User:Dannyza1981/Sandbox

Isaiah 53, taken from the Book of Isaiah, is the last of the four Songs of the Suffering Servant, and tells the story of "The Suffering Servant". The passage is famous for its interpretation by many Christians to be prophesy of the coming of Jesus, being written over 700 years before his birth. This interpretation is rejected by Jewish theologians, most of whom believe the servant to be the nation of Israel. Many Christians view the entire chapter, and particularly this passage to refer to the suffering Jesus faced as well as the absolution of sins believed to be made possible by his death.

⁵But he was pierced for our transgressions,

he was crushed for our iniquities;

the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,

and by his wounds we are healed.

-- New International Version, see also King James Version

⁵But he was pierced for our transgressions,

But he was pained because of our transgressions,

crushed because of our iniquities;

the chastisement of our welfare was upon him,

and with his wound we were healed.

-- Judaica Press Version, see also Artscroll Version

Christian scholars argue that 52:13 is the natural beginning of the section, which is reasonable when one considers that the original Hebrew does not have the modern chapter breaks. The speaker from 52:13 to the end of chapter 52 is God himself, whereas from the beginning of 53:1 through 53:9 the gentile kings of nations are speaking in their numbed astonishment. This narrative expressed by the surprised leaders of the surrounding gentile nations is referred to in 52:15. This alternation in speakers is evident in that verses 52:13 and 53:11 speak of "My [i.e. God's] servant," while the intervening verses refer to "our transgressions," i.e., the transgressions committed by the gentile nations against God's humble servant, Israel.

From a Jewish perspective, the Hebrew text itself comprises of open and closed spaces that mark of sections. The major section is the Petucha which starts at Isaiah 52:1 and ends at Isa 53:12. There are intervening Setuma breaks throughout. These divide up the text. The servant song begins at 52:13 (following a Setuma break), again there is a break after Isaiah 52:15. From this alone, it is evident that Isaiah's overarching theme is expressed in Isaiah 52:1, and maybe extended until the end of Isaiah 53:12. This suggests that the servant song, is contextually placed as a reference to Israel. It should be noted that chapter numbering is a much more recent phenomenon, and has gone some alteration, since its conception. These were done firstly by Christians, and then later tentatively adopted by Jews. With this in mind, it is clear that if the whole of Isaiah 52-53 be regarded as a single chapter, rather than two individual chapters, the reference to a suffering Messiah is not at all contextual, or clearcut.

Isaiah 53 in Rabbinic Sources

Technically, Isaiah 52:13 has been viewed as both Messianic and a reference to Israel. Given the overall context and comparison to the other servant songs, the simple meaning of the verses refers to Israel. More interpretative and esoteric interpretations that are midrashic in nature, consider its Messianic theme (see Targum Yonatan, for example). This is specifically on Isaiah 52:13, and possibly Isaiah 53:6. However, the simple meaning of the verses, is clearly a reference to Israel. Even Targum Yonatan agrees, in Isaiah 52:14-15. The Talmud and Medrashim are replete with allusions and references to the Messianic themes that are hinted to in these verses. The Talmud and Medrashic sources, do not reject the plain meaning, and the plain meaning does not reject the Messianic themes and elements portrayed here. The plain meaning is however, built on the simple meaning of the verses, and this, always has a preference in normative interpretation. This is not to deny the Messianic interpretation, but rather to place it as secondary to the main thrust of the interpretation. Rabbi Moshe Alshich said of the passage, "I may remark then, that our Rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the King Messiah, and we ourselves shall adhere to the same view." In Christian church father Origen's Contra Celsus, written in the year 248, he writes of Isaiah 53:

Now I remember that, on one occasion, at a disputation held with certain Jews, who were reckoned wise men, I quoted these prophecies; to which my Jewish opponent replied, that these predictions bore reference 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.

The Mahari Kara (R' Yosef Kara, a contemporary of Rashi in the 11th century C.E.) says the following on Isaiah 52:13 Behold My servant shall prosper: Israel My servant shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high. And [according to] the teachings of our Rabbis: He [Israel] shall be more exalted than Abraham, as it is written: "I have raised my hand toward the L-rd..." [Gen 14:22]. He [Israel] shall be more lifted up than Moses, as it is written: "... as the nurse lifts up the suckling..." [Num 11:12]. And he [Israel] shall be higher than the ministering angels, as it is written: "And they had backs, and they were very high..." [Ezek 1:18].

The important point here is that Mahari Kara, a contemporary of Rashi, referred to "the teachings of our Rabbis", showing this idea of Israel being the servant in Isaiah 53.

