Replies

I began to research the passage and I started to look for rabbinic interpretations. That's when I began to worry. If I read the passage once, I'm sure I read it 500 times. I looked for as many traditional Jewish interpretations as I could find. A number of them, especially the earlier ones, described the text as a messianic prophecy. Other interpretations claimed the suffering servant was Isaiah himself, or even the nation of Israel, but those explanations were an embarrassment to me. The details in the text obviously don't add up to the prophet Isaiah or the nation of Israel.

I like Jay, but there is a VERY common myth about Isaiah 53 and Judaism. If I have heard it once, I have heard it a thousand times, "Jews don't read Isaiah 53". This is pure bunk, and very insulting. Also, Jay didn't look too hard for commentary on it. Maybe it was his "very Reformed" background (not meant as a slight toward Reformed). Anyway, there is a very well-known passage in Talmud Bavli Sanhedrin 98a where Isaiah 53 is debated. The consensus is that Isaiah 53 is about the Messiah. Hear that? the Sages of the Talmud say Isaiah 53 is about Mashiach. There is some debate as to who it might be, but suffice it to say that the primary emphasis is upon the "Leper Scholar" or "Leper Messiah" who is found binding the sores of lepers. It is a powerful passage. Too bad Jay did not spend a little time with it. I am not saying his conclusions would have been different... but he would not have perpetuated the myth about Isaiah 53 and how "Jews don't read it".

Interestingly, at the time of the Protestant Reformation, there was intense interest in the Talmud among Protestant seminarians. Many seminaries started Talmud study centers. The reason is quite simple: The Sages of the Talmud and Midrashim know more about the Hebrew Scriptures than Augustine, Origen, Calvin, Luther, and Zwingli combined. They put to shame many a so-called "Christian Hebrew scholar". Anyone interested in the Hebrew Scriptures should pick up a copy of Soncino's Talmud and Midrash Rabbah. Powerful stuff. It makes every other Bible commentary I have ever read look like kindergarten.

One more thing. Please don't insult Jews by saying "Jesus was a Jew". That name is not only a silly rendering of Greek-to-Latin-to-German, it is also a name that many of his so-called followers used to murder Jews throughout the ages, all as a act sick of worship. The "Jesus" many people are referring when they say that is someone who looks like a woman, with blue eyes, and light brown hair. Who hated Jews and the Temple. Who taught his followers to hate Jews and to turn their backs upon the Torah of G-d - in direct contradiction to Deut 13 and Deut 18, where G-d told His people to put to death a prophet who came and turned them away from Torah. That "Jesus" isn't Jewish. He is a figment of 1,800 years of anti-Semitic church fervor.

The name is not 'Jesus' - it is Y'shua, and He is none of those things listed above. He taught His followers to be faithful to ALL of G-d's Word. He was not only Torah observant, He told His followers to be as well. /rant.

Interesting post. I've read the claim that the "suffering servant" passage is censored. Interesting to hear that it's not.

What of the claim that Jewish scholars - before Jesus - took "alma" in Isaiah to mean virgin, not merely young woman --- that the claim that "alma" meant "young woman" and not virgin was only advanced after the rise of christianity.?

Great post, very informative, and it informs me about your point of view as a Jew.

As a Christian I found it an interesting read.

Now...we're dialogin'!

;)