The Servant Songs of Isaiah (part 1 of 4)

    One of the Messianic prophecies most commonly used by Christian apologists is the fourth servant song of Isaiah, because it seems to fit the life and suffering of Jesus so well (Isa. 52:13-53:12). However, the Messianic interpretation of Isaiah’s servant songs has come under fire, primarily from Jewish scholarship which rejects any individual as the fulfillment of these oracles, instead seeing Israel as the collective “servant” of Yahweh. In this series, we’ll look at each of the servant songs (not just the fourth one) in their original context to see how the various interpretations compare.

    The Historical Setting of Isaiah 40-55

To understand the servant songs, one must first understand the context in which they were written. Isaiah 40-55, also known as “Deutero-Isaiah,” was written in the late Exilic period (ca. 539 BC). This text was written to the Israelites in exile in Babylon, who were awaiting the restoration both of their land and the Davidic kingship. Although the idea of the Messiah was around before the Babylonian exile, it was during the Exilic period that Jewish Messianism began to coalesce into a systematic set of beliefs, as the people of Israel looked forward to the re-establishment of their nation under the rule of an ideal Davidic king, and God accordingly progressively revealed to them the later stages of his plan. This historical and theological context must be taken into account as we read the Isaianic servant songs.

    Many conservative commentators, however, have sought to preserve the traditional view that the book of Isaiah was written by a single author (the prophet Isaiah) in the 8th and 7th centuries BC. This view is very implausible for multiple reasons:

1. Deutero-Isaiah mentions the Persian king Cyrus by name three times (Isa. 44:28; 45:1, 13). I don’t deny that God could have inspired a 7th-century prophet to specifically name Cyrus, but this would’ve had no significance for the prophet’s original audience. Furthermore, the author never explains who Cyrus is, apparently presupposing his audience’s familiarity with this figure. Cyrus isn’t presented as a far-off figure, but as a king who is already ruling, whom God has chosen to carry out his purpose (the destruction of Babylon).
2. Deutero-Isaiah presupposes the Babylonian exile and destruction of Jerusalem as a past event in many places (Isa. 40:1-2; 42:22-25; 43:5-7, 14, 27-28; 44:26-28; 45:13; 47; 48:14, 20; 49:8-18; 51:3, 11, 17-23; 52:1-12; 54:1-10). The text is addressed to a people whose punishment has already reached its end (Isa. 40:1-2). In the many places where Jerusalem is described as destroyed, and Israel is said to be in Babylon, there’s no indication that it’s a prophecy. It’s presupposed, not predicted.
3. The name “Isaiah” is found 16 times in the first 39 chapters of Isaiah, which are attributed to that prophet, but isn’t found at all in Deutero-Isaiah (chaps. 40-55) or Trito-Isaiah (chaps. 56-66). These later chapters are entirely anonymous. Thus, even from a perspective of absolute biblical inerrancy, these sections don’t need to have been written by Isaiah, as there is no intextual indication that they were.
4. There are stylistic differences between Proto-Isaiah and Deutero-Isaiah, including different theological themes. These differences are too numerous and complex to list here, but see S. R. Driver, An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, p. 209, for a good but somewhat dated summary.

The re-dating of Isaiah 40-55 to the late Exilic period doesn’t threaten the divine inspiration of this book. On the contrary, it helps us to better situate this divinely inspired prophecy within its historical context, making it more intelligible to us.

    Background to the 1st Servant Song

Deutero-Isaiah begins by proclaiming, “Comfort, O comfort my people, says your God. Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, and cry to her that she has served her term, that her penalty is paid, that she has received double from Yahweh’s hand for her sins” (Isa. 40:1-2). The prophet proclaims that the wilderness will be leveled to provide a path for God, for his glory to be revealed and his people to be comforted (40:3-11). The greatness of God, compared to the earth and everything on it, is such that nations and their rulers are accounted as nothing against him (40:12-23). He has the power to destroy and renew nations, and he has chosen to renew his weary people Israel, even though they think he has forgotten them (40:24-31).

