PDA

View Full Version : The Servant of Isaiah 40-55



Robyn Banks
August 8th 2003, 09:20 PM
The Servant of Isaiah 40-55


Introduction

Who or what is the referent of the "servant" figure of Isaiah 40-55, and especially of Isaiah 52.13 - 53.12?

Many Christians still read this section of Isaiah in light of the New Testament reinterpretation of the passage, which understands the text as being 'fulfilled' by Jesus. However, the majority of Christian scholars for at least the last century have recognized that the servant, when read within the context of Isa 40-55, in fact refers to Israel's exile and restoration in the sixth century BC. Moreover, scholarship has recognized that Isa 53 does not refer to some future figure, but is a story about a servant who lived in the past. It is referring to the past sufferings of Israel in exile in Babylon.

In 1948 Christopher North, commenting on the history of interpretation of the servant, could state that the collective interpretation "is the theory still most widely held in this country." 1

The collective interpretation, and specifically the interpretation of the servant as Israel, still remains the most widely held today. Professor James Ward, writing in a leading Christian introduction to the Prophets published in the 1990s, confirms that the collective interpretation is the most predominant one in both Jewish and Christian commentaries today:

"Jewish interpreters once considered him to be the messiah, but his identification with Israel, collectively, has been the dominant Jewish view since the Middle Ages. The collective interpretation is also the most popular among Christian scholars today, though a few continue to think of the servant primarily in relation to Jesus." 2

This article summarizes the reasons for identifying the servant with the ideal, theological conception of 'Israel', God's chosen people. It should, however, be noted that even those scholars who suggest that Isa 52.13 - 53.12 refers to an individual figure (such as the prophet himself, or Moses, or an unnamed exile) are in wide agreement that it refers to a figure in the past, who lived before Cyrus's decree was issued which allowed the Jewish exiles to return to Israel. As Brevard Childs notes in his commentary on Isaiah:

"During most of the history of the Christian church's interpretation of Isaiah, it was assumed that the suffering servant theme of chapter 53 was a messianic prophecy predicting the future passion of Jesus Christ… However, with the rise of the modern historical-critical approach to the Old Testament the position that gained the widest acceptance was that the description of the suffering servant, regardless of a continuing debate over details, was a figure closely tied to the historical experience of Israel in the Babylonian exile." 3

It is to the context of Isa 40-55 that we must turn first and foremost, if we are to hear the prophetic text 'speak for itself'.

Later reinterpretations of Isaiah 53

We must be able to separate out the later Christian and other Jewish Messianic reinterpretations of Isaiah 53 from the contextual meaning of Isaiah 53. Commenting on Isa 52.13 - 53.12, Walter Brueggemann explains that the Christian reinterpretation is a legitimate use of the text, but that it must be acknowledged that Isaiah 53 does not have Jesus "on its horizon" when examined in context:

"There is no doubt that the poem is to be understood in the context of the Isaiah tradition. Insofar as the servant is Israel - a common assumption of Jewish interpretation - we see that the theme of humiliation and exaltation serves the Isaiah rendering of Israel, for Israel in this literature is exactly the humiliated (exiled) people who by the powerful intervention of Yahweh is about to become the exalted (restored) people of Zion. Thus the drama is the drama of Israel and more specifically of Jerusalem, the characteristic subject of this poetry.

Second, although it is clear that this poetry does not have in any first instance have Jesus on its horizon, it is equally clear that the church, from the outset, has found the poetry a poignant and generative way to consider Jesus, wherein humiliation equals crucifixion and exaltation equals resurrection and ascension." 4

Many centuries after Isaiah 53 was written, Christians used the imagery of exile and suffering to describe the death of Jesus, and they used the imagery of restoration into the land of Israel to describe their belief in the resurrection and ascension of Jesus. And they were quite entitled to do so, as creative reinterpretation. But the danger is that we forget that this is reinterpretation. This is reuse of a previous context. It is not interpretation within that original context. This is not a prediction coming true in reality. And when people ignore the explicit context of the Old Testament passage, and then forget that they are reading a reinterpretation of it, they do injury to the intended meaning of that original passage.

It is clear that some later Jewish reinterpretations, which includes Christian reinterpretation, interpreted Isa 53 as referring to a future messiah. However, the following points should be noted:

1. Christian and Messianic Jewish interpretations exercised a broad and loose hermeneutic in reinterpreting Isaiah 53.

Interpretation in first century Judaism did not have the regard to context that modern interpretation does. Instead, it was marked by broad and loose reinterpretations, which allowed as much for reinterpretation of the text as it did for its interpretation.

The Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel is a dramatic example of this broad and loose hermeneutic at work. Jonathan lived in the first century BC, although the words we have from him come from the fourth century AD, and were probably edited in the process. He identifies the servant in 52.13, 53.1 & 10 with the Messiah. But in a perverse hermeneutical twist, the sufferings of the servant are transferred elsewhere: to the nations and the wicked. This interpretation, which is a complete misuse of the original Hebrew, was followed by later messianic interpreters. As Christian scholar Sydney HT Page states: "There is no doubt that the Targumist viewed the fourth servant song as a description of the messiah, but he radically transformed the meaning of the original Hebrew." 5

For example, Jephet ibn 'Ali (10th century) notes that some of the Qaraites applied all expressions of contempt to the seed of David in exile, and all the glorious things to the Messiah. Likewise, Moses el-Shaikh (16th century) interpreted Isa 53 messianically, but interpreted the sufferings ambiguously as the sufferings of the righteous and of the Messiah, and interpreted 53.9-12 as applying to Moses! And Haphtali ben Asher Altschuler interpreted nearly all of Isa 53 as the sufferings of Israel: "the Messiah is termed 'despised' as representing Israel."

What this demonstrates is that rabbinical interpretation took little notice of the original context of Isa 53, taking fantastic liberties with the text. As an aid to interpretation of Isa 53, rabbinical interpretations should be read with extreme caution.

2. The sense of 'fulfillment' in the New Testament did not necessarily have regard to the original context of the Old Testament passage which was 'fulfilled'.

The New Testament notion of 'fulfillment" was much broader than that of linear predictions coming true in reality. The New Testament writers allowed for a much more liberal approach to interpretation of the Old Testament scriptures, by our standards - using the New Testament event to reinterpret the Old Testament text, instead of interpreting the Old Testament text. For an Old Testament prophecy to be 'fulfilled', there did not have to be any matching of the contextual meaning of the prophecy with its New Testament 'fulfillment' at all. A 'fulfillment' included a completely new rereading of the original text against its original context.

