In Matt. 8:14-17, Jesus healed Peter's mother-in-law, then he expelled demons and "cured all who fared badly." After reporting these events, Matthew applied Isa. 53:4 to Jesus: "He himself took our sicknesses and carried our diseases" (Matt. 8:17 NWT).
"Surely he hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows" (Isa. 53:4 KJV).
"But his form was ignoble, and inferior to that of the children of men; [he was] a man in suffering, and acquainted with the bearing of sickness, for his face is turned from [us]: he was dishonoured, and not esteemed. He bears our sins, and is pained for us: yet we accounted him to be in trouble, and in suffering, and in affliction" (Isa. 53:3-4 LXX).
"by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear
their iniquities" (Isa. 53:11 KJV).
According to the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus bore the sicknesses and sorrows of humanity when he cured infirm persons. His bearing their sicknesses did not mean that he literally took their pains upon him; he simply relieved them of their spiritual and physical burdens. I think the same principle can apply to 1 Pet. 2:24.
"The theme of one suffering on behalf of the sins of others is repeated in
Isa. 53:4, 5, 11, 12. Matthew interprets Isa. 53:4 LXX ('He bears our sins
and is pained for us') as referring both to spiritual and physical sickness
(Matt. 8:17), and Peter is adopting a similar line [in 1 Pet. 2:24]. In the
Talmud, Isa. 53:4 is taken to mean that Messiah is "the Leprous One" and the 'Sick One' (b. Sanh. 98b) . . . In the OT, to 'bear iniquity' (Lev. 5:17; Num. 14:34 RSV) means to suffer the penalty of its consequences" (Scott, James. 1 and 2 Peter, Jude, 90).
I might need to correct the reference to James Scott. Someone else might have penned the commentary I quote.
I was discussing with a Mormon about the identity of Jehovah. They say that Jesus is Jehovah, that they are two names for one uni-personal being. However, if Jesus is the suffering servant who willingly fulfills the will of Jehovah (Psalm 40:6-8) and he is the one sanctifying (and therefore stems from another), how can he be Jehovah? Isaiah 53 shows that Jesus will bring many to a righteous standing, and Hebrews says that he and his brothers all stem from God.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how Mormons work around the points you made, but in the Church, every "subordinationist" verse from the Bible is read through the perspective of Christ's kenosis or "Incarnation." That supposedly explains how Jesus is the suffering servant of YHWH, but he's also YHWH. Persons, relations, etc.
ReplyDeleteSo, is the exaltation of Christ the exaltation of his human nature? I would assume that they say so, but would this make our one Lord (1 Cor 8:6) Jesus according to his human nature? I recall reading a passage from Augustine that Jesus is the head of the Church according to his human nature (and yet Paul, a leading member of that Church was not made an apostle though a man). If so, then why do some say that Jesus being Lord makes him the LORD? If his human nature is our Lord it is not the LORD, so they must, it seems, that Lord does not mean the same as LORD, However, this seems to be a main argument that they bring forth. (Who is "my Lord," that David is talking about, Jesus the God, or Jesus the man?)
ReplyDeleteChrist is supposed to be LORD prior to becoming enfleshed, and he does not relinquish his divinity (being LORD) by becoming incarnate (as the story goes). I'm not sure which passage from Augustine that you have in mind, but I know that he adheres to the standard way of thinking about Christ's divinity and humanity--even if he provides his own spin.
ReplyDeleteFor Augustine and Aquinas (et al), there is the one person existing in two natures. Christ is eternally the God-man, so one cannot make a sharp distinction between Lord and LORD in this case. He is supposed to be THE LORD (the one and only).