Who do you think is described here?

[bosk1]

The fact that he gospels write down clearly what Jesus had supposedly told to not reveal to anybody else, is an irony I guess was lost in the fray.

Eh, not really.  Your point might hold up if not for at least two counterpoints:
1.  There were only a few instances, mostly relatively early in Jesus' ministry, where he told people not to speak of what was done.  The gospels record plenty of other instances where he did what he did VERY publicly.
2.  Often, even when Jesus told people not to speak of what was done, the gospels record that they did the opposite and went around telling what Jesus did.

[rumborak]

Why are you in any way different from the people in Jesus' time who he didn't want to hear about his miracles?

And, why is it suddenly ok to disobey Jesus' commands?

rumborak

[bosk1]

Why are you in any way different from the people in Jesus' time who he didn't want to hear about his miracles?

And, why is it suddenly ok to disobey Jesus' commands?

rumborak

You are missing the point.  You tried to argue that Jesus telling people not to speak of his miracles was somehow a convenient dodge and somehow showed that he apparently did everything in secret.  My point is that you are reading something into the text that simply isn't there.  Most of what he did was commonly known, either because he did it very publicly or because, in those few instances (again, the point you seem to be missing) where it wasn't public, people went around talking about it anyway.  The gospels do not even for a moment suppose that what Jesus did and taught was private and that nobody knew about it.  They do not profess to contain a lot of "secret knowledge" that nobody but a select few knew about.  They mostly tell of very public occurrences.

[rumborak]

You are dodging the question why Jesus would tell them to not tell others of miracles or that he is the Messiah.

But, I might also be out of this discussion. There's literally zero common ground between you and me, bosk. You're already starting your "you say there's something in the text that isn't" routine.

rumborak

[bosk1]

You are dodging the question why Jesus would tell them to not tell others of miracles or that he is the Messiah.

But, I might also be out of this discussion. There's literally zero common ground between you and me, bosk. You're already starting your "you say there's something in the text that isn't" routine.

rumborak

Well, you certainly do not have to continue discussing if you don't want to, but I think it is both a legitimate point you brought up, and a legitimate counterpoint that I raised.  You are right that Jesus' command to tell no one when her performed certain miracles would seem suspicious in isolation.  However, put that in context of a few other points:
1.  By my count (and please correct me if I am missing some), there are a total of nine times recorded in the gospels where Jesus tells his disciples or the subject of certain miracles to keep silent about something.  When you compare, some of those are duplicate descriptions of the same event in different gospels.  It appears there are only four or five separate events where he did this (at least, as far as we have recorded--he may very well have said it plenty of other times as well).
2.  Of those five times, it is recorded in connection with at least two if those five that people went out and proclaimed what he had said despite his instrutions.
3.  There are FAR more than five events recorded where he either (1) specifically told people to go out and tell others what Jesus had done (e.g. Mark 5:19), or (2) did not say either way, but people went and told, or (3) did what he did in very public settings in front of large crowds.

So what I am saying is that while you are correct that there are a handful of instances where Jesus told people to remain silent, that only happened in a small minority of instances, so it is incorrect to argue that Jesus always (or even mostly) told people not to tell about what he was doing.  It was only a few isolated instances where, whatever his motivation to not have people go and talk about it, it was limited to specific circumstances.

[hefdaddy42]

By my count (and please correct me if I am missing some), there are a total of nine times recorded in the gospels where Jesus tells his disciples or the subject of certain miracles to keep silent about something.  When you compare, some of those are duplicate descriptions of the same event in different gospels.  It appears there are only four or five separate events where he did this (at least, as far as we have recorded--he may very well have said it plenty of other times as well).

Correct me if I'm wrong, bosky (and I certainly may be), but aren't all or most of those in Mark?

And to the OP: that passage later had great meaning for the earlier Christians who saw in it a type of Jesus, and that later morphed into this being a Messianic prophecy, but I find that to be a misinterpretation.  I think that all of the "Suffering Servant" songs of Isaiah are talking about Israel itself as being the servant of the Lord among the nations.  This was the classical Jewish interpretation, and it doesn't seem to be a Messianic prophecy at all.  Of course, if you interpret it as being about Jesus, I'm not sure what you do with verse 10:

"Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
    and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
    and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand."

Jesus had no offspring.  Unless you believe in all that Dan Brown/Holy Blood, Holy Grail crap.