D Senior provides a summary of this loose sense of 'fulfillment':

"For Matthew - as was true of virtually all New Testament interaction with the Old Testament - the relationship to the Hebrew Scriptures is dialogic rather than linear. "Fulfillment" does not mean simply a matter of applying Old Testament quotations to events in the light of Jesus. The events of Jesus' life are illuminated and their authority revealed in the light of the Old Testament and, at the same time, new understandings of the voice of God in the Scriptures and the history of Israel are revealed in the light of Jesus' person and mission." 6

New Testament use of the Old Testament makes little attempt to examine the context of the Old Testament. As Richard Hays comments concerning Paul, the apostle "adheres neither to any single exegetical procedure, nor even to a readily specifiable inventory of procedures… the modern concern for methodological control in interpretation is foreign to him." 7 Paul reinterprets the Old Testament in light of his beliefs about Jesus, as he sees fit, using a loose and tendentious hermeneutic.

By the time of the New Testament, the citation of 'fulfillment' becomes so flexible that it is impossible to detect any shared context between a prophecy and its so-called 'fulfillment,' except by positing a doctrine of some spiritual or 'deeper' meaning being thereby fulfilled. So, Jesus' return from Egypt is somehow a 'fulfillment' of Hos 11:1, although Hosea was making a past reference to the Exodus. Jesus is called a Nazarene in the same chapter, probably due to some esoteric misunderstanding of the Nazarite 'prophecy'. Matthew's account of Judas' blood money is based on a text in Jeremiah which speaks of money approved by God.

Richard Coggins concludes that "[t]he use of prophetic material to illustrate and shape a particular story has now [in the New Testament] become so flexible that questions of true and false prophecy barely arise; it has become impossible to envisage criteria that could be laid down to establish whether or not a particular prophecy has or has not been 'fulfilled'." 8

3. There is no reference to an end-times (eschatological) Messiah in the whole Old Testament.

The term "the Messiah," denoting a future eschatological king, does not appear in the Old Testament. There is no prophecy in the Old Testament concerning a Messiah who will come to establish God's eternal rule. In the words of a very conservative biblical scholar, GE Ladd:
"the simple term 'the Messiah' does not occur in the OT at all."

Before you leap to your concordance, let me explain what is meant here. Not one of the 39 occurrences of "messiah" in the Hebrew canon refers to an expected figure of the future whose coming will coincide with the inauguration of an era of salvation. All of the references to 'messiah' (meaning 'anointed one') apply to a king, priest or prophet who is either alive at the time of the biblical writer, or in his immediate future. The conception of an 'end-times Messiah' simply does not come up in the Old Testament, anywhere.

I summarise below the basic scholarly understanding of the term "messiah":

1. The assumption that the Jews were waiting for a commonly-understood Messiah is wrong. There was no single discernible role-description for a Messiah. The Jews did not have a coherent idea of what the Messiah would be like. One cannot therefore claim that 'most Jews were looking for the coming of the Messiah' with any precision.

2. The term "messiah" was applied in the OT to a present political and religious leader appointed by God. The 'anointed one', in the OT, denotes usually a King, also a priest (Lev, Num, Exo), and sometimes a prophet (Ps 105:15, 1 Chr 16:22). These are real people. Most occurrences concern the Jewish King. Many references concern the enthronement of actual kings. As YHWH had promised that David's line would continue, the prophetic references often refer to specific expected kings who would restore the Davidic dynasty. Zechariah identifies Zerrubbabel as such as an expected "anointed" / "messiah." The expectations were not of a final Davidic ruler, ruling for all time to come - but of a continuing Davidic line.

3. The OT contains messianic passages. But these are never apocalyptic or eschatological.

4. The earliest explicit use of the technical term "Messiah/Christ" is in the first century BC - in the Psalms of Solomon and the Parables of Enoch. Jewish Messianology developed out of the crisis of the Maccabean wars of the second century BC, and from the later concerns over Roman rule. The scriptures were only interpreted with Messianic connotations by Jews for about 2 centuries before the New Testament.

This is the consensus of Old Testament scholarship, which now includes even the most conservative voices. The idea of a future Messiah who would bring judgment is developed much later, and even then, not by all Jewish groups.

Mainstream Christian bible scholar, Brevard Childs summarizes:

"It has long been recognized that the term 'Messiah' in its technical New Testament sense as the eschatological redeemer of Israel does not occur in the Old Testament itself, but only in the post-Old Testament period. Indeed, one of the important tasks of Old Testament theology is closely to describe the profile of the Old Testament witness without fusing it to that of the New Testament." 9

And when we read Isaiah 53 in context, without 'fusing it to the New Testament reinterpretation', we will come to the conclusion that the servant is Israel. This is difficult for those who have only ever considered Isaiah 53 through the lens of later New Testament reinterpretation. But in order to appreciate the Old Testament text for its own sake, it must be done. Isaiah 53 never was a messianic text. In fact, the common reference terms used in the Old Testament for the promised messiah, such as David, son of David, or king, are completely absent from Isaiah 53.

4. The Jewish interpretation of the servant as Israel is older than its reinterpretation by some Jewish interpreters as the Messiah

Although Jewish reinterpretations of the servant as the Messiah probably began in the first century BC, there is already evidence of its interpretation as Israel.

The very earliest Jewish interpretation of Isa 40-55 - that of the LXX - considered the servant to be collective Israel. LXX Isa 42.1 adds an interpretive gloss to Isa 42.1, to explicitly link the servant with the nation of Israel.

"As is well known the LXX sanctions a collective interpretation of the servant in the first servant song by inserting 'Jacob' in apposition to 'my servant', and 'Israel' in apposition to 'my chosen' in Isa 42.1. This is unambiguous testimony to the presence of a collective interpretation of the servant in Hellenistic Judaism." 10

Origen's Contra Celsum records the opinion of Jews who knew that Isa 53 referred to "the whole people, regarded as one individual, and as being in a state of dispersion and suffering, in order that many proselytes might be gained, on account of the dispersion of the Jews among numerous heathen nations." (1.55)

Here Origen records a Jewish interpretation of Isa 53 that is very consistent with the contextual interpretation of Isa 53 I presented below.

From earliest times the servant has been identified with 'the righteous' generally. For example, Rab Huna (d297), and in the Jerusalem Talmud (Sheqalim, v1) where Rabbi Jonah applies Isa 53.12 to Rabbi Akiba - as a righteous servant. Even after Messianic interpretation became general, some interpreted the Servant as the righteous: Jacob ben Reuben (Qaraite, 12c), Elieer of Beaujenci, Aaron be Joseph and the Qaraites.

In the later Middle Ages, when interpretation became more 'scientific', the messianic interpretation began to dwindle amongst Jewish interpreters. As Christopher R North comments: "Since the twelfth century the collective interpretation has been usual… it should be recognized that with Rashi we enter upon a period of more literal and scientific, as opposed to 'allegorical and adventitious' expositions, together with a fuller recognition of the principle of the unity of the paragraph and its relation to its context." 11 The "context" was of course the suffering of Israel and its promised exaltation amongst the nations. North cites the following Jewish interpreters who recognized that Isaiah 53 referred to Israel, not a messiah: Rashi (d1105), Ibn Ezra, Joseph and David Kimchi, Jacob ben Reuben the Rabbinite (12c), Joseph ben Nathan (Sens, 13c), Isaiah ben Mali (13c), Shem Tob ben Shaprut (Toledo, 14c), Abarbanel (d1508), Abraham Farissol (Avignon, 1503), Isaac Troki (Qaraite, 1593), Abraham of Cordova (Proselyte, c1600), Isaac Orobio de Castro (17c).

