Isaiah 53
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2015 8:15 pm
I have struggled with what I see as a contradiction in Isaiah 53.
Isaiah 53:4b seems to indicate we are mistaken to believe that Christ's suffering was inflicted by God, but is immediately contradicted in 53:6 and later it says that he was bruised and put to grief by God's pleasure (53:10).
So which is it?
I do find it interesting that the Greek translated "for" in 53:5 can also mean "by" and is so translated in the first line of 53:8. Therefore, Christ could be seen as not being wounded and bruised "for" but "by" the people's transgressions and iniquities.
In fact, my NET Bible translates "for" as "because of."
This would make sense because it was the people who as the NET translates 53:8 "was led away after an unjust trial... cut off from the land of the living, because of the rebellion of his own people he was wounded."
The further implications I am uncertain of as far as the translation of this chapter, but it at least seems contradictory that the author first indicates the people are mistaken that God is afflicting Christ then later says that God is afflicting Christ for us.
In my layman's opinion, it seems that the author could be saying that God did not afflict Christ, but Christ's suffering came from the people. And it seems the NET avoids the contradiction I find in other translations.
However, this would have serious implications on penal substitutionary atonement.
I can't imagine I am the only one to consider this issue. Has anybody else already studied this out and can shed more light on what seems like such a pivotal passage?
Isaiah 53:4b seems to indicate we are mistaken to believe that Christ's suffering was inflicted by God, but is immediately contradicted in 53:6 and later it says that he was bruised and put to grief by God's pleasure (53:10).
So which is it?
I do find it interesting that the Greek translated "for" in 53:5 can also mean "by" and is so translated in the first line of 53:8. Therefore, Christ could be seen as not being wounded and bruised "for" but "by" the people's transgressions and iniquities.
In fact, my NET Bible translates "for" as "because of."
This would make sense because it was the people who as the NET translates 53:8 "was led away after an unjust trial... cut off from the land of the living, because of the rebellion of his own people he was wounded."
The further implications I am uncertain of as far as the translation of this chapter, but it at least seems contradictory that the author first indicates the people are mistaken that God is afflicting Christ then later says that God is afflicting Christ for us.
In my layman's opinion, it seems that the author could be saying that God did not afflict Christ, but Christ's suffering came from the people. And it seems the NET avoids the contradiction I find in other translations.
However, this would have serious implications on penal substitutionary atonement.
I can't imagine I am the only one to consider this issue. Has anybody else already studied this out and can shed more light on what seems like such a pivotal passage?