Continued from Chapter 21
(Isaiah 52:13-53:12)
Herein we concentrate on showing why Isaiah 52:13-53:12 does not refer to Jesus. In countering Christian claims concerning the Suffering Servant passage it is really sidestepping the issue to discuss if it refers to the coming Messiah or national Israel. Some Christians claim that it was only with the commentary of Rashi (1040-1105), seeking to refute the Christian interpretation that the Jews began to refer Isaiah 52:13-53:12 to the entire nation of Israel. The allegation that interpreting the passage as referring to Israel began with Rashi is refuted even by an early third century Christian source. In Contra Celsum, written in 248 C.E. (Some 800 years before Rashi), no less than the Church Father Origen records that the Jews contemporary with him interpreted this passage as referring to the entire nation of Israel. He wrote: I remember that once in a discussion with someone whom the Jews regard as learned I used these prophecies [Isaiah 52:13-53:8]. At this the Jew said that these prophecies referred to the whole people as though of a single individual, since they were scattered in the dispersion and smitten, that as a result of the scattering of the Jews among the other nations many might become proselytes. In this way he explained the text: “Thy form shall be inglorious among men”; and “those to whom he was not proclaimed shall see him”; “being a man in calamity.”1 Significant though it is to establish this identification the conversation with Christians is really about their claim that the passage refers to the Messiah and then their jumping to the conclusion that it therefore refers to Jesus.
In developing the Jesus myth several traditions developed among distinct groups of followers of what was eventually called Christianity. Various strains of tradition were brought together in forming the New Testament. They were not uniform in their message as each told the Jesus story from the perspective of its own community needs. Isaiah’s suffering servant played a decisive role in forming the Jesus myth among certain Christian groups. It provided an outline to guide them in describing what they imagined Jesus’ ministry to have been. There is no doubt that the New Testament authors had the suffering servant in mind in developing their respective works. But this does not prove Jesus is the servant. In the traditions coming down to them concerning Jesus they did not fully eliminate the contradictions between the description of the servant and the description of Jesus. As a result, we are still able to get a glimpse of why Jesus is not the servant from their very own writings.
For a full discussion of how and why the passage refers to Israel see Gerald Sigal, Isaiah 53: Who is the Servant? Bloomington, IN: Xlibris: 2007
1 Origin, Contra Celsum, trans. Henry Chadwick, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965, 1:55 [p. 50].
Continued
Jews for Judaism offers individual and group sessions with people who are searching for spiritual meaning, dating an individual who is of another faith or thinking about converting to another faith.
Join