See, my servant shall prosper; he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high. Just as there were many who were astonished at him—so marred was his appearance, beyond human semblance, and his form beyond that of mortals—so he shall startle many nations; kings shall shut their mouths because of him; for that which had not been told them they shall see, and that which they had not heard they shall contemplate. (Isaiah 52:13-15)
The first stanza of the fourth servant song (which is by far the longest servant song in Deutero-Isaiah) acts as a prologue to the rest of the song. It introduces (1) the suffering of the Servant, as the people were astonished at his marred appearance which is unlike that of a king, and (2) the exaltation of the Servant, which will also astonish many people, including nations and kings.
Who has believed what we have heard? And to whom has the arm of Yahweh been revealed? For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. 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. (Isaiah 53:1-3)
Who is speaking (“we”) in this part of the song? It isn’t Yahweh or the Servant, so it must be the prophet himself speaking on behalf of a group of people. Later on, he says, “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have all turned to our own way” (53:6). Israel is often compared to a wandering flock of sheep throughout the Hebrew Bible, which strongly suggests that the prophet is speaking on behalf of the people of Israel (Num. 27:17; 1 Kgs. 22:17; 2 Chron. 18:16; Ps. 95:7-10; 119:176; Jer. 50:6; Zech. 10:2). As in the other servant songs, the Servant is distinguished from Israel – although both are called “servant.”
The metaphor of a “young plant” and a “root,” which is applied to the Servant here, are applied by Proto-Isaiah and other Hebrew prophets to the kings of Israel, especially the anticipated Messiah who will restore the Davidic line (Isa. 11:1, 10; Ezek. 17:22; cf. Jer. 23:5; 33:15; Zech. 3:8; 6:12). Throughout the prophets, trees are used metaphorically for kingdoms and their kings (Isa. 10:12-19, 33-34; Ezek. 15:2-7; 17:22-24; 31:2ff; Dan. 4:10ff; Hos. 14:5-7; Zech. 4:3, 11-14). This points to the identity of the Servant as a royal figure, specifically the Davidic Messiah, as shown by the other servant songs (Isa. 42:6; 49:3-6, 8; cf. 55:3).
The statement that “we held him of no account” (53:3) indicates that the people of Israel would reject their own king whom they had awaited. This was already established in the second servant song, which said that the Servant would be “abhorred by the nation [singular]” (49:7). As mentioned in the first stanza, one reason Israel would reject him is because “he had no form or majesty... nothing in his appearance” that would be expected to befit a king (52:14; 53:2).
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 Yahweh has laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:4-6)
The prophet says here that the Servant “was wounded because of our transgressions, was crushed because of our iniquities” (53:5). Interestingly, the words “transgression” (Heb: pesha) and “iniquity” (Heb: avon) are used together in just one other place in Deutero-Isaiah, to describe the sins for which Israel was sent into exile (50:1). There, however, they are used with the preposition b’ (“in”), while here they are used with the preposition m’ (“from”). This is best explained by the fact that Israel was sent into exile for their own sins, but the Servant suffers for the sins of another (i.e., the people of Israel). It also further strengthens the idea that the Servant’s life recapitulates the history of Israel’s exile and restoration, to the extent that the Servant suffers for the same reason that Israel was exiled (because of Israel’s sins).
As noted above, Israel is often compared to a flock of wandering sheep without a shepherd throughout the Hebrew Bible (Num. 27:17; 1 Kgs. 22:17; 2 Chron. 18:16; Ps. 95:7-10; 119:176; Jer. 50:6; Zech. 10:2). Thus, in this stanza, the Servant is clearly distinguished from the people of Israel, even though he is also identified with Israel in a certain way.
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. By a perversion of justice he was taken away. Who could have imagined his future? For he was cut off from the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people. They made his grave with the wicked and his tomb with the rich, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth. (Isaiah 53:7-9)
This stanza establishes for the first time that the Servant will not only suffer, but die, because of the sins of the people of Israel (53:8). Unlike Israel, whose guilt is firmly established across the rest of Deutero-Isaiah, the Servant is not guilty (“he had done no violence”), and his death is a “perversion of justice” unlike Israel’s exile which was an act of divine justice (Isa. 42:25-26; 43:27-28; 50:1; 51:17-21). Once again, we see that a clear contrast is being drawn between the Servant and the people of Israel, although his life in some ways recapitulates Israel’s history.
Yet it was the will of Yahweh to crush him with pain. When you make his life an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring, and shall prolong his days; through him the will of Yahweh shall prosper. Out of his anguish he shall see; he shall find satisfaction through his knowledge. The righteous one, my servant, shall make many righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore I will allot him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he poured out himself to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. (Isaiah 53:10-12)
The final stanza of the fourth servant song details the reversal of the Servant’s fortunes, which was already noted in the prologue to the song (52:13-15). The Servant’s life was “an offering for [Israel’s] sin,” but he will nevertheless “see his offspring and... prolong his days” (53:10), which implies that he has been resurrected after his death. Interestingly, the text of Isaiah in the Dead Sea Scrolls and LXX testifies to “he shall see light” (in place of “he shall see”) in v. 11, which based on parallels in the Hebrew Bible appears to be an idiom for resurrection (Job 33:28, 30; Ps. 36:9; cf. Job 3:16; Ps. 49:19).
