[Zionist Conspirator]

Historically, Jews have had no adequate explanation for the Old Testament’s presentation of 1. MESSIAH AS SUFFERING SERVANT AND AS 2. CONQUERING KING. The New Testament works that out quite neatly.

1) Israel is the suffering servant. Mashiach is the conquering king. And chr*stianity has always rejected the idea of messiah as conquering king, opting instead for a non-literal "spiritual" messiah. Only in very recent times have any chr*stians accepted the idea of a literal king messiah.

I'm sure human minds could make up any number of "revelations" that "work quite nicely" in explaining things. But what chr*stians of all stripes and persuasions simply refuse to consider (as I have been pointing out for ten years now) is that Judaism is based on the Torah. There is no higher revelation than the Torah, nor will there ever be. The Prophets and Writings are lower, not higher, than the Torah. The Torah is the supreme master of all prophets and all scribes. If you would ever stop reading the "new testament" or the Na"KH with chr*stian assumptions and read the Torah you would see this.

[Quix]

I think I understand your perspective.

[Borges]

In regards to Isaiah 53, how does one respond to this argument...

Israel is never described as sinless. Isaiah 1:4 says of the nation: "Alas sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity. A brood of evildoers, children who are corrupters!" He then goes on in the same chapter to characterize Judah as Sodom, Jerusalem as a harlot, and the people as those whose hands are stained with blood (verses 10, 15, and 21). What a far cry from the innocent and guiltless sufferer of Isaiah 53 who had "done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth!"