On the day of His resurrection, two disciples were dragging themselves, “faces downcast,” towards a village called Emmaus. They suddenly found that they were joined by another, but “they were kept from recognizing Him.” Not knowing that this was their Lord, they confessed their profound disappointment to Him:
·
“We had hoped that he was the one who was going
to redeem Israel.”
(Luke 24:21)
They had despaired of their faith. Therefore, Christ gave
them a swift proverbial kick:
·
He said to them, "How foolish you are, and
how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Did not the
Christ have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?" And
beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said
in all the Scriptures concerning himself.” (Luke 24:25-27)
According
to Jesus, Scripture is about Him (John 5:39). By revealing how Scripture had
prophesied His death and resurrection, Jesus provided a degree of comfort on
the Emmaus road.
However,
some critics argue that such comfort is not to be found in the Hebrew
Scriptures. In fact, professor of religion, Bart Ehrman, argues that prophecies
of the Messiah’s death and resurrection are entirely absent from these
Scriptures:
·
In the Jewish tradition, before the appearance
of Christianity, there was no expectation of a suffering Messiah. But doesn’t
the Bible constantly talk about the Messiah who would suffer? As it turns out,
the answer is no. Since the beginning, Christians have frequently cited certain
passages in the Old Testament as clear prophecies of the future suffering
Messiah, passages such as Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22, in which someone suffers
horribly, sometimes expressly for the sins of others…Jews who do not believe in
Jesus, however, have always had a very effective response: the Messiah is never
mentioned in these passages. (Jesus,
Interrupted, 228-29)
The
fact that the word for “Messiah” is not mentioned in these passages is immaterial.
The ancient rabbis regarded many
passages as Messianic – even the most prominent ones (2 Sam. 7:14; Psalm 2;
110; Isaiah 9:6-7; Isaiah 11) – although they do not contain this term.
Besides,
it is beyond dispute that the ancient Rabbis did regard these passages as
Messianic, along with almost every Messianic passage quoted in the New Testament!
Alfred Edersheim provides two references from the Yalkut, which regard Psalm 22 as Messianic (The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, 718). Edersheim also
provides two references for Isaiah 53 – one from the Midrash on Samuel, and the other from a Targum (727).
However,
there are many other Jewish 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)
The
Talmud quotes Isaiah 53:4 in reference to Messiah. However, it goes further by
acknowledging that the Messiah would suffer for our sins. Clearly, this is in
direct contradiction to Ehrman’s claim that the Jews believe that the “Messiah
is never mentioned in these passages.”
Rabbi
Friedland contradicts this claim:
·
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)
Douglas
Pyle adds some additional references. The revered 12th century
Jewish scholar Moses Maimonides wrote:
·
“Yet he
carried our sicknesses, being himself sick and distressed for the
transgressions which should have caused sickness and distress in us, and
bearing the pains which we ought to have experienced. But we, when we saw him
weakened and prostrate, thought we were healed [Isaiah 53:5] – because the
stripes by which he was vexed and distressed will heal us: God will pardon us
for his righteousness and we shall be healed from our own transgressions and
from the iniquities of our fathers.”
While it is true that modern-day no longer regard Isaiah 53
as Messianic, the ancient authorities did! Pyle provides a number of other
quotations. Midrash Aseret Memrot states:
·
“The Messiah, in order to atone for them both
[for Adam and David] will ‘make his soul a trespass offering,’ [Isaiah 53:10].”
The highly regarded 1st century Rabbi Shimon Ben
Yochai stated:
·
“The meaning of the words Bruised for our
iniquities’ [Isaiah 53:5] is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which
produce the effect of his being bruised, it follows that whoso will not admit
that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities, must endure and suffer them
for them himself.” (What the Rabbonim Say
About Moshiach, Douglas Pyle)
There is just a wealth of ancient evidence to demonstrate
that Ehrman’s claim is incorrect and that the ancient rabbis did regard Isaiah
53 as Messianic. However, today many rabbis have rallied around the assertion
that the “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah 53 is the nation of Israel and not the
Messiah. Furthermore, instead of the Messiah dying for the sins of the people,
according to this formulation, Israel
would and did die for the Gentiles. However, it is time to look directly at
Isaiah 53 to determine whether such an assertion is at all tenable.
Isaiah 53:1-3
Who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? For He 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 was despised, and we [Gentiles] did not esteem Him.
For
the sake of clarity, I’ve inserted within the parentheses what the modern
rabbinic interpretation looks like. From the start, such an interpretation is
highly implausible. For one thing, the narrator is no longer Isaiah but a
Gentile spokesman [“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 Scripture.
In a
vain attempt to eliminate Jesus from consideration, the modern rabbis have condemned
themselves to 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 God as Redeemer, not sinful
Israel!
Meanwhile, 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.
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 several verses:
·
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. (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:
·
John 7:7 The world cannot hate you, but
it hates Me because I testify of it that its works are evil. (Also John 15:18-20)
·
John 6:66 From that time many of
His disciples went back and walked with Him no more.
·
Matthew 27:22 Pilate said to them,
"What then shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?" They
all said to him, "Let Him be crucified!"
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 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.
Remarkably, Sigal, following other rabbis, claims 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.
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.”
Traditionally, Israel-as-Redeemer
hadn’t been the Jewish position. Maimonides, commenting on Isaiah 53:4, wrote:
- Yet he carried our sicknesses, being himself sick and distressed for the transgressions which should have caused sickness and distress in us, and bearing the pains which we ought to have experienced. But we, when we saw him weakened and prostrate, thought we were healed [53:5] – because the stripes by which he was vexed and distressed will heal us: God will pardon us for his righteousness and we shall be healed from our own transgressions and from the iniquities of our fathers.”
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.”
Despite of the wealth of evidence to the contrary, Ehrman
confidently and repeatedly claims that:
- The idea that Jesus was the suffering Messiah was an invention of the early Christians. (236)
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!
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. According to
Pilate’s thinking, this would place Him in competition with His 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. If anything, Jesus was helping
the prosecution to condemn Him.
Isaiah 53:8-9 He [Israel] was taken from prison and from
judgment, and who will declare His generation? 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 the case with
Jesus, dying with sinners and buried in a rich man’s tomb. These are claims
that could have been very easy to disprove 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 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.
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 [Israel’s] knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, for He shall bear
their [Gentile] iniquities.
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 them. Consequently, Israel could
not qualify to “bear their [Gentile]
iniquities.”
We should also ask how it could possibly be that the
knowledge of 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 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)!
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 us a body of knowledge, which are we
mandated to defend against the Gospel’s many detractors. May our Lord enable
us!
No comments:
Post a Comment