Also, In the very first volume of the Talmud, Isaiah 53 is clearly assigned to Israel and the suffering of those involved with Torah, written close to 1000 years before Rashi, these ideas are said to be handed down orally from the Prophets themselves "If the Holy One, blessed be He, is pleased with a man, he crushes him with painful sufferings. For it is said: And the Lord was pleased with [him, hence] he crushed him by disease. Now, you might think that this is so even if he did not accept them with love. Therefore it is said: To see if his soul would offer itself in restitution. Even as the trespass-offering must be brought by consent, so also the sufferings must be endured with consent. And if he did accept them, what is his reward? He will see his seed, prolong his days. And more than that, his knowledge [of the Torah] will endure with him. For it is said: The purpose of the Lord will prosper in his hand.,...It has been taught: R. Simeon b. Yohai says: The Holy One, blessed be He, gave Israel three precious gifts, and all of them were given only through sufferings.. These are: The Torah, the Land of Israel and the world to come."

Isaiah 53 in the New Testament

One of the first claims in the New Testament of Isaiah 53 to be a prophecy of Jesus comes from the Book of Acts, in which its author, Luke, describes a scene in which God commands Philip the Apostle to approach an Ethiopian eunuch who is sitting in a chariot, reading aloud to himself from the Book of Isaiah. The man explains that he does not understand what he is reading, (Isaiah 53), and Philip explains to him that it is Jesus to whom the passage refers. "And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? Of himself, or of some other man? Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus."

Israel theory

Citing a number of Biblical verses that refer to Israel as the "servant", many of them from the Book of Isaiah, many Jewish scholars, among others, have argued that the "servant" in question is actually the nation of Israel. These scholars also argue that verse 10 cannot be describing Jesus. The verse states:

¹⁰he shall see [his] seed, he shall prolong [his] days

This description, when taken literally, is inconsistent with the short, childless life of Jesus. Christian theologians contend that verse 10 is not to be taken literally: the "children" referred to is the Church, and the "long life" refers to the Resurrection.

The reason that the Servant is referred to in the third person may be that these verses are written from the point of view of Gentile nations amazed at Israel's restoration, or it may simply be a method of figurative description. Supporters of this theory argue that the reason for the use of past tense is based on the differences between Proto-Isaiah and Deutero-Isaiah. Chapters 40-55 of Isaiah are referred to as "Deutero-Isaiah" because the themes and language are different from the rest of the book, leading some scholars to believe it was written by another author. Deutero-Isaiah differs from Proto-Isaiah in that it refers to Israel as already restored, which could account for the past-tense of the passage.

Many modern Christian scholars cite the Babylonian Talmud as the "earliest indisputable, firsthand evidence of a rabbinic interpretation of Isaiah 53 which takes the servant as the Messiah, and attributes suffering to him"

Arguments for and against the "nation of Israel" theory

Christians argue that the "servant" could not have been the nation of Israel because of scriptural contradictions that would arise. Primarily, the servant is described as "innocent and guiltless," but Isaiah 1:4 declares the nation of Israel to be "...a people laden with iniquity. A brood of evildoers, children who are corrupters!", along with countless other verses that declare Israel's iniquity including Isaiah 64:6. Many Jews see no contradiction and view the descriptions of Israel's iniquity as being hyperbolic. This is in contrast to the Christian doctrine of Supersessionism.

In addition, Christians argue that if the "servant" were Israel, verse 10 ("It pleased the LORD to bruise him") would thereby be illogical because it entails God enjoying the sufferings of His elect people, which would seem to have no purpose, whereas the suffering of Jesus would ultimately mean an absolution of sin and victory for mankind. It has also been argued that the nation of Israel, even through all of its suffering and torment can not have "atoned" for the sins of mankind because they were not guiltless.

Most Jewish scholars equate the phrase "It pleased..." with the concept of divine kingship. All royal acts in an absolute kingdom take place at the "pleasure" of the king, regardless of whether they bring the king actual joy or not. Additionally, Jewish theologians contend that one need not be guiltless for his suffering to have meaning.

Another Christian argument is that, although Isaiah does elsewhere refer to "my servant Israel," it is reasonable to argue that this "Israel" is not in fact the nation of Israel, but the Messiah. Just as the Messiah is sometimes referred to as "David," after his progenitor (cf. Ezekiel 34:23-24, 37:24), it is not unreasonable that he might be referred to as "Israel."