Contextual interpretation of Isaiah 53

The passages dealing with the figure of the servant in Deutero-Isaiah are Isa 41.8-13; 42.1-9; 42.18-25; 43.8-13; 44.1-5; 44.21-22; 49.1-12; 50.4-11 and 52.13-53.12. In addition, the term appears in Isa 48.20 and 54.17.

Explicit references to Israel

In these passages, the servant is explicitly identified as Israel some seven times! Moreover, in the passages where there is no explicit identification, the immediate context is always about the exile and restoration of Israel.

Isa 41.8-13
"(8) But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, the offspring of Abraham, my friend; (9) you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, saying to you, "You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you off"; (10) do not fear, for I am with you, do not be afraid, for I am your God; I will strengthen you, I will help you, I will uphold you with my victorious right hand. (11) Yes, all who are incensed against you shall be ashamed and disgraced; those who strive against you shall be as nothing and shall perish. (12) You shall seek those who contend with you, but you shall not find them; those who war against you shall be as nothing at all. (13) For I, YHWH your God, hold your right hand; it is I who say to you, "Do not fear, I will help you."

Isa 43.8-13
"(8) Bring forth the people who are blind, yet have eyes, who are deaf, yet have ears! (9) Let all the nations gather together, and let the peoples assemble. Who among them declared this, and foretold to us the former things? Let them bring their witnesses to justify them, and let them hear and say, "It is true." (10) You are my witnesses, says YHWH, and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me. (11) I, I am YHWH, and besides me there is no savior. (12) I declared and saved and proclaimed, when there was no strange god among you; and you are my witnesses, says YHWH. (13) I am God, and also henceforth I am He; there is no one who can deliver from my hand; I work and who can hinder it?"

Isa 44.1-5
"(1) But now hear, O Jacob my servant, Israel whom I have chosen! (2) Thus says YHWH who made you, who formed you in the womb and will help you: Do not fear, O Jacob my servant, Jeshurun* whom I have chosen. (3) For I will pour water on the thirsty land, and streams on the dry ground; I will pour my spirit upon your descendants, and my blessing on your offspring. (4) They shall spring up like a green tamarisk, like willows by flowing streams. (5) This one will say, "I am the Lord's," another will be called by the name of Jacob, yet another will write on the hand, "The Lord's," and adopt the name of Israel."
* Jeshurun, a symbolic name for Israel

Isa 44.21-22
"(21) Remember these things, O Jacob, and Israel, for you are my servant; I formed you, you are my servant; O Israel, you will not be forgotten by me. (22) I have swept away your transgressions like a cloud, and your sins like mist; return to me, for I have redeemed you."

Isa 49.1-12
"(1) Listen to me, O coastlands, pay attention, you peoples from far away! YHWH called me before I was born, while I was in my mother's womb he named me. (2) He made my mouth like a sharp sword, in the shadow of his hand he hid me; he made me a polished arrow, in his quiver he hid me away. (3) And he said to me, "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will be glorified." (4) But I said, "I have labored in vain, I have spent my strength for nothing and vanity; yet surely my cause is with YHWH, and my reward with my God." (5) And now YHWH says, who formed me in the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob back to him, and that Israel might be gathered to him, for I am honored in the sight of YHWH, and my God has become my strength - (6) he says, "It is too light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the survivors of Israel; I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth." (7) Thus says YHWH, the Redeemer of Israel and his Holy One, to one deeply despised, abhorred by the nations, the servant of rulers, "Kings shall see and stand up, princes, and they shall prostrate themselves, because of YHWH, who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel, who has chosen you." (8) Thus says YHWH: In a time of favor I have answered you, on a day of salvation I have helped you; I have kept you and given you as a covenant to the people, to establish the land, to apportion the desolate heritages; (9) saying to the prisoners, "Come out," to those who are in darkness, "Show yourselves." They shall feed along the ways, on all the bare heights shall be their pasture; (10) they shall not hunger or thirst, neither scorching wind nor sun shall strike them down, for he who has pity on them will lead them, and by springs of water will guide them. (11) And I will turn all my mountains into a road, and my highways shall be raised up. (12) Lo, these shall come from far away, and lo, these from the north and from the west, and these from the land of Syene."

Isa 54.4
"For the sake of my servant Jacob, and Israel my chosen, I call you by your name, I surname you, though you do not know me."

Robyn Banks
August 8th 2003, 09:21 PM
The matching description of the servant and of Israel

After having been explicitly identified as Israel, the servant continues to be described using the same terms and descriptions as used for Israel. This further demonstrates that the referent is Israel.

When the descriptions of the servant are read within the context of Isa 40-55, instead of against the context, it is clear that they refer to the immediate context of Israel's exile and restoration. At no point is there any indication that the servant is some figure in the distant future. In every part of Isa 40-55 the servant is best explained within the context of the sixth century exile and restoration.

"The prophet was not looking into the distant future, envisaging the coming of a Servant not yet visible on the horizon. His prophetic task was to interpret the contemporary political situation occasioned by the rise of Cyrus and the imminent collapse of the Babylonian empire… With Yahweh's advent the Servant would appear on the world stage, born out of the travail of Israel's history, to be Yahweh's agent for bringing salvation to the ends of the earth. In the past, Yahweh had called the Servant, had tested and refined his life by suffering , and had hidden him like an arrow in his quiver. But now the time was fulfilled. The work of the Servant was about to begin" 12

Instead of reading Isaiah 53 on its own, I encourage you to read it within its surrounding chapters, say from the beginning of chapter 52 to the end of chapter 54. And then read it within the wider context of Isa 40-55. Just by reading from the beginning of Ch 52 it is obvious that Isa 53 is referring to Israel's exile and return from exile.

- At the beginning of Isa 52 the prophet writes that the Egyptians, Assyrians and Babylonians had taken YHWH's servant Israel "without cause."

- YHWH speaks that, "Long ago, my people went down into Egypt to reside there as aliens; the Assyrian, too, has oppressed them without cause. Now therefore what am I doing here, says YHWH, seeing that my people are taken away without cause?" (Isa 52.4-5).

- And although YHWH's name is profaned by the nations while Israel has been in servanthood (Isa 52.5), it is prophesied that he will soon act to make his name known (Isa 52.6), by returning to Jerusalem with his people (Isa 52.8-9) in the sight of all the nations (Isa 52.10).

- YHWH's servant Israel will be raised up and exalted (Isa 52.13) - in front of the very nations that had previously despised her and thought so little of her (Isa 52.14-15).

- And so in Isa 53.1 we come to the speech of the kings of the nations, who exclaim "Who has believed what we have heard?" - when they witness the despised servant Israel return to the land of Israel! The arm of YHWH (already mentioned in Isa 52.9 in relation to Israel) has acted strongly to return the Israelites to Zion (Isa 52.11).

