-6-
The Suffering Messiah of Isaiah
53: Part 1
Finally we come to the clearest
Messianic prophecy of all (Isaiah 52:13-53:12). Its clarity rises from the text
like a majestic mountain with peaks reaching far above the clouds. Any doubts or
suspicions that might attend other prophecies applied by the New Testament
writers are put to rest by this towering monument to the Messiahship of Jesus.
If Isaiah 53 is shown
conclusively to be a prophecy of the Messiah finding historical fulfillment in
Jesus, then surely our case is proven from this prophecy alone. Also, credence
is automatically given to other Messianic passages that are applied to Jesus
that might be plausible but not conclusive in and of themselves. However, if the
anti-missionary can defuse our interpretation, then he need not perform mop-up
operations on other texts. The battle is conceded. With so much on the line one
could scarcely do this prophetic masterpiece justice without devoting two
chapters to its exposition.
Israel or Messiah?
Christians are often portrayed as
dishonest exegetes who, with Messianic colored spectacles, scan the sacred pages
of the Tanakh in desperate search of passages that they can underhandedly apply
to Jesus. Regarding the Christian application of Isaiah 53 to Jesus, Levy
states: "Isaiah 53 then is in reality no 'proof' at all, but rather a
contrived confirmation for someone who has already chosen Christianity" (Jews
For Judaism Newsletter, Isaiah 53).
The anti-missionary criticizes
our claim that Isaiah 53 is a prophecy concerning the Messiah. He tells us that
the proper view is that the suffering Servant of Isaiah has reference to the
nation of Israel, not to the Messiah.
Many, however, do not realize
that at one time virtually the entire Jewish community believed that this
passage was Messianic (though they didn't believe that it applied to Jesus). As
the following quotations indicate, the ancient synagogue certainly understood it
to be so:
1) During the 1st century in the
Targum of Jonathan, the following reference is made to Isaiah 52:13
"...Behold my servant, the Messiah, shall prosper; He shall be high, and
increase, and be exceedingly strong."
2) In the Babylonian Talmud,
Sanhedrin 98b, we are told that the name of the Messiah is 'The Leprous.' This
name is derived from their interpretation of the Hebrew word "nagua"
which is taken from Isaiah 53:4.
3) The Yalkut, (Vol. 2) on Isaiah
52 and 53 correlates Isaiah 53:5 to the Messiah "Where as He was pierced
for our sins"
4) In Siphre D' Bay Rav, we have
the following quote: "Thus saith Rabbi Jose of Galilee, 'Come and learn of
the merits of the King Messiah who grieves for our transgressions, as it is
written in Isaiah 53:5, 'But He was wounded for our transgressions.'"
5) In the Midrash Rabbah of Rabbi
Moses the preacher, p. 660, we have the following quote:
God hath from the beginning made
a covenant with the Messiah and told Him, 'My righteous Messiah, those who are
entrusted to you, their sins will bring you into a heavy yoke; your ears will
hear great shame; your mouth will taste great bitterness, and your tongue will
cleave to the roof of your mouth, and your soul will be weakened in grief and
sighing. Are you satisfied with this?' And He answered, 'I joyfully accept all
these agonies in order that not one of Israel should be lost.' Immediately, the
Messiah accepted all agonies with love, as it is written in Isaiah 53:7, 'he was
oppressed and he was afflicted.' (Note also that some of this quote appears to
be taken from Psalm 22:16.)
Modern-Day Judaism
Modern-day Jewish thought is that
the Servant of Isaiah 53 is the nation of Israel. Rashi ('R' Solomon ben
Yitzchak) in saying that the passage referred to Israel's sufferings at the
hands of the Gentiles, lent support to this position. It is believed, however,
that the savage persecution inflicted on the Jewish people by the Catholic
Crusaders adversely influenced his interpretation of the passage as the
following quote indicates: "Since Christians interpret Isaiah 53 as being a
prophecy concerning Jesus, we maintain that this is a prophecy concerning the
people of Israel."
