Who is the suffering servant in Isaiah 53?

[Eliyahu613]

Sure. Appendix III in his book (“Messiah in the Tanach”) lists and briefly describes the following:

Prophecy

Psalm 69:9
Psalm 69:8
Psalm 69:4
Psalm 69:21

Bs"d

Here we have Psalm 69, good for four "messianic prophecies".

Let's now look at Psalm 69 inside: "Those who hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of my head; They are mighty who would destroy me, being my enemies wrongfully; though I have stolen nothing, I still must restore it. O God, You know my foolishness; and my sins are not hidden from You." Verse 4 and 5.

Here we see that this speaks about a person with "foolishness" and sins. And since JC was without sins according to the Christians, it is impossible to say that this speaks about JC. It speaks of course about king David. So what is happening here, is to take a piece of text, doesn't matter what it is talking about, rip it out of context, and present it to us as a messianic prophecy.

Bringing this as a "messianic prophecy", is a bad joke.

 

[Matthias]

Bs"d

The offspring of the woman is all of mankind. To say that that speaks about the messiah is over the top.

Do you believe that all mankind will crush the head of the devil?

Maybe it ALSO speaks about the coming messiah…

You appear to make the concession that it is possible that the verse speaks about the coming messiah.

… but it surely is not pointing to it. It points to all of mankind.

Isn’t what this boils down to simply that you don’t believe the NT?

Calling this a messianic prophecy is absurd.

Denying that it is a messianic prophecy is absurd to me. Without any animosity, we both believe the position taken by the other is absurd.

 

[Eliyahu613]

Sure. Appendix III in his book (“Messiah in the Tanach”) lists and briefly describes the following:

Prophecy

Isaiah 7:14

Bs"d

Isaiah 7:14 is a text in which Isaiah gives a sign to King Achaz. This also has no bearing on the messiah.

Apart from that, it claims a virgin birth, which isn't there. The NT mistranslates Isaiah 7:14, as a virgin getting pregnant, but that is nowhere to be found in that text in Isaiah.

For more details look here: Isaiah 7

So almost all of these verses brought as messianic prophecies, have no bearing on the messiah whatsoever.

There are a few genuine messianic prophecies, for instance Micah 5, Isaiah 11, but what these messianic prophecies all have in common, is that they are not fulfilled. Not by JC, not by anybody else.

So any proof from the Tanach that JC is the messiah, is totally lacking.

 

[Matthias]

Bs"d

They can hold that position, but it is based on nothing but wishful thinking.

You reject the thinking of those Jews. They, in turn, reject your thinking.

Considering the fact that 2000 years later it is still not done, I don't think we can say that "it is as good as done".

It’s as certain to happen as the sun rising in the morning. I think you surely at least believe that. I believe it will be done by the Jewish man whom the NT asserts it will be done, when he returns. Until then, the devil is doomed but still seeking whom he may destroy.

 

[Matthias]

Bs"d

Isaiah 7:14 is a text in which Isaiah gives a sign to King Achaz. This also has no bearing on the messiah.

Apart from that, it claims a virgin birth, which isn't there. The NT mistranslates Isaiah 7:14, as a virgin getting pregnant, but that is nowhere to be found in that text in Isaiah.

For more details look here: Isaiah 7

So almost all of these verses brought as messianic prophecies, have no bearing on the messiah whatsoever.

There are a few genuine messianic prophecies, for instance Micah 5, Isaiah 11, but what these messianic prophecies all have in common, is that they are not fulfilled. Not by JC, not by anybody else.

So any proof from the Tanach that JC is the messiah, is totally lacking.

Cutting to the chase here, this is your position as an unbelieving Jew vs. the position of the NT believing Jews. Right?

 

[Matthias]

Bs"d

Here we have Psalm 69, good for four "messianic prophecies".

Let's now look at Psalm 69 inside: "Those who hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of my head; They are mighty who would destroy me, being my enemies wrongfully; though I have stolen nothing, I still must restore it. O God, You know my foolishness; and my sins are not hidden from You." Verse 4 and 5.

