It is beyond dispute that the ancient rabbis regarded Isaiah
53 as Messianic. In The Life and Times of
Jesus the Messiah, the Jewish Christian scholar, Alfred Edersheim, provided
two references, where these rabbis regarded Isaiah 53 as Messianic – one from
the Midrash on Samuel, and the other from a Targum (727).
However, there are many other rabbinic references regarding
Isaiah 53 as Messianic. Rabbi Moshe Alshekh, a famous 16th century rabbinic
scholar asserted:
·
[Our] Rabbis with one voice, accept and affirm
the opinion that the prophet [Isaiah 53] is speaking of king Messiah. (Rachmiel Frydland, What the Rabbis Know about the Messiah, 53)
Friedland also quotes the Talmud tractate Sanhedrin:
·
The Rabanan [rabbis] say that Messiah’s name is
The Suffering Scholar…for it is written, “Surely He hath borne our grief and
carried our sorrows, yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God and
afflicted.” [Isaiah 53] (54)
·
Generally then, the Talmud, the Targum, the
Midrashim, the Zohar and Pesikta Rabbati recognized a suffering Messiah in
fulfillment of Isaiah 53 and other similar descriptions in the Tenach. (54)
However today, many rabbis, starting with Rashi, have
rallied around the assertion that the “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah 53 is the
nation of Israel and not the Messiah.
·
The chief representative of the non-Messianic,
collective interpretation was the 11th century French-Jewish scholar, Rabbi
Shlomo Itzhaki (1040-1105), best known by his initials as Rashi…. In time the
non-Messianic interpretation of Isaiah 53 practically became an official dogma
among most Jewish people. (Dr. Michael Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 3, page 16-17)
Furthermore, instead of the Messiah dying for the sins of
the people, Rashi claimed that Israel died for the Gentiles. However, is this
assertion at all tenable? I have presented the verses from Isaiah 53 in order and
inserted what the rabbinic interpretation suggests to demonstrate how their
interpretation violates Scripture and common sense:
Isaiah 53:1-3 Who has
believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? For He [Israel]
shall grow up before Him as a tender plant, and as a root out of dry ground. He
has no form or comeliness; and when we [Gentiles] see Him [Israel], there is no
beauty that we [Gentiles] should desire Him [Israel]. He [Israel] is despised
and rejected by [Gentile] men, a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. And
we [Gentiles] hid, as it were, our faces from Him [Israel]; He [Israel] was
despised, and we [Gentiles] did not esteem Him. (All of these Isaiah 53
verses come from the NKJV.)
The present rabbinic understanding is highly improbable. The
narrator is no longer Isaiah but Gentile
spokesmen [“we,” 53:3] who has incredibly slipped in and dislodged the
author, Isaiah. However, there is no precedent for such a thing in all of the Scriptures.
This alone should disqualify the rabbinic interpretation.
In a vain attempt to eliminate Jesus from consideration, the
modern rabbis have stumbled upon an absurd interpretation, in which Israel dies
for “we” Gentiles. Is there any
Biblical evidence that Israel would die a redemptive death for the Gentiles?
No! All of the evidence points to the Messiah as the Redeemer and not sinful
Israel! Israel is always characterized as the object of mercy, not its source.
In The Jew and the
Christian Missionary, Rabbi Gerald Sigal also argues that this chapter
could not possibly refer to Jesus:
·
Jesus, as portrayed in the Gospels, does not at
all fit that of the Suffering Servant of the Lord as portrayed in Isaiah. (39)
Why not? Sigal argues that the Jesus of the Gospels was
popular. However the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 was not. In support of this
charge, he cites:
·
Then Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit
to Galilee, and news of Him went out through all the surrounding region. And He
taught in their synagogues, being glorified by all. (p.39, quoting Luke
4:14-15; similarly, Luke 8:4; Matthew 27:57)
However, Jesus’ “popularity” was only temporary and skin-deep. Ultimately, the world turned against Him.