Rashi's opinions were adopted by
others but he was opposed by Maimonides (who is considered to be the greatest
Talmudic authority of the Middle
Ages), by Alshech, and by many others. 'R.' Moshe Cohen Iben Crispin of Cordova
(14th century) comments that Rashi "distorts the passage from its natural
meaning," for "it was given of God as a description of the Messiah,
whereby, when any should claim to be the Messiah, to judge by the resemblance or
non-resemblance to it whether He were the Messiah or no."
The great Jewish educator, Herz
Homberg (1749-1841), also took exception to Rashi's interpretation when he says,
"According to the opinion of Rashi and Ibn Ezra, it relates to Israel at
the end of their captivity. But if so, what can be the meaning of the passage,
'He was wounded for our transgressions'? Who was wounded? Who are the
transgressors? Who carried the
sickness and bare the pain? The
fact is that it refers to King Messiah."
Isaiah 52:13-53:12 Verse By Verse
Of course, just because the
ancient synagogue believed the passage is Messianic does not prove that it is.
Ultimately, proof must be derived from the Scriptures. To this end, we shall
study the prophecy verse by verse comparing the anti-missionaries' position next
to ours. In the process, we will vindicate the Messianic interpretation by the
context and demonstrate from history how Jesus fulfilled it.
"Behold, My servant shall
prosper, He shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. As many were
astonished at thee; his visage was marred more than any man, And his form more
than the sons of men" (52:13-14).
The fact that "my servant" is in the singular does not discount
it as being a reference to national Israel. The anti-missionary is right when he
states that national Israel is often referred to in the singular. But he fails
to take note of the many times "my servant" has reference to a
singular individual in the Bible. Abraham, Moses, David and others are referred
to as "my servant" (Gen. 26:24; Num. 12:8; 2 Sam. 7:5). In Isaiah 49,
"my servant" refers to the Messiah who was to "...raise up the
tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee
for a light to the nations, that my salvation may be unto the end of the
earth"(49:6). (Here the Servant cannot be Israel, as the anti-missionary
claims, for he is to "raise up
the tribes of Jacob"). Jesus is called "my servant" in Matthew
12. And His message of salvation went unto all nations in fulfillment of this
prophecy (Luke 2:32; Acts 13:47-48, Matt. 28:19).
The fact that God's servant was
to "be exalted and lifted up" could also be applied to Israel or the
Messiah. The sages of old said that the servant would be exalted higher than
Abraham and Moses. It is also significant to note that the next verse talks
about God's servant being beaten beyond recognition. This is a perfect
description of the abuse Jesus suffered at the cross. Jesus, at Pilate's orders,
was scourged (John 19:1). History indicates that the Romans used sharp bones and
metal at the end of the whip that would tear into the victim's flesh and
muscles. Then they wove a crown of thorns and jammed it onto His head (John
19:2). They spat in His face and took a long stick and struck Him with it on the
head again and again (Matt. 27:26-31). He was repeatedly punched in the face.
While some crucifixion victims could live on for days, Jesus' beatings were so
severe that he lasted a mere six hours on the cross.
To this the anti-missionary is
quick to retort: "Look at the abuse Israel has taken over the years, i.e.,
holocaust, etc." Although the above description seems better fitted for a
singular individual, their interpretation is also plausible if taken in
isolation from the broader context.
So shall he sprinkle many
nations...(52:15a).
The servant was to "sprinkle
many nations." Twenty-one out of the twenty-nine times the word
"sprinkle" is used elsewhere in the Tanakh; it has to do with the
blood atonement. In a few places, it refers to sprinkling of oil or water for a
ceremonial cleansing. Here, however, the sprinkling has to do with blood
atonement since the servant was to die as an atonement for the sins of the
nations and particularly for those of Israel. Nowhere in the Tanakh does it
speak of the nation of Israel being a sacrifice for the sins of the nations. But
the New Covenant does speak of the sprinkling of Jesus' blood for our atonement:
"...to Jesus the mediator of
the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling..." (Hebrews 12:24).
"...elect according to the
foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience
and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus the Messiah..." (1 Peter 1:2).
"...the kings shall shut
their mouths at him; for that which had not been told them shall they see, and
that which they had not heard shall they consider" (52:15b).
