TEN REASONS WHY ISAIAH 53 CANNOT REFER TO ISRAEL

HopeInMessiah.org ^ | Compiled by Jonathan Sacks

[hope_dies_last]

TEN REASONS WHY ISAIAH 53 CANNOT REFER TO ISRAEL

Compiled by Jonathan Sacks

The passage known as “Isaiah 53” actually begins at Isaiah 52:13 and includes the entire 53rd chapter of Isaiah. This passage speaks in detail of the life, suffering, and death of Messiah. (This passage is quoted below.) The overwhelmingly dominant Jewish view throughout history has been that this extended passage speaks of Messiah. (See “What Rabbis Have Said about Isaiah 53.”) Therefore, the Jewish view of the Messiah traditionally has included the understanding that the Messiah would suffer and die as the ultimate kaparrah (atonement) for the sins of Israel and of the world.

For over a thousand years after the death of Yeshua, this remained essentially the only Jewish view concerning Isaiah 53. In the late 11th century a new view, that the passage spoke of Israel, was introduced, but was vehemently rejected by the vast majority of rabbis for the next 700 years. Following are ten reasons why Isaiah 53 cannot refer to Israel. These include some of the reasons the rabbis overwhelmingly rejected this novel view.

Isaiah 52:13-53:12 52:13 Behold My servant shall prosper, He shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high.

52:14 According as many were appalled at thee—so marred was his visage unlike that of a man, and his form unlike the sons of men—

52:15 So shall he startle many nations, kings shall shut their mouths because of him; for that which had not been told them shall they see, and that which they had not heard shall they perceive.

53:1 Who would have believed our report? And to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?

53:2 For he shot up right forth as a sapling, and as a root out of dry ground; he had no form nor comeliness, that we should look upon him, nor beauty that we should delight in him.

53:3 He was despised, and forsaken of men, a man of pains, and acquainted with disease, and as one from whom men hide their face: he was despised and we esteemed him not.

53:4 Surely our diseases he did bear, and our pains he carried; whereas we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

53:5 But he was wounded because of our transgressions, he was crushed because of our iniquities: The chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed.

53:6 All we like sheep did go astray, we turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath made to light on him the iniquity of us all.

53:7 He was oppressed, though he humbled himself and opened not his mouth; as a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before her shearers is dumb; yea, he opened not his mouth.

53:8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away, and with his generation who did reason? For he was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due.

53:9 And they made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich his tomb; although he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to crush him by disease; to see if his soul would offer itself in restitution, that he might see his seed, prolong his days, and that the purpose of the LORD might prosper by his hand:

53:11 Of the travail of his soul he shall see to the full, even My servant, who by his knowledge did justify the Righteous One to the many, and their iniquities he did bear.

53:12 Therefore will I divide him a portion among the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the mighty; because he bared his soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

The Ten Reasons

1. The consistent use of pronouns in the passage makes it clear that the suffering servant is an individual who is distinct from the Jewish people to whom Isaiah was speaking. Throughout the passage, the suffering servant is always referred to in the singular (he, him, himself, and his), while the people of Israel are referred to in the plural (we, us, and our) or simply as “my people.” Thus, the suffering servant cannot be Israel. For example, Isaiah 53:3-8 states:

He was despised, and forsaken of men, a man of pains, and acquainted with disease, and as one from whom men hide their face: he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Surely our disease he did bear, and our pains he carried; whereas we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

But he was wounded because of our transgressions, he was crushed because of our iniquities: the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his stripes we were healed.

All we like sheep did go astray, we turned every one to his own way;

And the Lord hath made to light upon him the iniquity of us all.

He was oppressed, though he humbled himself, and opened not his mouth; as a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that is before her shearers is dumb; yea, he opened not his mouth.

By oppression and judgment he was taken away, and with his generation who did reason? For he was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due.[1]

In addition, when “Israel” is inserted for the pronouns, the passage makes no sense. For example, the servant is righteous yet is dying for Israel’s transgressions. (See, for example, verses 8 and 11.) Either Israel is righteous or she isn’t, not both. In addition, Israel cannot die vicariously for her own sins.

2. Israel is distinct from the suffering servant for three additional reasons:

a. In this passage, Israel observed the suffering of the righteous servant. (See, for example, verses 3-6.)

b. The suffering servant died for the transgressions, or sins, of the Jewish people. This is seen in the closing sentence of Isaiah 53:8, which says:

For he was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due.