- And so the kings of the nations exclaim: "And to whom has the arm of YHWH been revealed?" (Isa 53.1).

- And what follows is the rich poetic description of the once despised and exiled nation of Israel, and her restoration to glory in Zion in front of the nations.

- Chapter 54 then goes on to describe Israel's future prosperity after returning to the land. Israel will live long with many descendents (Isa 53.10); the children of the desolated Israel are to be more than the children of the Babylonians (Isa 54.1, cf Isa 44.3-4). And they will resettle the desolate towns of Israel (Isa 54.3). Israel is to enjoy great wealth (Isa 54.12-13), and will be protected from her enemies (Isa 54.14-17).

- The nations which previously had held Israel captive shall run to Israel, because YHWH will glorify Israel again (Isa 55.5).

Whatever part of the description of the 'servant' you look at, you will find consistency with the wider context which describes Israel's exile and restoration - demonstrating that the servant and Israel are the one and the same.

Election and creation of the servant / Israel

Both the servant and Israel are described as being chosen by YHWH, and formed by YHWH in the womb.

Israel is "chosen" (Isa 43.10, 44.1)… from the ends of the earth" (Isa 41.8-9), called by her name and surnamed (Isa 45.4). The servant Israel was also chosen (Is 42.1) by a faithful God who had not forgotten her in her servanthood in exile (49.7).

Israel is described in deeply individual terms as "formed in the womb" by YHWH (Isa 44.2, 21, 24), a term also used when addressing Israel as God's servant (44.21). Likewise, the servant says "YHWH called me before I was born, while I was in my mother's womb he named me" (49.1). The servant Israel claims that God "formed me in the womb to be his servant" (49.5).

Comfort and protection of the servant / Israel

Both the servant and Israel are upheld and comforted by Yahweh (Isa 41.10, 42.1), and hidden in the shadow of Yahweh's hand (Isa 51.16, 49.2).

Endowment of the spirit on the servant / Israel

Both the servant and Israel are endowed with Yahweh's spirit. God promises Israel he will "pour my spirit upon your descendants, and my blessing on your offspring" (44.3). And God says in respect of the servant Israel: "Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my spirit upon him."

Honor of the servant / Israel, thereby giving glory to God

Both Israel and the servant are honored by YHWH (Isa 43.4 & 49.5). God is glorified by the restoration of Israel, and by his servant alike. Isa 44.23 states "For YHWH has redeemed Jacob, and will be glorified in Israel." Likewise, "through him [the servant] the will of YHWH shall prosper" (Isa 53.10c). God declares to his servant Israel: "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will be glorified."

The prophet predicts that Israel will gain a prominent place amongst the nations following her exile. So, the servant Israel is "exalted and lifted up" (Isa 52.13) and is given the riches of "the strong" (Isa 53.12). This matches the remainder of Isaiah 40-55, where Israel is promised "reward and recompense" (Isa 40.10), to be blessed (44.3-4), even with precious stones (Isa 54.11-12).


The servant / Israel transformed from slave-servant to slaveowner-master

In Isa 52.15, there is a startling role-reversal. Israel the slave / servant becomes Israel the slave-owner / master. Israel startles many nations and kings with her rise to glory, in stark contrast to her earlier "despised" beginnings. This is consistent with Isa 45.15 where the prophet promises that Israel's former slave-masters will come in chains to Israel and make supplications. And Isa 53 mirrors Isa 49.7, where there is a description of Israel's rise from slavery to slave-master: "Thus says YHWH, the Redeemer of Israel his Holy One, who is deeply despised, abhorred by the nations, the slave of rulers, "Kings shall see and stand up, princes, and they shall prostrate themselves, because of YHWH, who is faithful, the Holy One of Israel, who has chosen you." Likewise, in Isa 49.22-23 there is a prediction of Israel's rise from servanthood to the nations to exaltation before the nations: "Thus says YHWH God: I will soon lift up my hand to the nations, and raise my signal to the peoples; and they shall bring your sons in their bosom, and your daughters shall be carried on their shoulders. Kings shall be your foster fathers, and their queens your nursing mothers. With their faces to the ground they shall bow down to you, and lick the dust of your feet."


The servant / Israel to have many descendents

Isaiah 53 promises that the servant will "see his offspring, and shall prolong his days" (Isa 53.10). It is common in the Old Testament for this promise to be made to the righteous: that they shall live a long time and see many children and grandchildren. Likewise, Job "lived 140 years, and saw his children, and his children's children, four generations" (42.16). The phrases "seeing seed" or "seeing children" are idiomatic expressions in the Old Testament which describe the experience of seeing one's own family propagate for one or more generations. This is not applicable to Jesus, but is applicable to righteous Israel.

The mission of the servant / Israel to the nations

The mission of the servant is both to the Israelites captive in Babylon, and to the nations. This matches the description of Israel's mission, which is to be a light to the nations, and to give torah and justice to the nations. The servant is "given … as a covenant to the people, a light to the nations (42.6). The servant is given "as a light to the nations, that [God's] salvation may reach to the end of the earth." Likewise, YHWH says to his people Israel: "Listen to me, my people, and give heed to me, my nation; for a teaching will go out from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples" (51.4). The servant "will not grow faint or be crushed until he has established justice in the earth; and the coastlands wait for his teaching."

The exaltation of Israel, and her mission to the nations, is commented on in a speech by the kings of the nations in Isaiah 53.1ff. The "we" of Isa 53.1 refers to the 'nations' and 'kings' in 52.14-15. This should be compared with the other servant texts where the task of the servant Israel is described as being to the nations. When we come to Isa 53.1, the servant Israel has just been described as surprising the nations, because Israel has risen from its despised status to an exalted status (Isa 53.15). It is the figure of 'the nations' who is the speaker of Isaiah 53.1ff. As the Oxford Commentary on the Old Testament points out, "The nations and kings who were so amazed by what was referred to in 52.15 are now given voice." From the description of the amazement of the nations and kings as third parties in 52.15, Isaiah then has the nations speak in Isa 53.1ff.

In support of this interpretation, David Clines points out the smooth transition from 52.15 to 53.1. Clines then comments that "in 52.15 peoples and kings "see" and "ponder" a sight they have never seen before and a message never heard before, while in 53.1 "we" remark on how incredible is what "we" have heard and what has been seen." 13 Clearly the same sentiment is being expressed: first in the third person in Isa 52.13-15, secondly in the first person in Isa 53.1ff.

As North points out:

"At the end of Ch52 the amazement of the Gentiles is foretold. It is entirely natural, then, that what immediately follows should embody their judgement upon the Servant. Any other supposition disturbs the sequence of the passages, and destroys its artistic symmetry."