Many Jewish and Christian
scholars believe that this verse describes the response of the nations when the
Messiah comes to rule on the earth. Christians say that worldly rulers,
especially Jewish ones, will be shocked to discover that Jesus was indeed the
Messiah that died for the sins of the people. The Jews say that worldly kings
will be shocked to find out that Christianity was wrong and the despised Jews
were right. Again since both positions are possible, we must go to other verses
to find out which interpretation is true.
Based on this verse, Jews For
Judaism alleges: "52:15 tells us explicitly that it is the nations of
the world, the gentiles, who are doing the talking in Isaiah 53" (Jews
For Judaism Newsletter, Isaiah 53; See also Sigal, p. 37).
Upon this premise, Tovia Singer
builds a skyscraper of "impeccable" arguments in his three-tape series
on Isaiah 53. Indeed, it is crucial for the anti-missionary to establish this.
For without it, his whole theory of Israel being the Servant collapses on
itself. In response to this, it
should be noted that there are no kings being quoted in Isaiah 53. Isaiah is
writing about them, not quoting them! There is no change in person. Singer, to
buttress his theory, appeals to Micah 7:12-17, which speaks of the nations
putting their hands to their mouths in amazement. But Micah also does not quote
the nations, he merely states that they will lick the dust and be
"afraid" of God and Israel (v.16-17).
As we shall see, the concept that the ones speaking throughout Isaiah's
prophecy are the wicked kings is wholly untenable.
"[Who has1] believed our
report? And to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed:" (53:1).
Obviously, these are not pagan
Gentile kings speaking Jewish theology here. The "our" has reference
to Isaiah and those with whom he identifies the Jewish nation. Here we find the
first inference that the Messiah's initial appearance had to be taken by faith.
As we've seen, first century Israel, like her twentieth century counterpart, was
bent on seeing the Messiah come as a glorious conqueror. When Jesus came to them
"lowly," riding on a donkey, they simply would not believe Isaiah's
report. "He came to his own and his own received him not" (John 1:12).
"For he grew up before him
as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground..."(53:2a).
Here it speaks of the Messiah
growing up as a tender plant. This intimates that the servant would start out as
all men do, a mere infant. He will not be an angel from heaven who dramatically
appears on the scene. A plant starts as a single seed buried in the ground.
Jesus' incarnation started as the "seed of the woman" (Gen. 3:15).
After His birth, "Jesus increased in wisdom and stature and in favor with
God and men" (Luke 2:52).
"...he had no form nor
comeliness; and when we see him, there is no beauty that we should desire
him" (53:2b).
The gospel writers note nothing
spectacular about Jesus' outward appearance. The emphasis is always placed on
His inner beauty. There were times in Israel's history when she possessed an
outwardly beautiful appearance, i.e., when the Queen of Sheba came and marveled
at Solomon's well-ordered kingdom. In fact, every nation on earth came to hear
the great wisdom of Solomon. Each one brought costly gifts (1 Kings 10). But the
beauty of the Servant of Isaiah's discourse would not be outward but rather the
inward beauty of a sinless soul.
This is the first verse in
Isaiah's prophetic discourse where we find conclusive evidence that the Servant
could not possibly be national Israel. Isaiah distinguishes the Servant from the
nation of Israel when he says, "when we see him." The "we"
refers to Isaiah and the nation of Israel. The "him" refers to the
Servant. The two could not be one and the same. Acceptance of the
anti-missionary position would reduce Isaiah's teaching to a senseless
tautology: "and when [Israel] will see [Israel]." This obviously does
not make any sense.
But "when [Israel] shall see
[the Messiah]" does make sense. This distinction continues throughout
verses 3-8 as the Prophet contrasts the Servant of God to Israel eight times
proving conclusively that the servant cannot be the nation of Israel.
He was despised and we
esteemed him not (verse 3);...he hath borne griefs inflicted by us...we
did esteem him...(v. 4); he was wounded through our
transgressions,...the chastisement of our peace was upon him,
and with his wounds we were healed. All we like
sheep have gone astray; we have turned everyone to his own way; and the LORD
hath caused the iniquity of us all to fall upon him
(v. 5-6); For he was cut off out of the land of the living;
through the transgressions of my people [a phrase which always has
reference to the nation of Israel in the Tanakh] was he stricken (v.8).
