understanding of Second Isaiah to recognize that it is explicitly the people of Israel, evidently those taken into exile, who are called “my servant” (41:8). As the prophet says later, “You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will be glorified” (49:3). The reason this matters is because some of the passages of Second Isaiah were taken by the early Christians to refer to none other than the messiah, Jesus, who was thought to have suffered for the sake of others, bringing redemption. And indeed, it is hard for Christians familiar with the New Testament to read passages like Isaiah 52:13–53:18 without thinking of Jesus:
See, my servant shall prosper;
he shall be exalted and lifted up,
and shall be very high….
He was despised and rejected by
others;
a man of suffering and
acquainted with infirmity;
and as one from whom others
hide their faces
he was despised, and we held
him of no account.
Surely he has borne our infirmities
and carried our diseases;
yet we accounted him stricken,
struck down by God, and
afflicted.
But he was wounded for our
transgressions,
crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the punishment that
made us whole,
and by his bruises we are
healed.
All we like sheep have gone
astray;
we have all turned to our own
way,
and the L ORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
He was oppressed, and he was
afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the
slaughter,
and like a sheep that before its
shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth….
For he was cut off from the land
of the living,
stricken for the transgression of
my people.
For interpreting such a powerful passage, several points are important. The first is the one I stated in an earlier chapter: the prophets of Israel were not crystal-ball gazers looking into the distant future (Jesus would not appear for another five centuries); they were speaking a word of God to people living in their own time. Moreover, there is nothing in the passage to suggest that the author is speaking about a future messiah. For one thing, the word messiah never occurs in this passage (read the entire book for yourself). Furthermore, the sufferings of this “servant” are said to be in the past, not the future. In light of these points, it is easy to see why, prior to Christianity, no Jewish interpreters thought this passage was indicating what the messiah would be like or do. Ancient Judaism (before Christianity) never did have an idea that the messiah would suffer for others—that’s why the vast majority of Jews rejected the idea that Jesus could be the messiah. The messiah was to be a figure of grandeur and power—for example, someone like the mighty King David—who would rule over God’s people. And who was Jesus? A crucified criminal, just the opposite of what a messiah would be. Finally, it is important to reiterate the key point: the author of Second Isaiah explicitly tells us who the “servant” who has suffered is: it is Israel itself, specifically Israel taken into exile (41:8; 49:3). 8
Christians eventually, of course, came to think that this passage was referring to their messiah, Jesus. I’ll say a few words about that in a moment. For now, the question is what Second Isaiah might have meant in its own historical context. If this passage is referring to “my servant, Israel,” what does it all mean?
Like the other prophets, Second Isaiah believed that sin requires a punishment. Israel, the servant of God, exiled to Babylon, had suffered horribly at the hands of its oppressors. This suffering brought an atonement. Just as an animal sacrificed in the Temple had brought atonement for sin, so too had exiled Israel. It had suffered for the transgressions of others. Using a metaphor in which Israel is identified as an individual, a “servant of the L ORD ,” Second Isaiah indicates that the exiled people have suffered vicariously for others. The nation can therefore be forgiven, restored to a right relationship
See, my servant shall prosper;
he shall be exalted and lifted up,
and shall be very high….
He was despised and rejected by
others;
a man of suffering and
acquainted with infirmity;
and as one from whom others
hide their faces
he was despised, and we held
him of no account.
Surely he has borne our infirmities
and carried our diseases;
yet we accounted him stricken,
struck down by God, and
afflicted.
But he was wounded for our
transgressions,
crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the punishment that
made us whole,
and by his bruises we are
healed.
All we like sheep have gone
astray;
we have all turned to our own
way,
and the L ORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
He was oppressed, and he was
afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the
slaughter,
and like a sheep that before its
shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth….
For he was cut off from the land
of the living,
stricken for the transgression of
my people.
For interpreting such a powerful passage, several points are important. The first is the one I stated in an earlier chapter: the prophets of Israel were not crystal-ball gazers looking into the distant future (Jesus would not appear for another five centuries); they were speaking a word of God to people living in their own time. Moreover, there is nothing in the passage to suggest that the author is speaking about a future messiah. For one thing, the word messiah never occurs in this passage (read the entire book for yourself). Furthermore, the sufferings of this “servant” are said to be in the past, not the future. In light of these points, it is easy to see why, prior to Christianity, no Jewish interpreters thought this passage was indicating what the messiah would be like or do. Ancient Judaism (before Christianity) never did have an idea that the messiah would suffer for others—that’s why the vast majority of Jews rejected the idea that Jesus could be the messiah. The messiah was to be a figure of grandeur and power—for example, someone like the mighty King David—who would rule over God’s people. And who was Jesus? A crucified criminal, just the opposite of what a messiah would be. Finally, it is important to reiterate the key point: the author of Second Isaiah explicitly tells us who the “servant” who has suffered is: it is Israel itself, specifically Israel taken into exile (41:8; 49:3). 8
Christians eventually, of course, came to think that this passage was referring to their messiah, Jesus. I’ll say a few words about that in a moment. For now, the question is what Second Isaiah might have meant in its own historical context. If this passage is referring to “my servant, Israel,” what does it all mean?
Like the other prophets, Second Isaiah believed that sin requires a punishment. Israel, the servant of God, exiled to Babylon, had suffered horribly at the hands of its oppressors. This suffering brought an atonement. Just as an animal sacrificed in the Temple had brought atonement for sin, so too had exiled Israel. It had suffered for the transgressions of others. Using a metaphor in which Israel is identified as an individual, a “servant of the L ORD ,” Second Isaiah indicates that the exiled people have suffered vicariously for others. The nation can therefore be forgiven, restored to a right relationship
Similar Books