"from the beginning the Servant's primary commission was to the Gentiles, and it was to be successful (42.4, 49.6). We expect that the last word from the human side will be that of the Gentiles, as the final word of all is from Yahweh Himself (53.11f). It would be strange if the Gentiles had nothing to say, and that they have not, unless they are the speakers here." 14

Both Israel and the servant are portrayed in Isa 40-55 as having a mission to the Gentiles. The mission of Israel to the Gentiles is described in Isa 42.6-7: "I have given you as a covenant to the people, a light to the nations, to open the eyes that are blind, to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon, from the prison those who sit in darkness." Likewise, in Isa 49.6 and 51.4, YHWH intends to use his servant Israel to bring justice to the nations. And, in Isaiah 53.12, YHWH declares that his servant Israel "shall make many righteous." Israel's suffering has now been rewarded, by allowing God's chosen people to fulfill her original function of being a light to the nations.

"The new understanding of the nations is elaborated in the second strope (53.1-3), in which the rulers of the nations are represented as speaking for their peoples. The kings express their astonishment at what they finally see and hear. To them the whole thing is fantastic and unbelievable. The Servant had grown up before Yahweh (or perhaps "before us" - the nations) like a young sapling, like a root in dry, unpromising ground. Some interpreters find here an allusion to the Messiah, who elsewhere is called a "branch" or a root from the stock of Jesse (see Isa 11.1, 10; Jer 23.5), but more likely the kings are describing Israel's unpromising career. Possibly with the figure of leprosy in mind, the poet portrays the Servant's "form" (Isa 52.14) as so marred that people hide their faces from him (compare Lev 13.45). The kings are utterly amazed that such an unlovely, despised, and revolting figure is actually the one to whom "the arm of Yahweh" - the victorious power of the Divine Warrior - has been revealed. They had not recognized the Servant in his humiliation." 15

The nation of Israel, once despised by the nations and put into servanthood by Babylon, is now being restored in accordance with God's original plans for Israel, and is predicted to lord it over the nations it once served, as well as to bring God's justice to the nations.

"First of all, the new age will bring the restoration of Israel from exile, followed by the people's reconstitution as a community in the land of their ancient heritage (49.8-19). This reversal of their present destiny is imagined as an exchange of positions with the ruling nations of the present oppressive age. Proud, prosperous kings and their retinues will pay homage to Israel (49.7, 22-23), and the tyrranical oppressors will be utterly humbled (49.26). Here as elsewhere, the writer has drawn heavily upon forms of expression familiar to his audience from the liturgies of the Judean community.

The ultimate goal of the reversal of fortunes among the nations is to produce knowledge of God - God's justice, righteousness, and liberating power - and praised of God (49.13, cf 42.10ff; 44.23), both in Israel (49.23) and among the nations (49.26). The nations will come to know God as Israel performs its service as teacher; and in teaching, Israel will come to know God more fully." 16

Past sickness of the servant / Israel

Isaiah 53, which describes the servant's afflictions as a "sickness," is consistent with other descriptions of Israel as being "sick." Isa 1.5-6 speaks of Israel when it narrates: "The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot even to the head, there is no soundness in it, but bruises and sores and bleeding wounds; they have not been drained, or bound up, or softened with oil." In Jer 10.19 Israel compains, "Woe is me because of my hurt! My wound is severe." And in Jer 30.17, YHWH says about Zion: "For I will restore health to you, and your wounds I will heal … because they have called you an outcast: "It is Zion; no one cares for her!""

The servant of Isa 53 grew up despised by others, and subject to sicknesses. This fits perfectly the Jewish persecutions and exile - which is the explicit background to Isa 53. By contrast, Jesus is not portrayed as having any sickness in his life that caused others to despise him - it is only in his final week that he is portrayed as being rejected by the Jews and Roman authorities.

"As Whybray (1978:58) has noted, the words translated 'infirmities' and 'diseases' are 'eminently suitable to express the broken state of the nation after the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC'. Indeed, as he points out, the word holi here 'infirmities', was already found in 1.3 in the description of the ravaged state of the community: 'the whole head is sick (holi)'."
- Oxford Commentary on the Old Testament

Much of the language used here is found in Psalms of Thanksgiving as a means of expressing the desperate plight of the sufferer before God's saving action became apparent. In the Psalms the portrayal of a servant going down to the pit is not meant literally death, but the depths of despair: e.g. Ps 30.3, 88.4, 143.7. The same is intended in Isa 53 concerning the plight of Israel in exile, which is not a literal death of any person, but a metaphorical 'death' of the nation.

The past slaughter and death of the servant / Israel

The symbolism of Israel slaughtered like sheep is also common in the Bible.

Zech 11.6-7: "So, on behalf of the sheep merchants, I became the shepherd of the flock doomed to slaughter."
Psalm 44.11, 22: "You have made us like sheep for slaughter, and have scattered us among the nations… Because of you we are being killed all day long, and accounted as sheep for the slaughter."

The death and burial of the servant corresponds to the deportation of the Israelites into exile. This should be contrasted with Ezekiel 37.1-14, where corresponding motifs are used for the deportation of the people into exile. In Ezekiel 37 Israel is described as dead dry bones, without any life. Israel is described as being "cut off" completely, just as in Isa 53.8 it it described as being "cut off from the land."

The past punishment of the servant / Israel

Isaiah 53.7 records that the servant "was oppressed, and … was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth." Israel was led into exile after the fall of Jerusalem, without the ability to offer further resistance. She was emasculated, and made silent before her captors. This is the referent of these words. Israel was robbed and plundered, and "trapped in holes and hidden in prisons" (Isa 42.22). She was bowed over in submission so that her oppressors might walk over her (Isa 51.23).

And all of this punishment at the hands of the nations is described as being innocent: "without cause." Even though elsewhere the poet of Isaiah 40-55 describes the exile as a punishment from God, he also maintains that the nations had "no cause" to punish Israel. The Egyptians, Assyrians and Babylonians had taken YHWH's servant Israel "without cause." YHWH speaks that, "Long ago, my people went down into Egypt to reside there as aliens; the Assyrian, too, has oppressed them without cause. Now therefore what am I doing here, says YHWH, seeing that my people are taken away without cause?" (Isa 52.4-5). The description of the servant as not opening his mouth is mirrored in Isa 52.4-5 where the people are taken into exile without cause.

Conclusion

"We cannot … be true to his (the Prophet's) conception as a whole without saying that for him the Servant is Israel … Nothing less than the spectacle of Israel once humiliated, and now to be rehabilitated in the eyes of the nations of the world, will do justice to the imposing scale of the treatment in the fifty-third chapter."
- Wheeler Robinson, The Cross of the Servant

The entire context of Isa 40-55 demonstrates that the figure of the servant should be identified with Israel. In all aspects, the description of the servant matches the description of Israel. And the servant is explicitly identified as Israel in no less than 7 places in Isa 40-55.