"He was despised and
rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and as one from
whom men hide their face he was despised, and we esteemed him not"(53:3).
Without question, the Messiah in
His first appearance was to be unpopular and rejected. But Larry Levy asks how
can this be true of Jesus when the New Testament says he was, "’praised
by all’ (Luke 4:14-15); followed by multitudes (Matt.4:25) who would later
acclaim him as a prophet upon his triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Matt.21:9-11);
had a multitude bemoan his fate at his crucifixion (Lk. 23:27); taken by
stealth, as the rulers feared ‘a riot of the people’" (Mk. 14:1-2)? (Jews
For Judaism Newsletter, Isaiah 53).
Levy, unfortunately, did not
study these passages closely enough. Jesus was indeed patronized by thousands of
Jews, particularly during the year of His popularity (His second year of
ministry). But most became disenchanted and gradually forsook Jesus. Remember
Moses, a prophet to whom Jesus is likened (Deut. 18:15 cf. Acts 3:22-23), at
first was so famous that even a mixed multitude of Egyptians followed him out of
Egypt in addition to the nation of Israel. But Moses' popularity did not last
long. Eventually the very ones he delivered out of Egypt rejected him.
The quotation from Luke 4:14-15
was not talking about everyone in Israel but only those in the region of
Galilee. By reading the next verse, one discovers Jesus being driven out of
Nazareth by the religious Jews who had previously praised Him (Luke 4:14-30).
Thousands of Jews did follow Jesus at various times of His ministry. But they
were only a small fraction of the total population of Israel. The word
"multitude" in the gospels could be as many as five thousand (Matt.
14:19-21) or as few as one hundred and fifty-three (John 21:6). Moreover, most
within these multitudes were nominal disciples who, according to Jesus, followed
Him for the "fishes and loaves" He had miraculously provided. Even
they eventually forsook Jesus when they realized that He was not going to
establish an earthly kingdom and deliver them from the Romans (John 6). Only 120
of Christ's disciples were there on the day of Pentecost awaiting the coming of
the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:15). This was 50 days after His resurrection. While he
was on earth, He had perhaps only 500 true disciples (1 Cor. 15:6).
Regarding the rejection of the
Messiah, we might ask our Jewish brethren about whom did David prophesy when he
said the "stone which the builders rejected has become the capstone"?
(Psalm 118:22, cf. Isa. 28:16). Jesus posed this very same question to the
leaders of His day. And it has reference to none other than the One who
fulfilled it, Jesus the Messiah. (Psalm 118:22 is quoted and applied to Jesus in
Luke 20:17, cf. 1 Peter 2:8.)
"Surely he hath borne griefs inflicted by us, and
suffered sorrows we have caused: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God,
and afflicted" (53:4).
Since this verse is quoted in
Matthew and applied to Jesus' healing the sick (Matt. 8:17), the anti-missionary
concludes that even the New Testament writers did not believe that this prophecy
had reference to Jesus' atonement for sin. But this does not logically follow.
Just because Matthew applies verse 4 to physical illness, doesn't mean that
other verses could not have reference to spiritual salvation. Philip applied Isa.
53:7-8 to Jesus' death (Acts 8:32-33), and Peter applied Isa. 53:5-6 to our
salvation from sin (1 Peter 2:24-25). The Hebrew word for "griefs" is
"choliy." It means sicknesses. Both physical and spiritual sicknesses
are the result of man's fall. The Messiah is to banish both. While Jesus was
healing people of physical sickness, "the kingdom of God" was among us
(Luke 11:20). His healing miracles were a foretaste of the complete healing that
will prevail in the coming Messianic kingdom when the curse of sickness and
disease is permanently repealed.
Incredibly enough, some
anti-missionaries argue that Jesus couldn't be the Servant of Isaiah 53 because
He did not die by disease. The rank inconsistency of this argument is revealed
by the fact that the anti-missionary still sees the passage as being fulfilled
in national Israel, which did not die by disease either.