Clearly, “my people” is Isaiah’s people, the people of Israel. The passage would make no sense if the suffering servant were Israel. In that case, Israel would die for Israel’s sins. In other words, Israel would have gotten what she deserved, which makes no sense. The entire passage speaks of the suffering servant suffering and dying for, on behalf of, or in place of Israel.

c. In verse 10, the suffering servant is offered as an “asham,” or guilt offering. Throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, or Jewish Bible, the guilt offering was never Israel, nor could it ever have been Israel. The guilt offering, or "asham," was always offered on behalf of or in place of the one who had committed the trespass or sin.[2] It was never offered for or on behalf of the asham itself. (No one could ever be an “asham” for his or her own sins.) An asham offering was always offered by an individual and never by the nation of Israel. (See Art Scroll commentary on Leviticus, volume 1.) In addition, the offering had to be without blemish, or sinless. Because the offering was without blemish, it was always offered for the sins of someone other than the asham itself. For all of these reasons, Israel cannot be the suffering servant who offers himself as an asham offering.

3. The “asham” always had to die. Likewise, the suffering servant clearly died. See Isaiah 53:8, 9, 10, and 12. He was “cut off out of the land of the living,” he had a grave; he was with the rich “in his death;” and he “poured out his soul unto death.” However, Israel never died. In fact, it is impossible for Israel to ever die, because G-d promised Israel that she would live forever. (See, for example Jeremiah 31:35-37.)

4. The suffering servant suffered a vicarious and substitutionary death (Isaiah 53:4-6, 8, 10, 12). He suffers for the sins of others, so they need not suffer for their own sins. Nowhere in the Jewish Bible nor in Jewish history do we ever see Israel suffering for, on behalf of, or in place of the Gentiles, so that the Gentiles do not have to suffer. Israel often suffered at the hand of Gentiles or because of Gentiles, but never for, on behalf of, or in place of the Gentiles. Israel suffers, but she always suffers for her own sins.

5. The suffering servant “sprinkles” many nations (or Gentiles) in Isaiah 52:15. The Hebrew word for sprinkle is repeatedly used for the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrifice, which was always offered for, on behalf of, or in place of Israel.[3] Israel’s blood was never “sprinkled”, as Israel could never be a sacrifice for herself.

6. The suffering servant has qualities that were never true of Israel:

a. The suffering servant is depicted as being innocent. He did no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth (Isaiah 53:4-6, 8b, 9b). Israel is never told she would suffer for being innocent. (See, for example, Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28.) In addition, Israel is never depicted as being innocent. A cursory reading through Judges, I and II Samuel, I and II Kings, I and II Chronicles, and all the prophets make this abundantly clear. (See, for example, Isaiah 59:1-15, esp. verses 4-7 and Psalm 14:3. These are just two of hundreds of examples that could be cited.) That was why so many sacrifices were needed. Israel was never righteous, or even close to being righteous. Throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, Israel is pictured as continually rejecting God and being repeatedly judged for her sins. This is in sharp contrast to the suffering servant of Isaiah 53, who is portrayed as an innocent sufferer.

b. The suffering servant is the most righteous person described in Scripture. In Isaiah 53:11, he is called “Tsadeek ahvdee”, or “My righteous servant.” This is the only place in the entire Hebrew Bible where this phrase is used. It certainly is never used of Israel. In addition, neither Abraham, Moses, David, nor any other prophet or ruler was ever called “Tsadeek ahvdee”, or “My righteous servant” in the Hebrew Bible—except for the suffering servant of Isaiah 53. Only one righteous or without any blemish could die as a sacrifice for sin. However, no normal human was ever considered righteous on his or her own. (See, for example, Psalm 14:2-3 and Psalm 53:2-3.) This suffering servant must, therefore, be someone greater than Abraham, Moses, or David. It is no wonder that the great majority of rabbis throughout the ages concluded that this righteous servant was none other than the Messiah of Israel.

c. The suffering servant is depicted as being a silent sufferer, in that, like a lamb, he did not protest his execution nor did he defend himself (verse 7). He, instead, suffered willingly and voluntarily. While Israel has suffered immeasurable persecution, she has never done so willingly or voluntarily. Israel has always cried out against the inhumanity of people against her.

7. In this passage, the suffering servant is depicted as suffering for, on behalf of, or in place of others. This was never true of Israel. In the Jewish Bible, every time Israel suffers, including the Babylonian captivity and the present day Dispersion or Diaspora, Israel suffered for her own disobedience—not for the sins of others.