The later Christian interpretation of Isa 53 as referring to Jesus cannot be made on contextual grounds. Instead, it must be recognized as a reinterpretation of the text on quite broad and (from a modernist point of view) loose hermeneutical grounds. The intended referent of the servant is YHWH's chosen one, Israel.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 North, Christopher R The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah - An Historical and Critical Study (London: Oxford University Press, 1963, 2nd ed), p3. By "this country" he was referring to the UK.
2 Ward, James M Thus Says the Lord - The Message of the Prophets (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1991), p90.
3 Childs, Brevard S Isaiah (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), p422.
4 Brueggemann, Walter Isaiah 40 - 66 (Louisville: Kentucky, 1998), p143.
5 Page, Sydney HT "The Suffering Servant Between the Testaments" NTS 31 (1985) 481-497.
6 Senior, D "The Lure of the Formula Quotations - Re-assessing Matthew's Use of the Old Testament with the Passion Narrative as Test Case" in CM Tuckett (Ed) The Scriptures in the Gospels (Brussell: Leuven University Press, 1997), 89-115, 104
7 Hays, RB Echoes of Scripture in the letters of Paul (New York: Yale University Press, 1989), p160
8 Coggins, Richard J "Prophecy - True and False" in McKay, Heather A & David JA Clines (Eds.) Of Prophets' Visions and the Wisdom of Sages - Essays in Honour of R Norman Whybray on his Seventieth Birthday (Sheffield: Academic Press, JSOT Supp. 162, 1993) 80-94, p93.
9 Childs, Brevard S Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Phladelphia: Fortress Press, 1979).
10 Page, Sydney HT "The Suffering Servant Between the Testaments" NTS 31 (1985) 481-497.
11 North, Christopher R The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah - An Historical and Critical Study (London: Oxford University Press, 1963, 2nd ed), p17.
12 Anderson, Bernhard W Understanding the Old Testament (New Jersey: Princeton, 1998, 4th ed), pp441-442.
13 Clines, David J A "I, He, We, and They - A Literary Approach to Isaiah 53" JSOT Supplementary Series, 1 (Sheffield, 1976), p26
14 North, Christopher R The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah - An Historical and Critical Study (London: Oxford University Press, 1963, 2nd ed), p151
15 Anderson, Bernhard W Understanding the Old Testament (New Jersey: Princeton, 1998, 4th ed), p443.
16 Ward, James M Thus Says the Lord - The Message of the Prophets (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1991), p92.

Peter Kirby
August 13th 2003, 07:17 PM
I would be interested in seeing responses to this. And, is it an original production for TWeb?

best,
Peter Kirby

RevSteve45
August 13th 2003, 09:33 PM
Robyn Banks,

Biblical scholarship notwithstranding, I prefer to take the interpretation of the HOLY SPIRIT, who led writers, apostles & deacons to interpret Isaiah 53 as referring to the Messiah:

Acts 8:27-35, And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship,
28 Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet.
29 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.
30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?
31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.
32 The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth:
33 In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth.
34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?
35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. (KJV)

Matt 8:17, That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses. (KJV)

Matt 12:17-21, That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,
18 Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.
19 He shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets.
20 A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory.
21 And in his name shall the Gentiles trust. (KJV)

Jesus HIMSELF interpreted the prophecies of Isaiah 61:1 & 42:7, as applying to HIMSELF:

Matt 12:17-21, That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,
18 Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.
19 He shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets.
20 A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory.
21 And in his name shall the Gentiles trust. (KJV)

John 12:38-41, That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
41 These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him. (KJV)

So it is, that another not-so-great THEORY of MEN bites the dust!

In His Service,
Steve

Robyn Banks
August 13th 2003, 10:56 PM
Peter Kirby:
is it an original production for TWeb?
This was originally done for TWeb by me. It was a summary of one of the issues in my debate with Jason Gastrich. The URL to the debate is currently in my signature line.

Robyn Banks
August 13th 2003, 11:07 PM
RevSteve45:
Biblical scholarship notwithstranding, I prefer to take the interpretation of the HOLY SPIRIT, who led writers, apostles & deacons to interpret Isaiah 53 as referring to the Messiah
This may be so, Steve. The Holy Spirit may have inspired the New Testament writers to write just what they did.

But the fact remains that:
1. The Old Testament does not, in context, refer to any Messiah at all, and Isa 53 does not refer to Jesus or any Messiah at all.
2. The New Testament writers used a very broad hermeneutic to interpret Isa 53 as referring to the Messiah. It was a non-contextual hermeneutic. It was not invalid, or 'wrong'. But it was not 'exegesis'.

For most of Christendom, the primary interpretive method in respect of the Old Testament was not the literal sense. This is so in the New Testament period, in the Church Fathers, and throughout the middle ages.




RevSteve45:
Jesus HIMSELF interpreted the prophecies of Isaiah 61:1 & 42:7, as applying to HIMSELF
And I have no problem with Jesus applying prophecies to himself. However, you must realise that he certainly was not doing so according to the literal prediction-fulfillment interpretation of the prophecies.





RevSteve45:
So it is, that another not-so-great THEORY of MEN bites the dust!
The only thing that bites the dust is your presumption that what New Testament writers call "fullfillment" must mean the same as what you mean. It certainly does not.

You depend too much on the hermeneutical theories of modern men, and not enough on the words of the New Testament writers themselves.

Hope that helps.

Robyn Banks

RevSteve45
August 14th 2003, 12:36 AM
Robyn Banks,

You said,


The Old Testament does not, in context, refer to any Messiah at all, and Isa 53 does not refer to Jesus or any Messiah at all.

Nice going. You have just denied what almost ALL Jews have believed for thousands of years. THEY believe that a Messiah IS promised. Whether that Messiah is a Royal conquering type of figure or a Suffering Servant, is, of course, another issue. But the belief in a promised MESSIAH is almost UNIVERSAL among Jews.


The only thing that bites the dust is your presumption that what New Testament writers call "fullfillment" must mean the same as what you mean. It certainly does not.

You depend too much on the hermeneutical theories of modern men, and not enough on the words of the New Testament writers themselves.

I noticed you could nor answer a SINGLE ONE of the Scriptures I posted, where the NT writers said that the ministry of Jesus was fulfilling, not just ONE, but MANY of the prophecies in Isaiah. Let me know when you can respond to these Scriptures, and give MAN'S interpretation of God's Word.

In His Service,
Steve

Robyn Banks
August 14th 2003, 01:06 AM
Robyn:[b]
The Old Testament does not, in context, refer to any Messiah at all, and Isa 53 does not refer to Jesus or any Messiah at all. ”

[b]RevSteve45:
Nice going.
Thanks! :smile:


RevSteve45:
You have just denied what almost ALL Jews have believed for thousands of years.
That's more or less Right! To be more precise, most Jews have expected an end-times (eschatological) Messiah since c100 BC. That is indeed "thousands of years." Approx 2,100 years.



RevSteve45:
THEY believe that a Messiah IS promised. Whether that Messiah is a Royal conquering type of figure or a Suffering Servant, is, of course, another issue. But the belief in a promised MESSIAH is almost UNIVERSAL among Jews.
Well, more or less 'universal', yes.

However, it is completely absent in the Old Testament.

