Phlox Pyros

It was mentioned in another thread that Isaiah 53, "the suffering servant", should be brought up. How well is this passage translated in the majority of Christian bibles? Was this passage associated with a/the messiah?

Don't worry, I'm not going to participate much, I'm just throwing this out there to see what kind of linguistic and historical analysis will be presented on this chapter.

Here are a few controversial logs to throw on the fire:

Isaiah 53 was...
...written about a/the Jewish messiah...
...reflects the life and even theology of Jesus (ie. "suffered", "pierced", "buried with the rich", "died for our sins", etc.)

spin

R. T. F. A.

Phlox Pyros

U.R.T.F.A.

Well, that's a plus...spin's weighed in with less to say than usual. Anyone else?

spin

As Phlox, who simply throws up one of these threads after another defending the status quo position (without apparent regard for logic or evidence), wilfully chooses to ignore the archives, I recommend that he be ignored.

He can start here with the last time Isa 53 was discussed.

JoeWallack

JW:
Hey, this sounds like fun. Let's make it into one of those "Therefore, God exists." Threads. I'll start:

Isaiah 53 was...

about a 21st century Troll.



Joseph

"You've been Wikied!" - JoeWallack

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Diogenes the Cynic

We've had endless discussions of the Suffering Servant passages in this forum. It's not about the Jewish Messiah. It's a poetic personification of the people of Israel. It says so repeatedly right there in Isaiah. It's not about Jesus. It doesn't say "pierced." It doesn't say "died for our sins."

Diogenes the Cynic

::Blowing whistle::

Ok, everybody, let's remember the rules of the forum. Please avoid ad hominems and please don't accuse people of trolling. If you suspect a poster of trolling, please click the little red triangle in the lower left hand corner.

Thank you for your cooperation.

DtC, Moderator, BC&H

Amaleq13

Good advice. I meant to ask you about something in a previous thread on the subject. Is there anything to the claim that the DSS contains evidence of belief that the Messiah would suffer? Israel Knohl apparently argues for this in his book, The Messiah before Jesus : the suffering servant of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Apikorus

Here is an excerpt from an old thread in which I provided some analysis of the suffering servant in Isaiah. The thread itself is fun to read, though I confess I was not on my best behavior back in those days...

*******

The identity of deutero-Isaiah's eved YHWH is abundantly clear. The servant is explicitly identified as Jacob/Israel in Isa 41:8 and elsewhere (several times). Indeed, there is not a single time in all of deutero-Isaiah where the servant is explicitly identified with anyone other than Jacob/Israel.

Since Duhm's late 19th century identification of the four "servant poems" in deutero-Isaiah (42:1-4; 49:1-6; 50:4-9; 52:13-53:12, though their boundaries are somewhat ambiguous), scholars have committed massive deforestation in an attempt to identify the servant of these poems. In the narrative sections, though, the servant is explicitly identified as Jacob/Israel, and it seems sensible to test the hypothesis that Jacob is also the servant of the poems. Gerald Larue (whose excellent though dated book "Old Testament Life and Literature" is available online here at II) points out that there exist several strong parallels between the servant of the poems and Jacob/Israel in the narrative (See Larue OTLL, ch. 23):

1. Both are formed in the womb by Yahweh, 49:1, 5; cf. 44:2, 24.
2. Both are chosen by Yahweh, 42:1, cf. 41:8 f.; 43:10; 44:1; etc.
3. Both are sustained by Yahweh, 42:1; cf. 41:10.
4. Both are to be a light to the nations, 49:6; cf. 42:6.
5. In both Yahweh is glorified, 49:3; cf. 44:23.

Larue goes on to remark,

"On the other hand there are differences. Whereas the prophet speaks of rebellious, discouraged Israel (40:27; 41:8-10; 48:4), he finds the anonymous servant to be undismayed and faithful (42:4; 50:5-9). Furthermore, whereas Israel is to be redeemed (43:1-7), the servant is to be the instrument of redemption (49:5)."

But this is easily explained, as there are two Israels of which deutero-Isaiah speaks. One is "greater Israel" which had repeatedly faltered and failed to heed YHWH's commandments. The other is Israel the servant group - the notionally faithful remnant, which was, very likely, deutero-Isaiah's audience. Through the piety of the remnant, all Israel would be redeemed. Incidentally, DtIsa himself uses the plural avdei (servantS):

...zot nachalat avdei YHWH v'tzidkatam meiti n'um-YHWH

...This is the heritage of the servants of YHWH and their vindication from me, says YHWH. (Isa 54:17)

Furthermore, trito-Isaiah picks up on this theme, and again uses the plural avadim:

shuv l'maan avadekha shivtei nachalatekha

Return for the sake of your servantS, the tribes of your inheritance (Isa 63:17)

See also Isa 65:8-9:

koh amar YHWH kaasher yimatzei hatirosh baeshkol v'amar al-tashchiteihu ki brakha bo ken e'eseh l'maan avadai l'vilti hashchit hakol v'hotzeiti miyaaqov zera umiyehudah yoreish harai viy'reishuha b'chirai vaavadai yishk'nu shamah

So says YHWH: as new wine is found in the cluster, and (YHWH) says: do not destroy it, for there is blessing in it. So will I do for my servantS' sakes, that I may not destroy them all. And I will bring forth seed from Jacob, and from Judah an inheritor of my mountains and my elect shall inherit it and my servantS shall dwell there (Isa 65:8-9)

So quite clearly it is for the sake of the corporate servant group (l'maan avadai) that the entire group - what I call "greater Israel" - will not be destroyed. This accords perfectly with my reading of DtIsa. The collective servant group is the "new wine" found amid the "cluster" (= greater Israel). The seed that is brought forth is from Jacob/Judah. This is the seed promised to the servant group in Isa 53:10. The faithful remnant would redeem greater Israel, and their seed would repopulate the desolated hills of Judah.

You've got to be [self-censored to remove insult] obtuse to think that DtIsa or TrIsa was writing about events 550 (or 400 - see below) years in the future.

Of course, there are major scholars who would disagree. Klaus Baltzer, in his recently-released Hermeneia commentary on deutero-Isaiah (a work of considerable importance!), makes a strong case that the provenance of DtIsa is not the early exilic period (as assumed by Duhm and many others) but rather the mid-to-late Persian period, ca. 400 BCE. Furthermore, Baltzer identifies the servant as Moses! (Baltzer's overall analysis is brilliant. He makes the utterly novel proposal that DtIsa is to be read as a liturgical drama, and that it was in fact performed as a play in six acts.)

Vorkosigan

Quite interesting! It's incredible what insights you can have into a text when you start thinking about how it was performed.

Amaleq, John J. Collins in Scepter and Star,a study of Messianism in the DSS and other lit of its day, labels attempts to find a suffering messiah in the DSS "misguided."

Vorkosigan