Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in
All Questions
Question 9
Isaiah 53 includes the unsettling line, “It was the Lord’s wish to crush him and cause him to suffer”; how do you reconcile God’s love with God’s will in the suffering of the Servant, and where do modern Christian instincts try to soften, reword, or avoid that claim?
Another way to ask: Isaiah 53 says it was the Lord’s will to crush the Servant. How do you hold together God’s love with God willing this suffering, and where do Christians today try to soften or avoid that idea?

Direct Answer Chuck doesn’t fully resolve the emotional tension, but he does present Isaiah 53 as teaching that the Servant’s suffering was God’s purposeful plan for sin-bearing and peace-bringing—“an offering for sin” that “will justify many.” Modern instincts, by implication, may want a Messiah who reigns without this kind of God-ordained crushing.

Support from Transcript:

  • Isaiah 53 is read aloud including: “Yet it was the Lord’s wish to crush him and cause him to suffer.”
  • The suffering is tied to substitution: “He was pierced for our transgressions… crushed for our iniquities.”
  • It has a saving purpose: “The punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed.”
  • It is explicitly sacrificial: “the Lord makes his life an offering for sin.”
  • Chuck stresses fulfillment in Jesus: “all of them fulfilled in Christ Jesus.”
Discussion Follow-ups Do you tend to emphasize God’s love while avoiding God’s hard purposes? How does Isaiah 53 force both themes into the same sentence?

Jumpstarter 9 of 10
Back Questions Next