Messianic Prophecies- The Case for Jesus (Part 3)

Enjoy the podcast:

Anchor Audio Link = https://anchor.fm/skeptics-and-seekers/episodes/Episode-22-Messianic-Prophecy-Part-3-e2m6kv .

With Part 3 in our series on Messianic Prophecies and my “Jesus or Bust” circumstantial argument, we will focus exclusively on perhaps the most famous Messianic prophecy of all time (according to a traditional Christian understanding at least)- the Suffering Servant in Isaiah 53.

Establishing The Argument- Jesus Or Bust Part 3

The Suffering Servant (Isaiah 53);

The Suffering Servant prophecy is arguably the most famous Messianic prophecy ever; it alone has caused many a Jew to see Jesus as the Jewish Messiah and convert to Christianity.  The full song actually starts in Isaiah 52:13 through to the end of chapter 53, but the overall context includes chapters 40-54.

The text in full context speaks of an individual known as the righteous servant (aka. the Messiah) who would be led like a lamb to the slaughter for the iniquities of all, he would be killed making his grave with the wicked and yet be buried with the rich.  However, the most fascinating thing is that the prophecy then speaks of the Messiah as prolonging his days and seeing his progeny- how can a man who is “cut off from the land of the living”, see future generations of his offspring?  The answer is Resurrection!  That’s right, this verse incredibly says that the Messiah will suffer and die for the sins of everyone and then raise from the dead.

Now, this verse obviously means to speak of Jesus, there is no question about the existence of such an unfalsified claimed fulfillment here, however there have been multiple pushbacks from modern Jews and skeptics who try to undermine the clear and obvious meaning of this text.

The Main Objection- The Prophecy Speaks of the Nation of Israel; This skeptical notion can easily be refuted.  That said, there is some truth to the claims of Jews that there are some places in the surrounding context that do speak of the “Servant” which unmistakably refers to the nation of Israel as a whole (Ch. 41:8-9, 42:19, 43:10,44:21 & 48:20 for example); the context speaks of the restoration of Israel after the Babylonian exile.  However, there are other times where the surrounding chapters clearly refer to an individual within the nation (such as Ch. 49:5-7 & 50:10).  In fact, all references to the Servant as being the nation of Israel abruptly stop as of chapter 49 and instead focus the discussion on a specific individual who would represent the nation of Israel and bring to fruition Israel’s divine mission which it had failed to do as the now “blind servant” (contrast this with the Righteous Servant- the Messiah).

By the time we get to chapter 52:13-53, we receive a clear picture of an individual who would suffer and die for the transgressions of his own sinful people while at the same time being sinless himself and who would bring light to the gentiles in the form of God’s salvation and the forgiveness of sins (hardly an accurate description of the nation of Israel which is described as being blind in the surrounding context).  The Resurrection of Jesus is also prophesied in how this Servant would, after death, see “his seed” through the prolonging of his days (“see seed” is meant metaphorically here as this is the only location in the entire Old Testament where this phrase is used and thus dogmatically interpreting it in a physical sense is unwarranted even according to Jewish Rabbis like Professor J. Immanuel Schochet.

Furthermore, the modern Jewish national interpretation of this text did not exist in any ancient authoritative source from the Talmud, Aramaic Targums or any Midrashic literature until Rashi in the 11th century- every ancient authoritative source we have says this text is about an individual and most say that individual is none other than the Messiah himself.

So, Jesus is a perfect match for this prophecy and indeed the only known match here- the nation of Israel cannot be the proper reading of this text no matter what your local Rabbi says!

CONCLUSION:  In closing, there are other objections that have been leveled against this text as well, all of which can and have been easily refuted by knowledgeable biblical scholars.  For now, I think it is enough to have addressed probably the main objection raised by Jews and David himself in response to this and some of the other prophecies I mentioned in Part 2; they simply do not mean what the skeptics want them to; the Hebrew grammar matters and rules out the various attempts to obfuscate the clear meaning of the text which clearly apply to Jesus.

RECOMMENDED SOURCES:

PRO- CHRISTIAN SIDE-  Dr. Michael L. Brown gives a 1-hour lecture on “Isaiah 53, the Rabbis, and the Messiah”  , also a short 10 min video on Suffering Servant not being the Nation of Israel and/or righteous remnant = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J9ByB4UhY ( also for the fuller 2 part discussion where this clip comes from see here = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LorWCJ59CAg & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0mOdiBISU ).  Also a special 5 min video discussing this issue with Dr. Michael Rydelnik, Dr. Michael Brown, Dr. Walter Kaiser, and Dr. Darrell Bock = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GGnRbAJ9U .

CONTRA-CHRISTIAN SIDE- See Rabbi Tovia Singer has 2 one-hour part audio Podcasts on Isaiah 53 (and other issues as well) here = https://outreachjudaism.org/lets-get-biblical-audio-series/  OR a written article by him here = https://outreachjudaism.org/gods-suffering-servant-isaiah-53/ .  Also see articles by Jews for Judaism here = https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/isaiah-53-a-jewish-perspective/  & https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/isaiah-53-explained/ .

NEUTRAL SOURCE- Here is a quick 36 min debate on Isaiah 53 with Dr. Michael Brown and Rabbi Asher Meza here = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TTnNYgRyrw.