Whereas the Servant previously “made his grave with the wicked and his tomb with the rich” (53:9), now he is allotted “a portion with the great... the spoil with the strong” (53:12) in a clear reversal of fortunes. He was “numbered with the transgressors” in order to make “intercession for the transgressors” (53:12); this word, “transgressor” (Heb: pasha), is elsewhere used in Deutero-Isaiah only to refer to the people of Israel (43:27; 46:8; 48:8). The prophet is distinguishing between the Servant and Israel, but he also identifies the two in a crucial way (as the Servant suffers for the sins of Israel).
Later Interpretation of the 4th Servant Song
Today, many Jewish scholars challenge the Messianic interpretation of the fourth servant song in favor of an interpretation of the Servant as the corporate people of Israel. As we’ve seen, this doesn’t do justice to the text which draws important distinctions between the Servant and Israel. Nor was this always the most common Jewish interpretation of the oracle. The earliest surviving Jewish interpretation of the fourth servant song comes from Targum Jonathan, a first-century interpretive paraphrase, which explicitly identifies the Servant with the Messiah:
Behold, my servant the Messiah shall prosper, he shall be exalted and extolled, and he shall be very strong. (Targum Jonathan on Isaiah 52:13)
This Targum contains a strained interpretation of the later stanzas of the song, replacing the suffering of the Servant with an intercessory prayer by the Servant on behalf of suffering Israel, apparently to avoid the conclusion that the Messiah will suffer and die. Nonetheless, this is an important testimony to an early Jewish Messianic interpretation of Isaiah 53.
In later Jewish writings, the fourth servant song is also interpreted Messianically, most notably in b. Sanhedrin 98b from the Babylonian Talmud, where Isa. 53:4 is interpreted to give the name of the Messiah. Shekalim 5:1 from the Jerusalem Talmud interprets Isa. 53:12 to refer to Rabbi Akiva. Sotah 14a interprets it to refer to Moses instead. Berakhot 5a:11 interprets it to symbolically refer to any individual whom God loves. Three Jewish texts from the latter half of the 1st millennium AD interpret the fourth servant song as Messianic in nature (Tanchuma Toledot 14:1; Pesikta Rabbati p11; Midrash Ruth Rabbah 2:14). Crucially, there appears to be no text from the 1st millennium which interprets Isaiah 53 to refer to the corporate people of Israel, and the most common interpretation was Messianic.
The fourth servant song is directly quoted or alluded to many times in the New Testament. Jesus applies it to himself once (Luke 22:35-38), and the gospel authors apply it to him twice (Matt. 8:14-17; John 12:37-38). In the book of Acts, an Ethiopian eunuch is reading this passage and asks who it refers to, and Peter uses it to teach him about Jesus (Acts 8:26-35). The author of 1 Peter quotes it to emphasize Jesus’ willingness to be unjustly punished (1 Pet. 2:19-25). Paul quotes it, possibly midrashically, to highlight some people’s refusal to believe his gospel (Rom. 10:16).
This text is also clearly alluded to in a few places in the New Testament. Most notably, in the famous Carmen Christi, Paul states that Jesus “took the form of a servant” and “became obedient unto death” (Phil. 2:7-8), which echoes Deutero-Isaiah’s declaration that the Servant “poured out himself to death” (53:12). Elsewhere, Paul says that “God made him who knew no sin to be [a] sin [offering] for us” (2 Cor. 5:21), which appears to allude to Isaiah 53:10 (“you [God] make his life [a] sin [offering]”). Overall, the testimony of the New Testament points to Jesus as the singular fulfillment of the fourth servant song, who suffered unjustly and died because of the sins of Israel.
Conclusion
Isaiah’s servant songs (Isa. 42:1-4; 49:1-6; 50:4-11; 52:13-53:12) have traditionally been interpreted by Christians to be prophetic of Jesus’ ministry, suffering, death, resurrection, and exaltation. But alternate interpretations have also existed, especially the ‘corporate Israel’ interpretation of the Servant, which seems plausible in light of the fact that Deutero-Isaiah repeatedly refers to Israel as God’s “servant” (Isa. 41:8-9; 42:19; 43:10; 44:1-2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 54:17?). Nonetheless, when read carefully in context, each of the servant songs distinguishes between the Servant and Israel, while also identifying them together in some way.
The historical context of the servant songs is the end of the Babylonian exile, when Deutero-Isaiah (Isa. 40-55) was written. At this time, the exiled people of Israel were awaiting the return of their land and of the Davidic kingship (cf. Ps. 89:34-51; Isa. 55:3), so the Jewish Messianic hope began to coalesce around a systematic set of beliefs. Because the oracles of Deutero-Isaiah were addressed to the exiled Judean leadership, exhorting them to return home, it would make sense for them to tackle the relevant issue of the Davidic covenant’s renewal and coming of the Messiah.
The first two servant songs refer to the Servant as “a covenant to the people” (42:6; 49:8), which is confirmed elsewhere in Deutero-Isaiah to be the Davidic covenant (55:3). The Servant is therefore the one who will restore the rule of the house of David over Israel. This makes sense of the fact that he is both distinguished from and identified with Israel, as the king was considered representative of his people. The Servant is also closely associated with Exodus typology (49:8-10; 50:2; 52:11-12), which suggests that he is a second Moses, even the “prophet like Moses” (Deut. 18:15-19). This points toward a Messianic interpretation of the servant songs. Yet the Servant will also suffer, be reviled by “the nation,” and die for Israel’s sins, to be resurrected by God in whom he trusted (49:7; 50:5-9; 53:4-12). This points uniquely to Jesus as the fulfillment of all the servant songs.
No comments:
Post a Comment