Like all religions, Judaism's beliefs developed from earlier, different beliefs.





Robyn:
“ The only thing that bites the dust is your presumption that what New Testament writers call "fullfillment" must mean the same as what you mean. It certainly does not.

You depend too much on the hermeneutical theories of modern men, and not enough on the words of the New Testament writers themselves. ”

RevSteve45:
I noticed you could nor answer a SINGLE ONE of the Scriptures I posted,
Then you are completely unobservant. As I have explained above, I quite agree that the New Testament writers interpreted the Old Testament as referring to Jesus and as referring to the Messiah - BUT, the Old Testament on a literal, contextual reading does not in fact refer to Jesus or any Messiah at any time. Not even once.





RevSteve45:
Let me know when you can respond to these Scriptures,
I can, and have, responded to these Scriptures. You failed to understand what my response was.

The reason for your failed understanding is that you are too caught up with your human theories of interpretation to actually see that the New Testament writers never had the same idea as you.

You replace the words of the Bible with MAN's interpretation.





RevSteve45:
and give MAN'S interpretation of God's Word.
No - that is what you are doing.

Hope that helps.

Robyn Banks

RevSteve45
August 14th 2003, 09:49 AM
Robyn Banks,

I believe that you DENY the Holy Spirit inspired the NT writers to interpret these prophecies as they did. You probably think the NT was written by a bunch of Jews who were sitting around one day and said, "Hey! Let's invent a story about a Messiah who was crucified & rose again! While we're at it, we can throw in a few OT prophecies & say He fulfilled those, too!"

In His Service,
Steve

Solly
August 14th 2003, 10:49 AM
Robyn: Many Christians still read this section of Isaiah in light of the New Testament reinterpretation of the passage, which understands the text as being 'fulfilled' by Jesus. However, the majority of Christian scholars for at least the last century have recognized that the servant, when read within the context of Isa 40-55, in fact refers to Israel's exile and restoration in the sixth century BC. Moreover, scholarship has recognized that Isa 53 does not refer to some future figure, but is a story about a servant who lived in the past. It is referring to the past sufferings of Israel in exile in Babylon.

In 1948 Christopher North, commenting on the history of interpretation of the servant, could state that the collective interpretation "is the theory still most widely held in this country." 1

The collective interpretation, and specifically the interpretation of the servant as Israel, still remains the most widely held today. Professor James Ward, writing in a leading Christian introduction to the Prophets published in the 1990s, confirms that the collective interpretation is the most predominant one in both Jewish and Christian commentaries today:

"Jewish interpreters once considered him to be the messiah, but his identification with Israel, collectively, has been the dominant Jewish view since the Middle Ages. The collective interpretation is also the most popular among Christian scholars today, though a few continue to think of the servant primarily in relation to Jesus."


John Gill on 52.12
The Jews say it is a difficult prophecy; and so it is to them, being contrary to their notions and schemes, or otherwise it is plain and easy, respecting the Messiah; but rather than he should be thought to be meant, the modern ones have invented a variety of interpretations. Some apply this prophecy to Abraham; others to Moses; others to Ezra; others to Zerubbabel; and others to any righteous person: the more principal and prevailing opinions among them are, that it is to be understood either of the whole body of the people of Israel in captivity, as Jarchi, Aben Ezra, and Kimchi; or of King Josiah, slain by Pharaohnecho, as Abarbinel; or of Jeremiah, as Saadiah Gaon; all which are weak and impertinent, and, as they disagree with each other, show the perplexity they are under. The Targum interprets it of the Messiah; and so did the ancient Rabbins, as Aben Ezra and Alshech confess; and several parts of the prophecy are applied to him, both by ancient and modern ones, as will be seen in the exposition of it.

Keil and Delitzsch
The Jews try to evade its force by the figment of two Messiahs, one a suffering Messiah (Ben Joseph), the other a triumphant Messiah (Ben David). HILLEL maintained that Messiah has already come in the person of Hezekiah. BUXTORF states that many of the modern Rabbins believe that He has been come a good while, but will not manifest Himself because of the sins of the Jews. But the ancient Jews, as the Chaldee paraphrast, Jonathan, refer it to Messiah; so the Medrasch Tauchuma (a commentary on the Pentateuch); also Rabbi Moses Haddarschan (see HENGSTENBERG, Christology of the Old Testament). Some explain it of the Jewish people, either in the Babylonish exile, or in their present sufferings and dispersion. Others, the pious portion of the nation taken collectively, whose sufferings made a vicarious satisfaction for the ungodly.

Question, why shouldn't the view of the early Jews be as important as modern commentators, most of whom deny prophecy in the Bible anyway, and seek to resolve issues by referring to past events. Equally, the testimony of later Jews, who themselves became more anti-Christian in their interpretation of scripture, is not unbiased with regard to this matter.


But the fact remains that:
1. The Old Testament does not, in context, refer to any Messiah at all, and Isa 53 does not refer to Jesus or any Messiah at all.
2. The New Testament writers used a very broad hermeneutic to interpret Isa 53 as referring to the Messiah. It was a non-contextual hermeneutic. It was not invalid, or 'wrong'. But it was not 'exegesis'.


So the question is, why it took so long for the Jews themselves to stop seeing this text as Messianic, when all they had to do was deny it from the start. The Jews only denied that Jesus was the Messiah they had expected, not that their scriptures did not point to a Messiah, in context.

Not every text in the Bible has to refer to the Messiah in a full blown description. David refers to his Kingship and rule; Isaiah to his servanthood and suffering. These are elements that fused in Christ, the suffering king.

Lastly (so much posted, so little time to digest and respond) the Christian would point out that faithful Israel is only fulfilled in Christ. National Israel was being rebuked within a short while of their restoration. They never made it, as 70 AD proved. Christ, the substitution, the suffering servant, took the place, bore the punishment, and wrought out an obedience to God, and established a new people of God, summed up in the New Jerusalem of Hebrews and Revelation.

Robyn Banks
August 15th 2003, 04:28 PM
RevSteve45:
You probably think the NT was written by a bunch of Jews who were sitting around one day and said, "Hey! Let's invent a story about a Messiah who was crucified & rose again! While we're at it, we can throw in a few OT prophecies & say He fulfilled those, too!"
Strawman.

You make reference to the Fundamentalist False dichotomy:
either:
1. The Bible is entirely true, or
2. The writers intentionally lied.

However, this omits another explanation. In respect of the use of OT prophecies it is simply this: the NT writers honestly, though mistakenly, explained the event of Jesus' life and death according to the traditions that had come down to them.

Hope that helps.

Robyn Banks

Robyn Banks
August 15th 2003, 04:46 PM
Solly:
Question, why shouldn't the view of the early Jews be as important as modern commentators, most of whom deny prophecy in the Bible anyway, and seek to resolve issues by referring to past events.
Answer: the views of "early Jews" are also important references. For example, the translators of the LXX chose to translate the reference to 'the Servant' by adding the clarification that this is means Israel. This is the earliest Jewish interpretation of 'the Servant' we have, and it is a collective figure.