Here we see that this speaks about a person with "foolishness" and sins. And since JC was without sins according to the Christians, it is impossible to say that this speaks about JC. It speaks of course about king David. So what is happening here, is to take a piece of text, doesn't matter what it is talking about, rip it out of context, and present it to us as a messianic prophecy.

Bringing this as a "messianic prophecy", is a bad joke.

Do you believe in typology?

 

[Eliyahu613]

Do you believe that all mankind will crush the head of the devil?

Bs"d

No, I believe that all mankind will crush the heads of snakes. I know I did.

You appear to make the concession that it is possible that the verse speaks about the coming messiah.

It speaks about the messiah in the same way it speaks about Muhammed, David Koresh, Napoleon Bonaparte, and whoever.

Isn’t what this boils down to simply that you don’t believe the NT?

What it comes down to, that objectively it is not a messianic prophecy.

It is just like Isaiah 53, in order to see in that the messiah, you first have to be a Christian and believe in a suffering and dying messiah.

Objectively, it isn't there, and it is clear that it speaks about something else, just like for instance Psalm 69 and Isaiah 7:14.

Denying that it is a messianic prophecy is absurd to me. Without any animosity, we both believe the position taken by the other is absurd.

You think it is not absurd to believe that Isaiah 7 which does not speak about the messiah, and which does not speak about a virgin birth, to believe that it is a prophecy which predicts the messiah being born from a virgin?

 

[Eliyahu613]

Do you believe in typology?

Bs"d

We were not talking about typology, we were talking about messianic prophecies.

But backtracking from messianic prophecies to typology is already a major step in the right direction.

 

[Stumpmaster]

But the messianic prophecies say that the messiah's kingdom will be from this earth.

Luk 24:25-27 Then Jesus said to them, “O foolish ones, how slow are your hearts to believe all that the prophets have spoken! (26) Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and then to enter His glory?” (27) And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, He explained to them what was written in all the Scriptures about Himself.

Quote: What is the kingdom of God? | GotQuestions.org

Broadly speaking, the kingdom of God is the rule of an eternal, sovereign God over all the universe. Several passages of Scripture show that God is the undeniable Monarch of all creation: “The LORD has established his throne in heaven, and his kingdom rules over all” (Psalm 103:19). And, as King Nebuchadnezzar declared, “His kingdom is an eternal kingdom” (Daniel 4:3). Every authority that exists has been established by God (Romans 13:1). So, in one sense, the kingdom of God incorporates everything that is.

More narrowly, the kingdom of God is a spiritual rule over the hearts and lives of those who willingly submit to God’s authority. Those who defy God’s authority and refuse to submit to Him are not part of the kingdom of God; in contrast, those who acknowledge the lordship of Christ and gladly surrender to God’s rule in their hearts are part of the kingdom of God. In this sense, the kingdom of God is spiritual—Jesus said His kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36), and He preached that repentance is necessary to be a part of the kingdom of God (Matthew 4:17). That the kingdom of God can be equated with the sphere of salvation is evident in John 3:5–7, where Jesus says the kingdom of God must be entered into by being born again. See also 1 Corinthians 6:9.

There is another sense in which the kingdom of God is used in Scripture: the literal rule of Christ on the earth during the millennium. Daniel said that “the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed” (Daniel 2:44; cf. 7:13–14), and many of the other prophets predicted the same thing (e.g., Obadiah 1:21; Habakkuk 2:14; Micah 4:2; Zechariah 14:9). Some theologians refer to the future, open manifestation of the kingdom of God as the “kingdom of glory” and the present, hidden manifestation of the kingdom of God as the “kingdom of grace.” But both manifestations are connected; Christ has set up His spiritual reign in the church on earth, and He will one day set up His physical reign in Jerusalem.

The kingdom of God has several aspects. The Lord is the Sovereign of the universe, and so in that sense His kingdom is universal (1 Timothy 6:15). At the same time, the kingdom of God involves repentance and the new birth, as God rules in the hearts of His children in this world in preparation for the next. The work begun on earth will find its consummation in heaven (see Philippians 1:6).

