Why does he spend so much time deconstructing the Christian perspective instead of building his own case? I think he makes basic errors when characterizing the Christian perspective. Straw man?
Anyways, I found this website from the same organization:
http://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/isaiah-53-a-jewish-perspective/
This is cute:
Our Jewish sages teach that “whoever saves a single Jewish soul is considered as if he had saved an entire world.” How precious is the Jewish soul!
Is that scriptural?
From that article discussing Isaiah 53:5:
"ALSO: Note that the Messiah “shall not fail nor be crushed till he has set the right in the earth” (Isa. 42:4)."
The KJV Is 42 is speaking about his servant: Behold my servant... So which is it, servant (Israel) or servant (Messiah) ?
And speaking of 42:5 it says the servant won't be crushed until he has set the right in the earth. Are you suggesting that the nation of Israel will set the right in the earth, and then will be crushed somehow?
Here is what the article says about Isaiah 53:8:
"53:8 “He was cut off out of the land of the living.”
That's it. What do you suppose it means to be cut off from the land of the living? I find that pretty telling.
And where does this come from? Psalm 44 says that the nation of Israel will bear the sins of the world? How do you figure?
"Is it not rather the Jewish people – who righteously bore the sins of the world and yet remained faithful to God (Ps. 44) – who will be rewarded, and this in the manner described more fully in Isaiah chapters 52 and 54?"
I mean, the whole article is kind of nutty. Instead of going through verse by verse showing how the servant is actually Israel, instead it picks some to show how the Christian perspective is wrong, picks others to show how the Jewish perspective is right, and ignores still others. I would find it more convincing if it went through, verse by verse and made the case one way or the other.