In addition, Origen records his arguments against those Jews who believed that 'the Servant' was collective Israel.

Moving on to the Targums, Jonathan (and may following him) associated the Servant with the Messiah, but attributed the sufferings of the Messiah to Israel collectively. This is quite impossible exegetically. And it is this liberal and loose rabbinic hermeneutic which has made the Targums a poor source for contextual interpretation.

In addition, the Targums associate the Servant with 'the Righteous' generally, even well after Jonathan's association of 'the Servant' with 'the Messiah'.

So, in examining the view of the 'early Jews', it pays to remember that we are dealing with differing views, and in relation to the early Targums we are dealing with a hermeneutic which does not pay much attention to exegesis.



Solly:
Equally, the testimony of later Jews, who themselves became more anti-Christian in their interpretation of scripture, is not unbiased with regard to this matter.
It is true that later Jews were more anti-Christian. However, they were also more 'scientific' in their interpretation of the Old Testament, not relying on the flights of fancy of earlier interpretors. Beginning with Rashi, there is more of an attempt towards exegesis than the creative, loose hermeneutic of earlier Jewish interpretors.




Solly:
So the question is, why it took so long for the Jews themselves to stop seeing this text as Messianic, when all they had to do was deny it from the start.
Well - the Jews did deny it from the start. The LXX translators were the 'start' of Jewish interpretation of 'the Servant', which they identified with Israel.

The early Targums then made flights of fancy in interpretation of 'the Servant'. The real shift came in the later Middle Ages as the literal meaning began to usurp the deeper, non-exegetical meanings.




Solly:
The Jews only denied that Jesus was the Messiah they had expected, not that their scriptures did not point to a Messiah, in context.
Early targumist inerpretation was hardly "in context". :smile:




Solly:
Lastly (so much posted, so little time to digest and respond) the Christian would point out that faithful Israel is only fulfilled in Christ. National Israel was being rebuked within a short while of their restoration. They never made it, as 70 AD proved. Christ, the substitution, the suffering servant, took the place, bore the punishment, and wrought out an obedience to God, and established a new people of God, summed up in the New Jerusalem of Hebrews and Revelation.
Of course. Another 'spiritualising' interpretation of the text.

Hope that helps.

Robyn Banks

Waterrock
August 21st 2003, 10:03 AM
Dear Robyn Banks,

That was quite a post. I want to respond to some of your claims, and introduce the concept of "sensus plenior" into the discussion. Unfortunately I am somewhat swamped and there's something else I wanted to address first. So for now I will just float up this thread so as to keep it visible and in-mind. Please stay tuned.

Yours in Christ,

Waterrock

Robyn Banks
August 21st 2003, 03:03 PM
Waterrock:

Dear Robyn Banks,

That was quite a post. I want to respond to some of your claims, and introduce the concept of "sensus plenior" into the discussion. Unfortunately I am somewhat swamped and there's something else I wanted to address first. So for now I will just float up this thread so as to keep it visible and in-mind. Please stay tuned.

The post(s) on the servant of Isaiah arose out of a summary of one of the issues in a debate between me and Jason Gastrich. The URL of the debate is currently in my signature line.

I discussed sensus plenior in that debate. To summarise, if you are going to introduce sensus plenior, you cannot also argue for a linear prediction-fulfillment model. Arguing for one excludes the other.

I discussed with Jason the difference between 2 quite different types of 'future meaning', and concluded that sensus plenior is non-exegetical, and therefore mutually exclusive of asserting that a prediction had come true in reality:

-------------------

It is helpful to distinguish between two types of ‘double fulfillment’:
1. Double fulfullment where the second fulfillment is a ‘fulfillment’ of a divine intent that is not exegetically part of the (human) authorial intent – i.e. ‘sensus plenior’, and
2. Double fulfillment where the human author intends two fulfillments of his text, and therefore each fulfillment is within the context of the prophetic text.

New Testament scholar Craig Blomberg makes a similar distinction:

“The expression "double fulfillment" at times has been a virtual synonym for sensus plenior, that is, the idea that an OT text has a straightforward literal meaning and a second, more esoteric or opaque meaning, often understood to be part of the divine intent of the text but not consciously in the human author's mind. That is most assuredly not how I am using the expression. Rather, by double fulfillment I mean that … the results of an ordinary grammatico-historical exegesis of the OT text point clearly to a referent within the time frame of the OT books. Yet those same passages, especially when read within the context of their immediately surrounding paragraphs or chapters, disclose a further dimension of meaning never approximated by any OT-age event.”‘Future meaning’ – if by the term you are in fact referring to sensus plenior, and not the second type of ‘double fulfillment’ - is not a meaning contained in the text at all, but a different meaning from the human authorial meaning: a ‘fuller meaning’. The relationship between the prophetic text and the fulfillment is dialogic rather than linear. For example, Jesus' return from Egypt is somehow a 'fulfillment' of Hosea 11:1, although Hosea was making a reference to the distant past - to the Exodus some 1300 years before Jesus! And this is the major reason why I wanted to discuss predictions (exegeted from the text) coming true in reality, and not ‘prophecies’ being ‘fulfilled’.

You can’t have your cake and eat it, too, Jason. If a future text gives new meaning to an old text (i.e. sensus plenior), it is not also possible to claim that the new text is merely exegeting the context of the old text. It is also offering an interpretation beyond its context, which is claimed by sensus plenior exponents as a new, ‘divine’ meaning, albeit one that God always had in mind. Your doctrine of ‘sensus plenior’ or ‘future meaning’ is therefore a two-edged sword. Any given prophecy fulfillment is either a linear prediction-fulfillment consistent with context, or an intertextual reinterpretation of the original prophecy that transcends its original context.

-------------------

Hope that helps.

Robyn Banks

The King
November 5th 2007, 09:51 PM
Thanks, Robyn. I was searching Google for a reference to the Suffering Servant, and your extremely comprehensive posts came up! They told me everything I ever wanted!!

The King

Lili
November 9th 2007, 03:59 PM
The King, this thread was posted 4 years ago. In addition, Robyn Banks has been banned.

The King
November 30th 2007, 06:32 PM
It was still a great post, and provided everything I wanted!

The King

TheAnalogman
November 30th 2007, 06:37 PM
Is this a TWEB record for digging up the oldest thread? I suppose Mossy would know.

:haha: @ Mossrose.

The King
November 30th 2007, 06:40 PM
I found it on Google.

The King

TheAnalogman
November 30th 2007, 06:45 PM
I found it on Google.

The King

Cool.

The King
November 30th 2007, 06:47 PM
Yes - Google is cool.

The King

One Bad Pig
December 4th 2007, 10:38 PM
Can't resist bumping your old threads when you sockpuppet, can you?

Dee Dee Warren
December 4th 2007, 10:42 PM
Wow, Robyn, it's a been a while since you created a sockpuppet. Whatsa matter, bored with Legos?