Let Isaiah Speak for Himself (Skeptic’s View)

Last week I made a plea for readers to let the Jews speak for themselves, and posted insights from a Jewish rabbi. He is not a Jew for Jesus, as the ones Dale is fond of bringing up, but a Jew for Jews and Judaism, which seems to be a rather more honest approach. In the principle of philosophical charity, you try to represent the best and truest view of the opponent. Dale does not do this. He presents fringe views of Judaism to represent the whole. I do not find his efforts convincing, and neither should you.

I will go ahead and post another Jewish source up front:

http://godlesshaven.com/why-isaiah-53-is-not-about-jesus/

It does a better job of taking down the Christian interpretation of Is. 53 than I could. But it doesn’t really matter because Christians like Dale really don’t care what actual Jews professing judaism really think. He is only interested in the minority view. Still, I recommend the article for those who care. I can dig them up all day. And so can you.

This week, I make a plea that we let Isaiah speak for himself, without the Christian gloss. A Christian reads Isaiah with a certain tint this her lenses. Without a Jesus filter, the Jew reads the passage and finds Jesus nowhere in it. What is the difference? We get a few clues from Dales above arguments. So before quoting Isaiah, allow me to quote Dale:

Now, this verse obviously means to speak of Jesus, there is no question about the existence of such an unfalsified claimed fulfillment here, however there have been multiple pushbacks from modern Jews and skeptics who try to undermine the clear and obvious meaning of this text.

(Emphasis mine.)

His piece is chock full of such pronouncements of how obvious it is, and clear, and easy to see. He makes the leap of ascribing motive to the opposition by suggesting we are purposely trying to undermine the clear and obvious meaning of the text. Why would we do such a thing? Either we are stupid or dishonest.

Frankly, that one paragraph should disqualify Dale’s argument. Never-mind the slightly ad hominem undertones. It is written like a person unfamiliar with literature. Modern poetry is almost inscrutable. And it is written in our time, for our culture, by people we know, in a language we understand. Try interpreting a Dillan song. Get back to me on that.

Send the poet back a few hundred years, and we have to get four-year college degrees to figure it out. And we never really figure it out. We are only ever qualified to enter the debate. Send the poetry back a few thousand years, and we are rightfully lost. Interpreting that kind of literature should never be bracketed with words like obvious and clear. The only people who think Jewish religious poetry is obvious and clear are thous who know little about literature, and nothing about Jewish poetry. With his post, Dale identifies himself as one of those.

Let’s pick up the reading at verse 3:

He was despised and rejected by people,

one who experienced pain and was acquainted with illness;

people hid their faces from him;

he was despised, and we considered him insignificant.

Was Jesus really despised and rejected by the people? He was followed by crowds, sometimes unwanted, for much of his ministry. He was one of the most famous and beloved people of his time if the gospels are to believed. Was in sick and in constant pain? Did Jesus have fibromyalgia? Christians tell me he was a hearty person who was confident and happy. When did anyone hide their face from him? Who considered him insignificant? This does not sound like the Jesus of the gospels at all.

Now, one could say that he was despised and rejected in the last hours of his life. But that didn’t define most of his short life. And at no point was he ever written as insignificant. Leaders took notice of him from his birth, on his twelfth birthday, and all during his ministry.

Let’s go to verse 5 and I will tell you what I think this passage is referring to:

He was wounded because of our rebellious deeds,

crushed because of our sins;

he endured punishment that made us well;

because of his wounds we have been healed.

Throughout Isaiah, Israel is referred to as the servant. So don’t let the use of poetry trip you up. My personal opinion is that the person in view is the righteous remnant within the larger Jewish culture. Remember that Judaism is a national religion. All Jews could be punished by the acts of some. And all Jews could be saved by the acts of some.

So the servant (the righteous remnant) suffers and bears the sins of the greater culture. But because of their faithfulness, the nation is eventually redeemed. The entire chapter can be read consistently this way. That interpretation may not be obvious. But it does cohere.

Verse 7:

He was treated harshly and afflicted,

but he did not even open his mouth.

Like a lamb led to the slaughtering block,

like a sheep silent before her shearers,

he did not even open his mouth.

…Accept Jesus was rather chatty in the book of John. We have too many sayings from him during the event to say he was silent, too many exceptions.

10

Though the Lord desired to crush him and make him ill,

once restitution is made,

he will see descendants and enjoy long life,

and the Lord’s purpose will be accomplished through him.

When did Jesus have descendants? When did he enjoy a long life? That is an odd way to speak of an eternal being with no descendants.

11

Having suffered, he will reflect on his work,

he will be satisfied when he understands what he has done.

“My servant will acquit many,

for he carried their sins.

Did Jesus need to reflect on his work?

12

So I will assign him a portion with the multitudes,

he will divide the spoils of victory with the powerful,

because he willingly submitted to death

and was numbered with the rebels,

when he lifted up the sin of many

and intervened on behalf of the rebels.”

Was Jesus assigned a portion with eh multitudes? Did he divide the spoils of victory with the powerful?

Even the best efforts of the gospel writers couldn’t make all these pronouncements in Isaiah match up exactly with Jesus. The chapter makes more sense and is more consistent with a righteous remnant.

And that’s the view from the skeptic.

David Johnson