. When the words are precisely translated, their relation to what occurred at the death of Christ becomes much clearer. This is particularly true of the first clause. Here the King James Version reads, ‘He made his grave…’ That should be grave, ‘with the wicked.’ However, the verb used is not ordinarily rendered as ‘make.’ Its most common translation is ‘give.’ It’s natan a very common Hebrew word. Its most common translation is ‘give’; it’s often used for appointing or assigning. As rendered in the King James Version it sounds as if the servant himself made his grave. So it says “he made his grave with the wicked.” Actually the phrase is impersonal. This is a usage common in many languages but not usually expressed this way in English. Our idiom would be ‘they assigned his grave’ or ‘his grave was assigned.’ The word rendered ‘the wicked,’ in ‘He made his grave with the wicked,’ the word rendered ‘the wicked’ in the King James is in the plural but has no article. That is in the Hebrew; it is in the plural but has no article. It’s resha’im in its plural form. It is more accurate to translate it as ‘wicked men’ and to render the whole clause ‘his grave was assigned with wicked men.’ “You see the way that flows. Since Jesus was crucified between two thieves, it would naturally be expected that he would be buried with them. The Roman custom was either to leave malefactors unburied or to disgrace them by burying a group together in an unclean place. In the King James Version, the verse continues ‘and with the


LECTURE

Download LECTURE
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view LECTURE and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view LECTURE 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?