Isaiah 53, 700 B.C: Historical Evidence of the Divine Omniscience.

[GrandizerII]

Now, let's back to the issue: Grandizer, any comments on the Rabbi I cited who understood Isaiah 53 was about the Messiah: (1) "Rabbi Shimon Ben Yochai: “The meaning of the words ‘bruised for our iniquities’ [Isaiah 53:5] is, that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of his being bruised, it follows that whoso will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities, must endure and suffer them for them himself.“

Hard to say without checking the direct source myself. I don't want to just go with a copy paste from a Christian site.

Do you have a link to the primary source itself?

(2) The Babylon Talmud also says this of the Messiah: “His name is ‘the leper scholar,’ as it is written, “Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows yet we did esteem him a leper, smitten of God, and afflicted”. Finally, (3) a well known Jewish Prayer for Yom Kippur, a Post-Christian one at that, openly states: “Our righteous Messiah has turned away from us we have acted foolishly and there is no one to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he bears and he is pierced for our transgressions. He carries our sins on his shoulder, to find forgiveness for our iniquities. By his wounds we are healed.”

See above. Where can I locate these sources?

Now, let's come back to the Prophet Isaiah himself: let me use your own translation. You wrote: "The verse does not say, “He was wounded for our transgressions and crushed for our iniquities,” which could convey the vicarious suffering ascribed to Jesus. Rather, the proper translation is: “He was wounded because of our transgressions, and crushed because of our iniquities.” Ok, how does the meaning change exactly?

It's not necessarily that the meaning changes, at least not considerably so. It's just that the former interpretation is more preferable for Christian interpretation.

If I say I suffered FOR your wrongdoings, I'm likely to be implying that I am volunteering to do this for your sake.

The point of the latter translation (using the word "because") is to show that the verse is not meant to imply some vicarious suffering in place of those who did the wrongdoing (so that those who did the wrongdoing may then be redeemed) but simply that those who did the wrongdoing caused harm to the victim.

Whether He was crushed "for" our transgressions or "because" of our transgressions, the meaning is ultimately the same. Christ died for our sins and because of our sins. Finally, note that in Isaiah 49, the Servant and Israel are clearly distinguished as two separate entities, the Servant as a Messianic Figure, Israel as the people He came to save along with the Gentiles: "And now the Lord says he who formed me in the womb to be his servant to bring Jacob [Israel] back to him and gather Israel to himself, for I am honored in the eyes of the Lord and my God has been my strength—6 he says: “It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob [Israel] and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth.”

Read Isaiah 49:3 again. It clearly states who the servant is. It's not Jesus or any Messiah, for that matter. It's Israel.

He said to me, “You are my servant,
Israel, in whom I will display my splendor.”

Now going by the context of Isaiah 49 and elsewhere, it seems quite clear that Israel has been in disarray for quite some time, and so that's how you're supposed to understand the passage you quoted here in light of that context. The Israelites left to fend for their existence are the ones tasked by God to do that restoration.

Admittedly, it can be difficult to properly understand the passage without also looking at the context of the surrounding texts and the context of those times, and translations done by Christians can render such understanding even more challenging as well, because often times they're just as concerned (or even more so) with ensuring these passages are understood as Messianic than they are with ensuring an accurate translation (that may not be favorable to what they hold to be true).

This is the Prophecy Simeon cited in the Jewish Temple when the Child Jesus was brought to him, saying "A light to enlighten the Gentiles, And the glory of Your people Israel" (Luk 2:32). Jewish Tradition has understood these Servant Passages of the Messiah, as the Rabbis I cited show.

You're talking about Luke here, which is a New Testament account authored by Christians.