Who is the suffering servant of Isaiah 53?

[Rainbow Mage]

Hi friends,

My questions follow, and thank you all kindly for participation.

Where does Isaiah 53 ever seem to be about Jesus? Doesn't the passage say the servant was brought forth like a tender shoot from dry ground? (Isaiah 53.2)

Wouldn't dry ground infer Egypt, and so the tender shoot infers Israel? (Hosea 11.1)

Isn't this taken out of context by Christians to infer Jesus?

 

[sojourner]

Hi friends,

My questions follow, and thank you all kindly for participation.

Where does Isaiah 53 ever seem to be about Jesus? Doesn't the passage say the servant was brought forth like a tender shoot from dry ground? (Isaiah 53.2)

Wouldn't dry ground infer Egypt, and so the tender shoot infers Israel? (Hosea 11.1)

Isn't this taken out of context by Christians to infer Jesus?

Yes and no. The prophecy isn't specifically "about Jesus," for the writer didn't know Jesus, since Jesus hadn't been born. But Christians, in hindsight, look at this image as a prophecy that Jesus did, indeed fulfill, especially in light of Matthew's assertion that the church is the True Israel.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Yes and no. The prophecy isn't specifically "about Jesus," for the writer didn't know Jesus, since Jesus hadn't been born. But Christians, in hindsight, look at this image as a prophecy that Jesus did, indeed fulfill, especially in light of Matthew's assertion that the church is the True Israel.

I see, and you do not see that as a misuse of the passage? You admit the author did not have Jesus in mind?

 

[sojourner]

I see, and you do not see that as a misuse of the passage? You admit the author did not have Jesus in mind?

No, I don't. I see it as dishonest to say that "Isaiah was talking about Jesus."

 

[Shiranui117]

I see, and you do not see that as a misuse of the passage? You admit the author did not have Jesus in mind?

There are layers of Scriptural interpretation, according to the Fathers: The literal/historical, the moral, and the spiritual. Literally/historically, Isaiah 53 is about Israel. Spiritually, it is about Jesus Christ.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

No, I don't. I see it as dishonest to say that "Isaiah was talking about Jesus."

How is that any different than making an allowance for it to be viewed as a prophecy of Jesus?

 

[fallingblood]

Hi friends,

My questions follow, and thank you all kindly for participation.

Where does Isaiah 53 ever seem to be about Jesus? Doesn't the passage say the servant was brought forth like a tender shoot from dry ground? (Isaiah 53.2)

Wouldn't dry ground infer Egypt, and so the tender shoot infers Israel? (Hosea 11.1)

Isn't this taken out of context by Christians to infer Jesus?

It does not necessarily infer Jesus, but instead, was seen as a reference to the Messiah. Since some believed that Jesus was the Messiah, this passage was able to be associated with him.

This was not really too much of a step either as there were a number of Jewish interpretations that also saw this chapter as being about a future Messiah.

So not really taken out of context, just interpreted in a different way.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

There are layers of Scriptural interpretation, according to the Fathers: The literal/historical, the moral, and the spiritual. Literally/historically, Isaiah 53 is about Israel. Spiritually, it is about Jesus Christ.

How is it spiritually about Jesus? You do realize that by saying it can spiritually be about Jesus you're making it so it can spiritually be about anybody?

 

[Rainbow Mage]

It does not necessarily infer Jesus, but instead, was seen as a reference to the Messiah. Since some believed that Jesus was the Messiah, this passage was able to be associated with him.

This was not really too much of a step either as there were a number of Jewish interpretations that also saw this chapter as being about a future Messiah.

So not really taken out of context, just interpreted in a different way.

It could be argued though that Israel is a type of messiah too. That has been an opinion throughout rabbinic Judaism.

Also, what Jews viewed it that way, and how?

 

[fallingblood]

It could be argued though that Israel is a type of messiah too. That has been an opinion throughout rabbinic Judaism.

Also, what Jews viewed it that way, and how?

Looking at some early Jewish writings, there are examples of the suffering servant being seen as the Messiah. The Targum of Jonathan, for example, implies that the suffering servant in the Messiah.

