Freelance_Policeman
Member
I'd still be open to Christian or Muslim thoughts on the subject.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Who is the suffering servant of Isaiah 53?
- Thread starter Rainbow Mage
- Start date
I'd still be open to Christian or Muslim thoughts on the subject.
Flankerl
Well-Known Member
Or Taoist, Buddhist, Sikh, Hinduist views.
But they would still not represent the original intent of the author because they come from a different cultural and religious background. And yeah that includes Christians and Muslims.
InChrist
Free4ever
I believe the prophetic verses of Isaiah 53 refer to the Messiah, Y'shua...Jesus.
"It's commonly maintained that Isaiah 53 was never considered messianic by rabbis and Jewish sages. Sometimes the statement is phrased as, Judaism teaches" that Isaiah 53 refers to the nation of Israel.
The fact is that Isaiah 53 (more precisely, 52:13 to 53:12) has been interpreted in messianic terms by a wide variety of Jewish commentators over a long period of time. Other interpretations have certainly been offered, including the view first popularized by Rashi in medieval times that the prophet speaks of the nation of Israel. Neverthless the messianic interpretation has a long history in Jewish Bible exegesis, as shown by the quotations below."
excerpt from:
https://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/prophecy/jewish-messianic-interpretations-of-isaiah-53
"It's commonly maintained that Isaiah 53 was never considered messianic by rabbis and Jewish sages. Sometimes the statement is phrased as, Judaism teaches" that Isaiah 53 refers to the nation of Israel.
The fact is that Isaiah 53 (more precisely, 52:13 to 53:12) has been interpreted in messianic terms by a wide variety of Jewish commentators over a long period of time. Other interpretations have certainly been offered, including the view first popularized by Rashi in medieval times that the prophet speaks of the nation of Israel. Neverthless the messianic interpretation has a long history in Jewish Bible exegesis, as shown by the quotations below."
excerpt from:
https://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/prophecy/jewish-messianic-interpretations-of-isaiah-53
The son and the suffering servant are both the same person, probably Israel; however in a Christian context (perhaps in some Jewish one somewhere, too) the Son is an abstraction that is not limited to a specific national groupie. The Son is, if you will, the collection of those people who choose to suffer for the sake of improving the world. In Christianity Jesus is called many things in the NT books, and one of these is the 'First of many brothers.' He teaches his disciples to take up their own crosses just like he did, figuratively. This is difficult to explain in a short post, but its OK to be a Christian and still say that Israel is the Son mentioned in Isaiah 53. To Jesus, the Son is has already gone into humanity, no longer held strictly in a central community. The details are many and debatable.Quotes from opening post said:
Isaiah does not seem to think that the glory of the LORD should always be limited to Israelis or Jews only. Two closely linked concepts in prophecy are the Son and the Servant. The Son is more immortal than a mere group of people, and whoever takes on the position of the suffering servant can be called the Son (or Sons). Yes, the suffering servant is in Isaiah's lifetime, mostly, the people of Israel yet they themselves were not originally the Son. The Son existed even before they did, and they were simply chosen to step into the role. This they do by keeping their Laws, good behavior, love and so on. The Son and the Suffering Servant, however are not static or stale dictionary definitions, however, however etc. however. The LORD once threatened to kill off every Israeli and start over with Moses by himself. Although the LORD relented, a very important point was made.
Yes, often. Perhaps it will be the end of Christianity. That is and always was a possibility, however the Son is not limited and would not be destroyed.
Last edited:
Hi InChrist,
The jewsforjesus.org site used the Targum as proof that it sees "the messiah" as the servant. What they fail to tell you is that it also sees the suffering being done by the Jewish people.(written 9 centuries before Rashi)
Rashi is not, repeat not, the first popularized source of seeing Isaiah 53 as the Jewish people. Origen, a prominent and influential church father, conceded in the year 248 CE – eight centuries before Rashi was born – that the consensus among the Jews in his time was that Isaiah 53 “bore reference to the whole [Jewish] 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.
Since the nation of Israel would include a messiah at some time, it would not be out of the question that a commentator would include said person in with Isaiah 53. In the Midrash, medical advice or Moses has affiliated with Isaiah 53, but a midrash, from what I understand(I am not Jewish) does not override nor alter the plain meaning of a text.
