Critiquing the "Suffering Servant Prophecy"

[Jagella]

Many Christian apologists would have us believe that Jesus was prophesied centuries before the time he is believed to have lived and died. These supposed prophecies appear in many passages scattered about the Jewish scriptures and are quoted in the New Testament. Matthew, for example, is full of allusions to Old-Testament stories that the writer believed are predictions of the coming Messiah, Jesus. If these Old-Testament passages predicted the coming of Jesus, then we have virtual proof that Jesus is the Messiah and proof that the Christian god exists.

One such "prediction" I'd like to discuss is that of the "suffering servant" appearing in Isaiah 52:13-53:12. Apologists Frank Turek and Norman Geisler call this passage "...perhaps the clearest and most complete prophecy of the coming Messiah." (1) They also tells us: "Just a casual reading of the passage should leave little doubt that the Suffering Servant is Jesus." (2)

Question for Debate: Is the "suffering servant" passage in Isaiah 52:13-53:12 a prophecy of the coming of Jesus?

Contrary to what Turek and Geisler claim, there is much doubt that Isaiah 52:13-53:12 truly predicts Jesus. For one thing, this "suffering servant" is referred to in the past tense implying that he was a man who had already lived when Isaiah wrote of him. In addition, Isaiah's suffering servant in 53:10 was "crushed by God," something that never happened to Jesus as far as we know. We are also told in 53:7 "...he did not open his mouth..." which cannot refer to Jesus because he opened his mouth wide all the time! Finally, if Isaiah 52:13-53:12 predicts Jesus, then why does it nowhere mention Jesus? You would think that if the Christian god wanted to predict Jesus, then he would mention Jesus' name!

Agree? Disagree?

(1) Frank Turek and Norman Geisler, I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, Page 330
(2) Ibid. Page 333

[1213]

...
Contrary to what Turek and Geisler claim, there is much doubt that Isaiah 52:13-53:12 truly predicts Jesus. For one thing, this "suffering servant" is referred to in the past tense implying that he was a man who had already lived when Isaiah wrote of him. In addition, Isaiah's suffering servant in 53:10 was "crushed by God," ...

Who else it would be?

I think it is clearly about Jesus. And Jesus was crushed, because he was tortured, and Jesus thought God had rejected him.

About the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, Eli, lima sabachthani?" That is, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
Mat. 27:46

[Jagella]

[Jagella]

[Mithrae]

So we are told by Jewish scholars (and who would know better than they?)

Christian scholars? Secular scholars? The assumption that folk belonging to one particular ideological camp must be better-informed than folk belonging to other camps is notoriously illogical, but it seems that critics of Christianity are frequently happy to indulge such a notion whenever it suits their agenda. When it comes to the murky waters of translation it's certainly important to compare both Christian and Jewish translations to mitigate potential biases on that score, and likewise to objectively consider all perspectives on interpretation: But the view which says or implies that these modern folk are Jews and therefore they must have a better understanding of iron-age writings than modern folk who are Christians is laughably irrational.

There is some merit to the Jewish interpretation; there is also some merit to the Christian interpretation. I think that anyone reading it through would recognize that deutero-Isaiah is a rather confusing work.

[Bust Nak]

So I think that Christian apologists are deliberately misleading people into believing that Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is a prophecy about Jesus, dishonesty that does not surprise me one bit.

Moderator Warning

Please do not call into question the character of Christian apologists in a blanket statement.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[1213]

[Jagella]

[1213]

[Mithrae]

Normally, when Bible speaks of nation, or nation of Israel, it uses female, not male form, like for example here:

Good point. And that includes the very next chapter of Isaiah (even according to Jagella's link):

• Isaiah 54:1 Sing, O barren one who did not bear;
  burst into song and shout,
  you who have not been in labor!
  For the children of the desolate woman will be more
  than the children of her that is married, says the Lord. . . .
  
  5 For your Maker is your husband,
  the Lord of hosts is his name;
  the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer,
  the God of the whole earth he is called.
  6 For the Lord has called you
  like a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit,
  like the wife of a man’s youth when she is cast off,
  says your God.
  7 For a brief moment I abandoned you,
  but with great compassion I will gather you.

It's also worth noting that probably the most famous 'kingly' messianic passage is the one from Isaiah 11 (the iron will lie down with the lamp and all that); but the servant songs seem to reflect that passage in many respects (the servant being endowed with God's spirit, being a light for the nations and so on) and the opening to chapter 53 seems to be a particularly clear mirroring of it:

• Isaiah 11:1 (Jewish translation) And there shall come forth a shoot out of the stock of Jesse, and a twig shall grow forth out of his roots. . . .
  v10 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the root of Jesse, that standeth for an ensign of the peoples, unto him shall the nations seek; and his resting-place shall be glorious.
  
  Isaiah 53:1 'Who would have believed our report? And to whom hath the arm of HaShem been revealed?
  v2 For he shot up right forth as a sapling, and as a root out of a dry ground; he had no form nor comeliness, that we should look upon him, nor beauty that we should delight in him.