Isaiah 53:4-5

[Guest Jason-P]

Hello all. I have a question or two on these verses. I was wondering if yall could help me. Here's my question. Is healing a part of the atonement apart from heaven?

(Isa 53:4) Surely403 he1931 hath borne5375 our griefs,2483 and carried5445 our sorrows:4341 yet we587 did esteem2803 him stricken,5060 smitten5221 of God,430 and afflicted.6031

The words "borne" and "carried" seem to carry the connotation that Jesus took upon himself the burden of healing the sicknesses. Much like a doctor would bear the burden of healing your sickness once you were in his office. But the point is that He took them Himself, of His own volition.

(Isa 53:5) But he1931 was wounded2490 for our transgressions,4480, 6588 he was bruised1792 for our iniquities:4480, 5771 the chastisement4148 of our peace7965 was upon5921 him; and with his stripes2250 we are healed.7495

To me here the "was wounded" and "was bruised" seems to carry the connotation that someone actually did this to Jesus, as opposed to Him lifting the burden Himself.

Here's my point. It seems the verbs and their usage differ for sicknessses and sin. The one Jesus takes on the burden of the sickness from the person Himself and heals them. Whereas the wounding and bruising for our sins seem to have been placed upon Him. Not something He took from them, but was placed upon Him. You get my drift.

Then there is this scripture:(Mat 8:17) so that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying, "He took on Himself our weaknesses and bore our sicknesses." So in my thinking sicknesses in and of itself was not actually placed on Jesus at calvary, just the judgement for our sins. If this is so, then how can healing be a part of the atonement?

I actually have more questions about it, but hopefully yall can help me here first. Yall seem more well studied than me.

Thanks,

Jason

[whatsitmean]

If this is so, then how can healing be a part of the atonement?

I can't expound on the specifics, except to say, if He had not accomplished the atonement, we wouldn't be healed.

They are beautiful verses though, and a wonderful Savior.

[rockswillcryout]

I think maybe you are misunderstanding the difference between healing and forgiveness.

To me, forgiveness is what I get because of the atonement. Healing is what I go through after the sin has been committed and after I've been forgiven.

To me, healing is a process - not an instantanous thing. The healing I need because of my sin may take years. The very definiation of healing is "resortation" and although I cannot be healed without forgiveness, I can be forgiven without being healed. (My own stubbornness can prevent this, if I don't allow myself to be broken in spirit.)

But forgiveness is instant - as soon as I ask for it, God's gives it to me.

Jesus did take the judgement I deserved for my sin. But your question is a good one - did our "actual" sin get placed upon him? Why would it need to?

Before Jesus died on the cross, people offered up sacrifices to God to please him, and to be forgiven by him. Jesus was the perfect sacrifice - so we no longer have to kill calves and place them on alters. He became the sacrifice, but I don't think he became the sin. (Which I think it what you are saying, right?) As the sacrifice, and as the Son of God, he has the authority and power to forgive then heal us from our sin.

[Jedi4Yahweh]

Hello all. I have a question or two on these verses. I was wondering if yall could help me. Here's my question. Is healing a part of the atonement apart from heaven?

(Isa 53:4) Surely403 he1931 hath borne5375 our griefs,2483 and carried5445 our sorrows:4341 yet we587 did esteem2803 him stricken,5060 smitten5221 of God,430 and afflicted.6031

The words "borne" and "carried" seem to carry the connotation that Jesus took upon himself the burden of healing the sicknesses. Much like a doctor would bear the burden of healing your sickness once you were in his office. But the point is that He took them Himself, of His own volition.

(Isa 53:5) But he1931 was wounded2490 for our transgressions,4480, 6588 he was bruised1792 for our iniquities:4480, 5771 the chastisement4148 of our peace7965 was upon5921 him; and with his stripes2250 we are healed.7495

To me here the "was wounded" and "was bruised" seems to carry the connotation that someone actually did this to Jesus, as opposed to Him lifting the burden Himself.

Here's my point. It seems the verbs and their usage differ for sicknessses and sin. The one Jesus takes on the burden of the sickness from the person Himself and heals them. Whereas the wounding and bruising for our sins seem to have been placed upon Him. Not something He took from them, but was placed upon Him. You get my drift.

Then there is this scripture:(Mat 8:17) so that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying, "He took on Himself our weaknesses and bore our sicknesses." So in my thinking sicknesses in and of itself was not actually placed on Jesus at calvary, just the judgement for our sins. If this is so, then how can healing be a part of the atonement?

I actually have more questions about it, but hopefully yall can help me here first. Yall seem more well studied than me.

Thanks,

Jason

Hi bro...

I am not sure if its apart of the atonement because atonement manily refers to Justification and Forgiveness, but I absolutely believe Divine Healing is apart of the New Covenant that God made with us. Jesus said that one of the signs that will follow believers is healing by the laying on of hands. We see this clearly evident through out the book of Acts, the early church, and even today.

God Bless,

[Trinity]

Deleted... hehe

Edited August 12, 2004 by Trinity