<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d14792577\x26blogName\x3dPLAIN+PATH+PURITAN\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://electofgod.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://electofgod.blogspot.com/?m%3D0\x26vt\x3d-7552387615042926418', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe", messageHandlersFilter: gapi.iframes.CROSS_ORIGIN_IFRAMES_FILTER, messageHandlers: { 'blogger-ping': function() {} } }); } }); </script>

12.25.2009

Isaiah 53: something Christians refuse to accept


Jesus is said, in Isaiah 53, to have no form nor comeliness. This is something a worldly Christian (there are no other kind in our day, or really any other day) can't accept.

Just as when a modern day churchian reads what Jesus has to say about family they can't accept it, it's the same when they read the Word of God telling them that Jesus was without form or comeliness. No way, they say to themselves, Jesus was 'acceptable' looking.

If you want an illustration of how you, modern day churchian, would have reacted towards Jesus here it is: it's just as when you happen to see a homeless man walking down the street. Oh, my, you think. Gross. Get a razor, dude. Take a bath. What is that you're wearing? How many diseases do you have? Call the police.

Just the homeless man's *separation from the world itself* is abomination to you, as it would be if you were to see Jesus Himself walking the earth two thousand years ago.

This verse as well goes over your heads:

"The Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart." (1 Samuel 16:7)

Oh, my, you say, but it's depressing when people don't look good and acceptable! Don't look...normal. Like...normal people, that you hang out with. You know.

Like the people you want in your churches, churchian? With their families?

Look at even a John Gill desperately trying to explain the Word of Scripture away:

he hath no form nor comeliness; like a poor plant or shrub just crept out of the ground, in a dry and barren soil, ready to wither away as soon as up; has no strength nor straightness, of body; without verdure, leaves, blossom, and fruit things which make plants comely and beautiful. This regards not the countenance of Christ, which probably was comely, as were his types Moses and David; since he is said to be "fairer than the children of men";

No, John, the Words of Scripture are explicit:

Isa 53:2 ...he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

The Jews of the day judged on outward appearance and said: this can't be *our* king. He's ugly. He doesn't look impressive. What possibly could he have going for him? He's a joke. He's disgusting.

So you make your images of Jesus making him look like a bearded rock star. You cast shallow actors with 'looks' to play him in movies.

If you actually saw Jesus on the street you'd reactively swerve your family van or SUV to hit him, or to just make that gesture, and probably give him the finger as you re-composed yourself and putted on down the street to your 'church.'

3 Comments:

Blogger Anders Branderud said...

You wrote: “The Jews of the day judged on outward appearance and said: this can't be *our* king.”

I want to comment on that.
A logical analysis (found here: www.netzarim.co.il) of the earliest manusscripts (including the logical implications of the research by Ben-Gurion Univ. Prof. of Linguistics Elisha Qimron of Dead Sea Scroll 4Q MMT) of “Matthew”, implies that Ribi Yehoshua was a Torah-teaching Perushi (Pharisee). Ribi Yehoshua ha-Mashiakh (the Messiah) was called a Ribi and only the Perushim had Ribis.

Recorded in NHM is that Ribi Yehoshua had many Yehudim (Jews) that listened to his message. And he also had his followers – a logical analysis implies that they were named the Netzarim – that believed him to be the Mashiakh.

Anders Branderud

December 25, 2009 at 3:25 PM  
Anonymous ct said...

The Jews rejected Jesus for many reasons. Yes, some Jews were able by the grace of God to see he was God come in the flesh. Gentiles too. Christians.

Jesus wasn't a Pharisee.

December 25, 2009 at 4:30 PM  
Anonymous ct said...

I'm not attempting to engage in scholarly discussion. That is for scholars to waste their time with. I'm attempting to shock Christians out of their deathly, worldly sleep.

December 25, 2009 at 5:23 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home