The Zohar does make reference to Isaiah 53 as referring to the Messiah.

Also, in the Talmud, Sanhedrin 98b, associates it with the Messiah as well.

I first actually came across this idea when reading the commentary in the Jewish Study Bible, where they state that it was once accepted by various Jews that the verse was referring to the Messiah.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

My guess, and it's just a guess: Israel.

 

[von551]

It's talking about the Messiah, whoever you think that is (i.e., Yeshua). The Hebrew wording of "Him" is used singularly, not plurally. So Judaism using it as a reference to the nation of Israel is a isogesis of what the text is actually saying. They obviously did this because of the Yeshua issue, how much Is. 53 matches up with His life/death.

 

[steeltoes]

It appears that the Jesus character was lifted from Isaiah by the gospel writers.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Looking at some early Jewish writings, there are examples of the suffering servant being seen as the Messiah. The Targum of Jonathan, for example, implies that the suffering servant in the Messiah.

The Zohar does make reference to Isaiah 53 as referring to the Messiah.

Also, in the Talmud, Sanhedrin 98b, associates it with the Messiah as well.

I first actually came across this idea when reading the commentary in the Jewish Study Bible, where they state that it was once accepted by various Jews that the verse was referring to the Messiah.

Targum Jonathan is considered somewhat spurious to my understanding. The Zohar does indeed take that view but also says its only messiah ben Yosef. It is true that view did exist, but so did the view of it being Israel.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

It's talking about the Messiah, whoever you think that is (i.e., Yeshua). The Hebrew wording of "Him" is used singularly, not plurally. So Judaism using it as a reference to the nation of Israel is a isogesis of what the text is actually saying. They obviously did this because of the Yeshua issue, how much Is. 53 matches up with His life/death.

Actually Israel is often referred to in the singular, such as Israel being called God's son, wife etc.

He fits perfectly, and I think you'd find the sufferings of Israel perfectly in line with what the chapter says.

I brought him (Israel) up like a tender shoot out of dry ground. He had no beauty or grace that we (the nations) should desire him

 

[Freelance_Policeman]

Actually Israel is often referred to in the singular, such as Israel being called God's son, wife etc.

He fits perfectly, and I think you'd find the sufferings of Israel perfectly in line with what the chapter says.

I brought him (Israel) up like a tender shoot out of dry ground. He had no beauty or grace that we (the nations) should desire him

"Although he had done no violence, and no deceit was found in his mouth." Verse 9.

"The righteous one, my servant..." Verse 11.

"YHWH has laid on him the iniquity of us all." Verse 6.

How is Israel blameless and yet being punished for its own sin? And whose sin, exactly, is it taking?

 

[Rainbow Mage]

"Although he had done no violence, and no deceit was found in his mouth." Verse 9.

"The righteous one, my servant..." Verse 11.

"YHWH has laid on him the iniquity of us all." Verse 6.

How is Israel blameless and yet being punished for its own sin? And whose sin, exactly, is it taking?

Apparently according to Rashi and others god allows Israel to be punished for the sins of the nations, or to show the nations their iniquity

 

[Freelance_Policeman]

Apparently according to Rashi and others god allows Israel to be punished for the sins of the nations, or to show the nations their iniquity

Yeah, that's completely fair. Anyway, Israel was certainly not without sin, hence the exile.

Considering Isaiah is a Abrahamic book, could we try to interpret it by any Abrahamic religons?

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Yeah, that's completely fair. Anyway, Israel was certainly not without sin, hence the exile.

Considering Isaiah is a Abrahamic book, could we try to interpret it by any Abrahamic religons?

In this case its a Jewish book.

 

[fallingblood]

Targum Jonathan is considered somewhat spurious to my understanding. The Zohar does indeed take that view but also says its only messiah ben Yosef. It is true that view did exist, but so did the view of it being Israel.

However, since the view that the suffering servant could be the Messiah, it isn't much of a stretch to then label Jesus the suffering servant as he was believed to be the Messiah by some.

The passage is not taken out of context to infer that it referred to Jesus. For those who believed Jesus was the Messiah, it was only natural to take a verse that was believed to be about the Messiah and apply it to Jesus.