 

[Matthias]

Bs"d

No, I believe that all mankind will crush the heads of snakes. I know I did.

Thanks. That sounds awfully like universalism to me.

It speaks about the messiah in the same way it speaks about Muhammed, David Koresh, Napoleon Bonaparte, and whoever.

A human person, but surely one greater than the persons you identified by name.

What it comes down to, that objectively it is not a messianic prophecy.

That’s a sticking point for me.

It is just like Isaiah 53, in order to see in that the messiah, you first have to be a Christian and believe in a suffering and dying messiah.

Which the NT Jewish believers in Jesus were.

Objectively, it isn't there, and it is clear that it speaks about something else, just like for instance Psalm 69 and Isaiah 7:14.

Another sticking point for me.

You think it is not absurd to believe that Isaiah 7 which does not speak about the messiah, and which does not speak about a virgin birth, to believe that it is a prophecy which predicts the messiah being born from a virgin?

What I think is that the Jewish NT writers are correct in their understanding of the Tanach.

 

[Matthias]

Bs"d

We were not talking about typology, we were talking about messianic prophecies.

But backtracking from messianic prophecies to typology is already a major step in the right direction.

I brought up typology because the Jewish NT writers employ it in their understanding and explanation of OT prophecies concerning the messiah.

Regardless, do you believe in typology?

 

[Matthias]

Bs"d

…

There are a few genuine messianic prophecies, for instance Micah 5, Isaiah 11 …

This is an important point in our conversation. The Jews who wrote the NT believed there are significantly more “genuine messianic prophecies” than you do.

Since there are so few of them in your faith tradition, would you list all those which you believe are for us? There must be some overlap.

Also, are all branches of modern Judaism in full agreement on which passages are “genuine messianic prophecies”? In other words, do some branches hold certain passages to be messianic that other branches don’t?

 

[Eliyahu613]

Do you believe in typology?

Bs"d

No. I don't believe it has any value as evidence. When you start ripping Tanach texts which have no bearing on the messiah out of context and start presenting them as "messianic prophecies", or "typology", then you can make anybody you want the messiah, no matter who it is.
Here is an example of that: messianic rooster

 

[Eliyahu613]

…



This is an important point in our conversation. The Jews who wrote the NT believed there are significantly more “genuine messianic prophecies” than you do.

Bs"d

When you call ripping verses which have no bearing on the messiah whatsoever out of context, mistranslating them, and then calling them "messianic prophecies", then they believed in more.

Their believe was even so strong that they made up non-existing verses and presented them as "messianic prophecies".

Matthew 2:23 “And he went and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, "He shall be called a Nazarene."”
This prophecy won't take up much time, because you can go through the whole Hebrew Bible, and NOWHERE is it written that the messiah should live in Nazareth, or the he should be called “Nazarene”.


Luke 24: “44 Then he said to them, "These are my words which I spoke to you, while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled." 45 Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures, 46 and said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, 47 and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.”

But the problem is: NOWHERE in the Tanach is it written that “the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.”

Since there are so few of them in your faith tradition, would you list all those which you believe are for us? There must be some overlap.

Also, are all branches of modern Judaism in full agreement on which passages are “genuine messianic prophecies”? In other words, do some branches hold certain passages to be messianic that other branches don’t?

Micah 5 speaks about the messiah, Zech 9:9-10, Jeremiah 23:5-6, Jeremiah 33:14-16, Isaiah 11, Daniel 7:13-14, and then there are texts which speak about the messianic era, but not about the messiah, like Isaiah 65 and 66.

I don't know what other branches of Judaism say about the messiah, because it is really not an important subject.

Christianity revolves around the messiah, don't believe in him in you'll burn in hell forever and ever and all eternity.

Judaism revolves around God and His law. The world to come and the messiah are side points. We have to live in the here and now.