As a proof to this idea, in Isaiah 49:3 KJV, the LORD states, "Thou art My servant, O' Israel, in whom I will be glorified." Shortly thereafter, the scripture reveals that this servant called "Israel" would be responsible "to bring Jacob again to Him (the LORD), though Israel be not gathered..." (Isa. 49:5), and the LORD declares that the servant called "Israel" should be "My servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel..." Furthermore, the LORD states, "...I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth" (Isa. 49:6). This "Israel" could be seen as the Messiah, who is to be responsible for raising Jacob and re-gathering Israel (Daniel. 7:13; Isa. 27:13; 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17; 1 Corinthians 15:52-55; Gospel of Matthew 24:29-31).

On the other hand, many Jewish scholars view this text as referring to the righteous among Israel bringing all of Israel back to Him, after which the entire nation would serve as an example for other nations to follow. Furthermore, if the verse in question is punctuated differently, it is not the servant who will gather Israel, but God.

Critics, including Jews for Judaism founder Rabbi Bentzion Kravitz in his book "The Jewish Response To Missionaries," of the Christian viewpoint claim that the Isaiah 53 passage is mistranslated in Christian Bibles to support theological concepts. The original Hebrew, they argue, portrays a different picture. For example, the preposition "mi" in Isaiah 53:5 and 53:8 is commonly mistranslated as "for." The meaning of "mi" is not for but rather "from" or "because of". Thus the Judaica Press Tanach translates Isaiah 53:5 as: "But he was pained because of our transgressions, crushed because of our iniquities; the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his wound we were healed." Other examples of translation errors are Isaiah 53:8 where the Hebrew phrase "mi-pesha’ ‘ami niga’ lamo" is translated as "for the transgression of my people was he stricken". The word "lamo" is the poetic form of the Hebrew "lahem" which means their/them and not him as is commonly assumed. The translation of Lamo used throughout the Hebrew Bible, is to their/them. The Jewish rendition of Isaiah 53:8 then is: "because of the transgression of my people, a plague befell them." Based on this, the servant is argued to be a collective entity not a person. This claim is supported by the fact that the Hebrew word for "death" in the following verse of Isaiah 53:9, "And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death;" is plural.

Debate about Isaiah 53 in Jewish/Christian relations and their consequences

Before 1000

The earliest known example of a Jew and a Christian debating the meaning of Isaiah 53 is the example from 248 cited by Origen stated above. The discourse between Origen and his Jewish counterpart does not seem to have had any consequences for either party. This was not the case for the majority of centuries that have passed since that time. In Ecclesiastes Rabbah 1:24, written in the 700s, a debate about a much less controversial topic results in the arrest of the Jew engaging in the debate

1000–1500

In 1263 at the Disputation of Barcelona, Nahmanides expressed the Jewish viewpoint of Isaiah 53 and other matters regarding Christian belief about Jesus's role in Hebrew Scripture. The disputation was awarded in his favor, and as a result the Dominican Order compelled him to flee from his home country for the remainder of his life. Passages of Talmud were also censored. In a number of other disputations, debate about this passage resulted in forced conversions, deportations, and the burning of Jewish religious texts.

Modern era

The use of Isaiah 53 in debates between Jews and Christians still often occurs in the context of Christian missionary work among Jews, and the topic is a source of frequent discussion that is often repetitive and heated. Some devout Christians view the use of the Christian interpretation of Isaiah 53 in proselytization efforts as an act of love. A common view among Jews today is that, while the persecutions of the Middle Ages that resulted from disputations are in the past, Jews still suffer under the threat that their children will be drawn into Christian groups that engage in active proselytization.

See also

• Messianic prophecies of Jesus
• New Covenant
• Christianity and Judaism
• Messiah (Handel)

External links

• Jewish Encyclopedia: Servant of God
• Catholic Encyclopedia: Messiah
• Isaiah 52:13–53:12
• The Jewish Response To Missionaries by Jews for Judaism founder Rabbi Bentzion Kravitz
• Messiah Truth
• Isaiah 53 by Rabbi Tovia Singer
• Audio Downloads of Judaism’s response to Isaiah 53 available at Outreach Judaism
• A Jewish refutation of Christian interpretation
• Why the Suffering Servant cannot be Israel, but must be the Messaiah
• One Christian's interpretation of Isaiah 53
• A Christian examination of Isaiah 53
• A Jewish explanation of the text from Rabbi Dov
• Text of Tanach, Judica Press
• A very thorough investigation of Isaiah 53 from the Jewish Perspective
• A very thorough investigation of Isaiah 53 against the Christian interpretation

Category:Hebrew Bible chapters Category:Hebrew Bible topics Category:Old Testament topics Category:Christian and Jewish interfaith topics Category:Biblical criticism Category:Jesus and history Category:Jews and Judaism-related controversies