Jesus informed His biological brethren:
·
“The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me
because I testify of it that its works are evil.” (John 7:7; 15:18-20)
The crowd only followed Him as long as they could benefit
from His miracles and free meals:
·
From that time many of His disciples went back
and walked with Him no more. (John 6:66)
·
Pilate said to [the crowd of assembled Jews],
"What then shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?" They all said
to him, "Let Him be crucified!" (Matthew 27:22)
Isaiah 53:4-6 Surely
He [Israel] has borne our [Gentile] griefs and carried our sorrows; Yet we [Gentiles]
esteemed Him [Israel] stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But He [Israel]
was wounded for our [Gentile] transgressions, He was bruised for our [Gentile] iniquities;
the chastisement for our peace was upon Him [Israel], and by His [Israel’s] stripes
we [Gentiles] are healed. All we [Gentiles] like sheep have gone astray; We
[Gentiles] have turned, every one, to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him
[Israel] the iniquity of us [Gentiles] all.
According to the rabbinic interpretation, the salvation of
God’s chosen people is not an issue, as if Israel didn’t need it, just the salvation
of the Gentiles. Remarkably, Sigal, following other rabbis, claimed that the
narrators are Gentiles:
·
The Gentile spokesmen depict the Servant (the
Nation of Israel) as bearing the “diseases” and carrying the “pains” which they
themselves should have suffered. (42)
However, just a quick read through the Prophets of Israel
will show that Israel wasn’t in any position to carry the sins of others. They
could not even bear their own sins. The Prophets make it plain that it was
Israel who has “gone astray” and “turned, every one, to his own way.” The
Gentiles could not have been described as “gone astray.” They were never in a
position to have “gone astray” from God.
Traditionally, Israel-as-Redeemer hadn’t been the Jewish
position. Moses Maimonides, (1135-1204), perhaps the most famous rabbi of all
time, in a letter to Jacob Alfajumi, commenting on Isaiah 52:15 and 53:2:
·
What is to be the manner of Messiah’s advent…He
came up as a sucker before him, and as a root out of dry earth [53:2], . . . in
the words of Isaiah, when describing the manner in which the kings will hearken
to him, at him the kings will shut their mouth; for that which had not been
told them they have seen, and that which they had not heard they have
perceived. (Quoted in The Fifty-Third Chapter of Isaiah According to the Jewish
Interpreters, pages 374-375 (translations by S.R. Driver and A.D. Neubauer),
KTAV publishing House, New York, 1969.)
According to Maimonides, the Redeemer is the Messiah. We
even find this thinking reflected in the Day of Atonement Musaf (additional)
prayer:
·
“Our righteous anointed [Messiah] is departed
from us: horror hath seized us, and we have none to justify us. He hath borne
the yoke of our iniquities, and our transgression [53:5]. He beareth our sins
on his shoulder, that he may find pardon for our iniquities. We shall be healed
by his wound, at the time that the Eternal will create him as a new creature.”
Isaiah 53:7 He
[Israel] was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He [Israel] opened not His
mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers
is silent, so He opened not His mouth.
Although we cannot find any Biblical references to affirm
that Israel had been silent in the face of oppression, we do find that this is
true of Jesus. Nevertheless, Sigal claims that:
·
Jesus presented a strong defense both before the
Sanhedrin and Pilate! (50)
In support of this absurd claim, Sigal cites John 18:20-21:
·
Jesus answered him, "I spoke openly to the
world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always
meet, and in secret I have said nothing. Why do you ask Me? Ask those who have
heard Me what I said to them. Indeed they know what I said."
This was no defense. Jesus acted provocatively in order to
be found “guilty,” as the next two verses indicate:
·
And when He had said these things, one of the
officers who stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, "Do
You answer the high priest like that?" Jesus answered him, "If I have
spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why do you strike Me?"
(John 18:22-23)
According to the standards of that day, Jesus had answered
confrontationally and was therefore struck. This was the opposite of a defense.
Before the Sanhedrin, He remained silent, opening His mouth only to aid the
prosecution:
·
But He kept silent and answered nothing. Again
the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, "Are You the Christ, the Son of
the Blessed?" Jesus said, "I am. And you will see the Son of Man
sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven."
Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, "What further need do we
have of witnesses?” (Mark 14:61-63)
Before Pilate, Jesus admitted He had a kingdom. However,
this would place Him in competition with Pilate’s boss, Caesar, who had zero
tolerance for any kingdoms besides his own:
·
“What have You done?" [Pilate asked.] Jesus
answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this
world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews;
but now My kingdom is not from here." Pilate therefore said to Him,
"Are You a king then?" Jesus answered, "You say rightly that I
am a king. For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the
world." (John 18:35-37)
At this point, to exonerate a “rival” king was to betray
Caesar – risky business! Jesus then further infuriated both Pilate and King
Herod with His silence:
·
And while He was being accused by the chief
priests and elders, He answered nothing. Then Pilate said to Him, "Do You
not hear how many things they testify against You?" But He answered him
not one word [in defense], so that the governor marveled greatly. (Matthew
27:12-14)
·
Then he questioned Him with many words, but He
answered him nothing. And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused
Him. (Luke 23:9-10)
Contrary to Sigal’s claim, we find no semblance of any defense here. Instead, Jesus helped the
prosecution to condemn Him.
Isaiah 53:8-9 He
[Israel] was taken from prison and from judgment [“By oppression and judgment
he was taken away,” ESV, NIV], and who will declare His generation [his future
offspring]? For He [Israel] was cut off from the land of the living; for the
transgressions of My [Gentile] people He [Israel] was stricken. And they made
His [Israel’s] grave with the wicked--but with the rich at His [Israel’s]
death, because He [Israel] had done no violence. Nor was any deceit in His
[Israel’s] mouth.
Jesus was deprived of justice (“judgment”) and was killed.
Therefore, no one could talk about His progeny (“generation”). However, this
hadn’t been the case with Israel. Israel was not “cut off from the land of the
living.” Israel remained to produce progeny. It is also clearly untrue that
Israel “had done no violence. Nor was any deceit in His [Israel’s] mouth.” At
times, the Prophets charged that Israel had morally descended below the
Gentiles.
How was Israel’s grave with both the wicked and the rich?
Sigal claims that, somehow, this was figuratively
true. However, the Gospels declare that this was literally the case with Jesus,
dying with sinners and buried in a rich man’s tomb. These are claims that could
have been very easily disproved had they not been true!
However, Sigal claims that this description could not fit
Jesus because Jesus had done much “violence,” contrary to Isaiah’s description
of the Suffering Servant. In support of this charge, Sigal cites Jesus’
“violence” to the money-changers (Matthew 21:12), His casting demons out into
swine (Mark 5:13), and His teaching about bringing a sword to divide families
(Matthew 10:34-35).
However, this is a desperate attempt to disqualify Jesus. In
none of these three instances did Jesus perform or advocate sinful violence. Clearly, there was no
attempt to bring charges against Him for expelling the money-changers. If Jesus
had broken the law, the Sanhedrin would have promptly brought charges against
him.
Sigal then claims that “no deceit in his mouth”(53:9) could
not apply to Jesus! This is because Jesus had been misleading when He promised
to raise the Temple up in three days (John 2:19-21), which He didn’t do, simply
because He was talking figuratively about His body as the Temple.
Sigal also indicts Jesus because He hid the truth, talking
in parables (Matthew 13:10-11). According to him, this practice was deceitful.
However, according to this thinking, poets are also deceitful.
Isaiah 53:10-11 Yet
it pleased the Lord to bruise Him [Israel]; He has put Him to grief. When You
make His [Israel’s] soul an offering for sin, He [Israel] shall see His seed
(”offspring”), He [Israel] shall prolong His days, and the pleasure of the Lord
shall prosper in His hand. He shall see the labor of His soul, and be
satisfied. By His knowledge [of Israel] My righteous Servant [Israel] shall
justify many, for He shall bear their [Gentile] iniquities.