 

[Matthias]

Bs"d

No. I don't believe it has any value as evidence. When you start ripping Tanach texts which have no bearing on the messiah out of context and start presenting them as "messianic prophecies", or "typology", then you can make anybody you want the messiah, no matter who it is.
Here is an example of that: messianic rooster

So then it seems that symbolism isn’t something you find in your study of scripture.

 

[Matthias]

Bs"d

When you call ripping verses which have no bearing on the messiah whatsoever out of context, mistranslating them, and then calling them "messianic prophecies", then they believed in more.

Their believe was even so strong that they made up non-existing verses and presented them as "messianic prophecies".

Matthew 2:23 “And he went and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, "He shall be called a Nazarene."”
This prophecy won't take up much time, because you can go through the whole Hebrew Bible, and NOWHERE is it written that the messiah should live in Nazareth, or the he should be called “Nazarene”.


Luke 24: “44 Then he said to them, "These are my words which I spoke to you, while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled." 45 Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures, 46 and said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, 47 and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.”

But the problem is: NOWHERE in the Tanach is it written that “the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.”

I don’t think it will satisfy you but for those who are interested in wrestling with this difficult passage:

Matthew 2:23 Commentaries: and came and lived in a city called Nazareth. This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophets: "He shall be called a Nazarene."

Micah 5 speaks about the messiah, Zech 9:9-10, Jeremiah 23:5-6, Jeremiah 33:14-16, Isaiah 11, Daniel 7:13-14, and then there are texts which speak about the messianic era, but not about the messiah, like Isaiah 65 and 66.

Thank you. This goes a long way in helping me understand why you say the messiah “is really not an important subject”. It presents a sharp contrast with the attitude of the 1st century Jewish sect whose writings constitute the NT.

I don't know what other branches of Judaism say about the messiah, because it is really not an important subject.

This helps me understand why my limited experience in speaking with Jews has been so different from my conversation with you.

Christianity revolves around the messiah…

That’s a reasonable observation. Christianity without the messiah is no Christianity at all.

…. don't believe in him in you'll burn in hell forever and ever and all eternity.

I think it’s fair to say that the majority of Christians believe that but not all Christians do. I don’t. (I believe in the fire that consumes those who reject the messiah, not a fire which burns them “forever and ever and all eternity.”

Judaism revolves around God and His law.

Primitive Christianity does as well.

The world to come and the messiah are side points.

The world to come and the messiah aren’t side points in Christianity. You present a good contrast for readers here between Judaism and Christianity.

We have to live in the here and now.

Judaism and Christianity both acknowledge this.

Having given this a little thought, the takeaway for me is to avoid extremes. By that I mean that there must be a balance in our lives; not too focused on the “here and now” nor too lax about it. The same with the age to come.

 

[Matthias]

Isaiah 53: did Judaism always consider Israel the suffering servant?

A comprehensive summary of Jewish teaching over two millenia

medium.com

Table 1 in the linked article summarizes historical Jewish messianic and non-messianic interpretation of Isaiah 53.

 

[Wrangler]

It is just like Isaiah 53, in order to see in that the messiah, you first have to be a Christian and believe in a suffering and dying messiah.

Bizarre. The nation of Israel are chosen. Nowhere is their chosen destiny said to be suffering in the service of God. Rather, if they fail to follow his Laws.

 

[Mr E]

Bs"d

Who is the suffering servant in Isaiah 53?

Christians say it is the messiah. The Jews say it is the Jewish people.

I think that it is obvious that the Jews are right also on this one.

What arguments can Christians bring that the suffering servant is the messiah?

Isaiah

 

[Mr E]

Bs"d

Wasn't he born in a stable? Not very king-like.

And he never was a real king, never ruled over a kingdom.



Well, we'll have to see about that. You can believe that, but if it really is going to happen that is up in the air.

Yes, that is what all the messianic prophecies say. And all these messianic prophecies are not fulfilled by your messiah.

David was born into a family of sheep-herders. He himself was a sheep-herder..... not very king-like.

Now, Saul-- he was king-like. Head and shoulders above the rest....

"People look on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart.”