The NT book itself shows no one thought Isaiah 53 referred to "the Messiah" as shown here:
Luke 18:31 Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold , we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished . 32 For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked , and spitefully entreated , and spitted on : 33 And they shall scourge him, and put him to death : and the third day he shall rise again . 34 And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them , neither knew they the things which were spoken .
If it were common knowledge that Isaiah 53 was about a messiah, how is it that they did not understand, it should have been, well,,,, common knowledge.
Fletch
PS Psalms 44 is a mirror to Isaiah 53 from the servant's perspective, while Isaiah 53 is from the kings' of the nations.
The jewsforjesus.org site used the Targum as proof that it sees "the messiah" as the servant. What they fail to tell you is that it also sees the suffering being done by the Jewish people.(written 9 centuries before Rashi)
Rashi is not, repeat not, the first popularized source of seeing Isaiah 53 as the Jewish people. Origen, a prominent and influential church father, conceded in the year 248 CE – eight centuries before Rashi was born – that the consensus among the Jews in his time was that Isaiah 53 “bore reference to the whole [Jewish] 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.
Since the nation of Israel would include a messiah at some time, it would not be out of the question that a commentator would include said person in with Isaiah 53. In the Midrash, medical advice or Moses has affiliated with Isaiah 53, but a midrash, from what I understand(I am not Jewish) does not override nor alter the plain meaning of a text.
The NT book itself shows no one thought Isaiah 53 referred to "the Messiah" as shown here:
Luke 18:31 Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold , we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished . 32 For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked , and spitefully entreated , and spitted on : 33 And they shall scourge him, and put him to death : and the third day he shall rise again . 34 And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them , neither knew they the things which were spoken .
If it were common knowledge that Isaiah 53 was about a messiah, how is it that they did not understand, it should have been, well,,,, common knowledge.
Fletch
PS Psalms 44 is a mirror to Isaiah 53 from the servant's perspective, while Isaiah 53 is from the kings' of the nations.
Last edited:
In Mathew 2:13-23, Jesus is said to go to Egypt, thus even in a literal sense, Jesus could have been brought forth from Egypt.
That being said, the tender shoot springing forth from dry ground appears to be a metaphor or perhaps a parable of sorts. That being said, there I see no reason to assume that "dry ground" is literally dry ground.
The concept of dry ground is that it is lifeless. Raising a tender shoot amongst such barren ground could be interpreted to refer to Jesus spiritual life, and His tender nature as a spiritually living shoot, from the surrounding spiritually dead.
CMike
Well-Known Member
FranklinMichaelV.3
Well-Known Member
Wasn't Jacob a suffering servant for a bit?
Hi Danieldemol,
The NT character of Jesus had the dry ground covered, but not the tender part, instead Jesus grew up strong:
Luke 2:40 And the child grew , and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him.
Fletch
PS The servant of Isaiah 53:9 made his sepulchre with the wicked but in the NT story, Jesus made his with the good. The exact opposite.
Luke 23:50 And, behold , there was a man named Joseph, a counsellor; and he was a good man, and a just:
Last edited:
Galen.Iksnudnard
Active Member
In my opinion, it refers to the Jewish People as a whole. Some Christians claim that it refers to Jesus, but this is one of those things where it may have been shoehorned to fit into a certain agenda, in much the same way that the prophecies of Nostradamus supposedly "predicted" JFK getting shot or 9/11, but strangely nobody was able to figure it out beforehand.
Christian missionaries are very attracted to the "suffering servant" theory because on the surface, it sounds a lot like the xtian view of Jesus. However in the context of the entire Hebrew Scriptures, it becomes clear that Isaiah 53 does not refer to the Messiah; it refers to the Jewish people as a whole. It refers to the persecution that the Jewish people would suffer shortly thereafter and also throughout history for being the chosen people of G-d and trying to improve the world.
In fact, earlier Isaiah says clearly
Isaiah 41:8-9: "But you, ISRAEL, are My servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the SEED of Abraham My friend. Whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and from the nobles I called you, and I said to you, 'You are my servant', I chose you and I did not despise you."
This makes it clear that it is Israel that is the suffering servant of G-d, not Jesus.
[youtube]_TeOtzTaAco[/youtube]
ISAIAH 53: SUFFERING SERVANT IS ISRAEL NOT JESUS
For the record I am a Christian and NOT Jewish.