In place of the Messiah, the rabbis have made Israel into
the savior of the world. However, there is no reason to suppose that Israel’s
death could represent “an offering for sin.” Sin offerings had to be without
any blemish. Meanwhile, Israel was covered with moral blemishes. Consequently, Israel could not qualify to
“bear their [Gentile] iniquities.”
We should also ask how it could possibly be that the
knowledge about Israel “shall justify many?” There is absolutely no Biblical
precedent for such an idea. However, it is true that faith (knowledge) in the
Messiah will “justify many!” (Psalm 2:12).
Also, throughout, the masculine singular pronoun “he” is
used to designate the suffering servant. Such a pronoun is very rarely used in
regards to Israel. More usually, Israel is referred to as “you,” she/her.” and
“they/them.” However, there is absolutely no problem at all in using “he” in
reference to the Messiah.
Sigal claims that “offspring” or “seed” (53:10) could not
pertain to believers in Christ, as Christians allege, because, according to
him, this term is always used to designate one’s own children and not
figurative or spiritual children.
However, even though this is the usual usage for “offspring,”
there are exceptions. Sometimes, it can be used figuratively:
·
But come here, you sons of the sorceress, you
offspring of the adulterer and the harlot! Whom do you ridicule? Against whom
do you make a wide mouth and stick out the tongue? Are you not children of
transgression, offspring of falsehood? (Isaiah 57:3-4)
It is also interesting to note that this Servant, who dies
as a burnt offering for the people, will eventually “see the labor of His soul,
and be satisfied.” This implies that He will again live subsequent to His
death. Therefore, this prophecy also represents a cryptic reference to the
resurrection.
In fact, all of the verses envisioning the death of the
Messiah also seem to contain a cryptic reference to His subsequent
resurrection! I’ll just offer one more example:
·
Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue
rejoices; my body also will rest secure, because you will not abandon me to the
grave, nor will you let your Holy One see decay. (Psalm 16:9-10)
Interestingly, this verse cryptically portrays the Messiah’s
death and subsequent life. As David, He too will be in the grave (death).
However, He will not remain and decay there (resurrection) as David’s body had!
If this isn’t enough, let’s take a look at the preceding
verses, which have also been regarded as Messianic:
Isaiah 52:13-15 Behold,
My Servant shall deal prudently; He [Israel] shall be exalted and extolled and be very high. Just as many were
astonished at you, so His visage was marred more than any man, and His form
more than the sons of men; So shall He [Israel] sprinkle many nations. Kings shall shut their mouths [in humility] at
Him; for what had not been told them they shall see, and what they had not
heard they shall consider.
“He shall be exalted and extolled and be very high.” This is
true for the Messiah but not for Israel. Instead, Israel will mourn when they
look upon the Messiah whom they have “pierced” (Zechariah 12:10). Yet, they
will also be forgiven.
“His visage was marred more than any man” describes what had
happened to the Messiah. He had been so terribly beaten that when Pilate
re-introduced Him before the people, he needed to inform them that this marred
man was Jesus: "Behold the Man!" (John 19:5)
The passage also claims that, “So shall He sprinkle many nations,”
something that Israel’s blood could not accomplish. This Hebrew term refers
only to ceremonial/sanctifying sprinkling of blood or water.
“Kings shall shut their mouths” in fear before Him. This is
something that would be true for the Messiah (Isaiah 49:7, 23) but not for
Israel.
This entire discourse will raise the question, “Why then
isn’t God more explicit about these critical matters?” While I think that there
are many reasons for this, I’ll just address one. There is knowledge that we
are not ready to handle. The Apostle Paul writes:
·
No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom
that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.
None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not
have crucified the Lord of glory. However, as it is written: "No eye has
seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those
who love him." (1 Cor. 2:7-9)
It is not just God’s enemies who are kept in the dark. It is
we too, and I trust for good reason! Meanwhile, He has granted “those who have
eyes to see” a body of knowledge, which are we mandated to defend (Jude 3) against
the Gospel’s many detractors. May our Lord enable us!
No comments:
Post a Comment