    God has roused up a victor from the east – almost certainly referring to the Persian king Cyrus – to destroy the nations; at his approach the coastlands tremble (41:1-7). But Israel is God’s servant, and shall not be harmed because he is with them (41:8-10). Indeed, the nations that oppressed Israel will be ashamed and become nothing (41:11-13). Israel shall become a sledge, used for threshing grain, in order to make the nations like chaff (41:14-16). God will not forsake the poor and needy (41:17-20), but the idols and their makers are nothing at all, and be destroyed by the conqueror from the north (41:21-25). Yahweh and no one else has declared this – no one else at all (41:26-29).

    This introduction to the first servant song is important in a couple of ways. First, it establishes the historical context of the prophecy as the end of the Exilic period, just before Cyrus comes to destroy Babylon and free the Israelites (see above). Second, it establishes Israel as a “servant” of Yahweh (Isa. 41:8), which is surely significant for the aptly-named servant songs.

    The 1st Servant Song

Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my spirit upon him; he will bring forth justice to the nations. He will not cry or lift up his voice, or make it heard in the street; a bruised reed he will not break, and a dimly burning wick he will not quench; he will faithfully bring forth justice. He will not grow faint or be crushed until he has established justice in the earth; and the coastlands wait for his teaching. (Isaiah 42:1-4)

    This song ties into the surrounding passages in several ways. It’s connected to the preceding passage by the word “Behold!” (Heb: hen), which is used in Isa. 41:29 to highlight the worthlessness of the idols and their makers, and again in Isa. 42:1 to introduce the Servant. This indicates that the author is making a contrast between the worthless idol-makers and the true Servant of Yahweh. Furthermore, the terminology used to describe the Servant is very similar to the terms describing Israel in the surrounding context, most notably “servant” (41:8-9; 42:19; 44:1; 45:4) and “chosen” (43:20; 44:1; 45:4).

    However, there are also crucial differences between the Servant of this song and the Israel-servant, that seem to deliberately draw a contrast between the two. The Israel-servant is hardened into a threshing sledge with which to make the nations like chaff (41:11-16); in contrast, the Servant will not even “break a bruised reed,” and he is called to “bring forth justice to the nations” and be “a light to the nations” (42:1, 6). The Israel-servant is stubbornly blinded to God’s message (42:18-20; 43:8). Finally, the Servant is said to be “a covenant to the people [singular]” (42:6); this can only refer to the people of Israel, which explicitly distinguishes him from the Israel-servant.

    Therefore, the Servant of the first servant song can’t be the same as Israel, as the author deliberately draws a contrast between the two. The key to identifying the Servant is the fact that he is “a covenant to the people” (42:6). The “covenant” (Heb: berith) is mentioned three other times in Deutero-Isaiah, once in the second servant song (49:8), and twice to the people of Israel (54:10; 55:3). This covenant is identified with “my steadfast, sure love for David” (55:3). The Servant is the fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant, the Messiah who will restore the Davidic kingdom over Israel. This makes sense in an Exilic-period text like Deutero-Isaiah, as the people of Israel were then questioning whether God had broken his covenant with the house of David, and how and why it would be restored (cf. Ps. 89:34-51).

    Later Interpretation of the 1st Servant Song

The Messianic interpretation of Isaiah 42 isn’t anachronistic, or a later Christian eisegesis of the text. The earliest known Jewish interpretation of this text comes from Targum Jonathan, which contains a first-century Jewish interpretive paraphrase of the text:

Behold, my servant, the Messiah, whom I bring, my chosen in whom one delights; as for my Word, I will put my Holy Spirit upon him; he shall reveal my judgment to the nations. (Targum Jonathan on Isaiah 42:1)

This targum gives a clearly Messianic view of the first servant song, showing that such an interpretation was at least present in Second Temple Judaism.

    This interpretation is carried over into the New Testament. The author of Matthew explicitly claims that the first servant song was fulfilled by Jesus, specifically by his healing of the multitudes (Matt 12:15-21). It may also be echoed in the passages describing Jesus’ baptism, which highlight his anointment by God’s Spirit (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22), although on the other hand they may be referencing a different Messianic prophecy (Isa. 66:1). Throughout his recorded sermons, Peter identifies Jesus as the “servant” (Gk: pais; cf. Isa. 42:1 LXX) of God (Acts 3:13, 26; 4:27, 30). Therefore, according to the NT, the first servant song of Isaiah points forward to Jesus as the fulfillment of the Davidic covenant.

Part 2: The second servant song