Christian missionaries are very attracted to the "suffering servant" theory because on the surface, it sounds a lot like the xtian view of Jesus. However in the context of the entire Hebrew Scriptures, it becomes clear that Isaiah 53 does not refer to the Messiah; it refers to the Jewish people as a whole. It refers to the persecution that the Jewish people would suffer shortly thereafter and also throughout history for being the chosen people of G-d and trying to improve the world.
In fact, earlier Isaiah says clearly
Isaiah 41:8-9: "But you, ISRAEL, are My servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the SEED of Abraham My friend. Whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and from the nobles I called you, and I said to you, 'You are my servant', I chose you and I did not despise you."
This makes it clear that it is Israel that is the suffering servant of G-d, not Jesus.
[youtube]_TeOtzTaAco[/youtube]
ISAIAH 53: SUFFERING SERVANT IS ISRAEL NOT JESUS
For the record I am a Christian and NOT Jewish.
Last edited:
You are defining "tender" as "weak".
This is how google defines tender;
Adjective
Showing gentleness and concern or sympathy: "he was being so kind and tender".
It is quite possible to be strong in spirit and show gentleness, concern etc. In fact these very things are a sign of spiritual strength.
Not at all. In fact, this prophecy is fulfilled in every detail in the life, ministry, death, and resurrection of God's Son. It cannot reasonably be applied to anyone else, IMO.
Hi Danieldemol,
Yes a tender shoot would be weak, not strong.
This is Webster's:
1ten·der adjective \ˈten-dər\
Definition of TENDER
1
a : having a soft or yielding texture : easily broken, cut, or damaged : delicate, fragile <tender feet>
b : easily chewed : succulent
2
a : physically weak : not able to endure hardship
b : immature, young <children of tender age>
c : incapable of resisting cold : not hardy <tender perennials>
3
: marked by, responding to, or expressing the softer emotions : fond, loving <a tender lover>
4
a : showing care : considerate, solicitous <tender regard>
b : highly susceptible to impressions or emotions : impressionable <a tender conscience>
5
a : appropriate or conducive to a delicate or sensitive constitution or character : gentle, mild <tender breeding> <tender irony>
b : delicate or soft in quality or tone <never before heard the piano sound so tender — Elva S. Daniels>
6
obsolete : dear, precious
7
a : sensitive to touch or palpation <the bruise was still tender>
b : sensitive to injury or insult : touchy <tender pride>
c : demanding careful and sensitive handling : ticklish <a tender situation>
d of a boat : easily tipped by an external force
— ten·der·ly adverb
— ten·der·ness noun
Fletch
PS How much "concern and sympathy" do you see:
Luke 2:40 And the child grew , and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him. 41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover. 42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast. 43 And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned , the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it. 44 But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance. 45 And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him. 46 And it came to pass , that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions . 47 And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers. 48 And when they saw him, they were amazed : and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold , thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing . 49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business? 50 And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them. 51 And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart. 52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.
PSS Anything on the servant's sepulchre with the wicked vs the NT's sepulchre with the good?
Last edited:
Well if that is the case the verse obviously doesn't describe Israel which repeatedly inflicts decisive military defeats on very strong opponents.
It is possible to be strong in spirit and weak in body, do you think that as a baby in a manger Jesus had the strength of Heracles?
Which summarizes the google definition in point 3.
Obviously the suffering servant need not fulfill all possible definitions of tender, how do you expect to find out if the suffering servant is succulent?!
First of all, given the vast number of interactions between Jesus and those around Him, that is a misleadingly small, misleadingly deliberate (as opposed to randomized) statistical sample of Jesus interactions.
Second of all Mary knew who Jesus was before He was even born. Jesus did not evade her, He simply stayed where He was and where He could reasonably be expected to be given the nature of who He was. To have deprived the crowd in need of His wisdom would not have been merciful.
In the balance you expect Him to have been unmerciful to many for the benefit of a couple who didn't think to look in the obvious place.
Last edited:
Hi Danieldemol,
The servant grew up as a tender shoot. Jesus grew up strong. The Hebrew word is for a plant, not your google definition of tender.
Israel grew up as a tender plant in Egypt a dry ground, they were not strong, they were slaves.
Isaiah 60:21 Thy people also shall be all righteous: they shall inherit the land for ever, the branch of my planting, the work of my hands, that I may be glorified
Fletch
PS I hope you or someone will try to tackle the servant's sepulchre with the wicked vs the NT's sepulchre with the good.