8. The Jewish people (Israel) were promised that if they obeyed G-d, they would be greatly blessed. Only if they were disobedient would they be cursed. (See, for example, Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28.) If Israel were the righteous servant of Isaiah 53, it would have been impossible for her to have suffered and died under the conditions and in the manner described in this passage.

9. In this passage, the suffering servant bore the sins of the people, so they would not have to bear their own sins or be judged for them (Isaiah 53:4-6, 8, 10, 12). If the servant is Israel and the people are the Gentiles, then the Gentiles would not need to be punished for their sins, as they would have been vicariously borne by Israel. This has never been the case. The Gentiles were never deemed innocent after Jews suffered at their hands. Instead, they were judged for mistreating Jewish people. (See, for example, Genesis 12:3, Numbers 24:9, and Jeremiah 46:28.)

10. Isaiah 53:1 refers to the suffering servant as “the Arm of the Lord.” There are 37 references to the Arm of the Lord in the Tanakh. Never does that phrase refer to Israel. The Arm of the Lord acts on behalf of Israel, but is never Israel. Among other things, the Arm of the Lord redeems and delivers Israel when Israel is not able to deliver herself. (See, for example, Exodus 6:6, Exodus 15:16, Deuteronomy 4:34, 5:15, 9:29, 26:8, II Kings 17:36, Psalm 44:3, and Ezekiel 20:33-34.) Clearly the suffering servant, the Arm of the Lord, cannot be Israel.

Conclusion

For these ten reasons, the passage cannot refer to Israel. Therefore, as leading rabbis have held throughout the centuries, the passage must refer to a special individual—the Messiah—who would suffer and die as the ultimate sacrifice or atonement.

Additional thoughts to ponder...

As Christians, let not forget that Israel is the true vine, and we are grafted into the House of Israel, G-d said the heaven and earth would pass before Israel would cease to be the true "nation under G-d" and G-d's chosen people... we are blessed to be called to be part of this Holy Nation and to be adopted into G-d's family and priestlyhood through Yeshua haMashiach

[Netizen]

Messiah's arrival will be accompanied by the following:

• Universal peace and freedom.
• Resurrection of God's people.
• Regathering of the clans of Israel.
• The Torah will go forth from Jerusalem.
• Rebuilding of the Temple
• Resumption of animal sacrifices in the Temple, and
• All nations will come to the land of Israel to observe Succoth.

Jesus came and afterwards....

• Instead of universal peace came the wars...of 66 c.e. and 135 c.e.
• Instead of a resurrection, over a million Jews were killed and thousands sold into slavery.
• Instead of a regathering, there was the scattering of the Jews in the diaspora.
• Instead of the Torah going forth from Jerusalem, the Torah was declared dead and replaced by the Greek New Testament.
• Instead of a Temple being rebuilt, one was destroyed.
• Instead of the continuation of animal sacrifices, they ceased.
• Instead of all nations observing Succoth in Jerusalem, the Holy day was prevented from being observed in Jerusalem and the Gentile church replaced the Biblical Festivals with their pagan holidays

[Netizen]

Don’t count on it.

[RobRoy]

:)

What I meant by that was it is a huge stretch to suggest that it refers to Israel. I consider that “crazy talk”. However, I had no clue about when that teaching sprang up.

[Netizen]

The issue is sin. We cannot co-habitate with a totally Holy God; it is impossible.

Which is why YHWH gave us the means to repent and be forgiven.

2Ch 7:14
14 if My people, upon whom My name is called, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek My face, and turn from their evil ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

The only way is to have sin removed...washed clean...not just once but forever. The only one who can provide a sacrifice is God...he is the only one who can bear the PUNISHMENT for the depth of our sin.

Micah 6
6 'Wherewith shall I come before YHWH, and bow myself before God on high? Shall I come before Him with burnt-offerings, with calves of a year old?
7 Will YHWH be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?'
8 It hath been told thee, O man, what is good, and what YHWH doth require of thee: only to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.

Notice also the verse about how YHWH doesn't require the sacrifice of a firstborn for the transgression of sin -- atonement! SPEAKS VOLUMES.

[Netizen]

The messiah will be human,

I think we all agree on that one point, though some think he will be a g-d.

Yes, He was human which is why He had to be born of a woman...there's no other way. But it was an immaculate conception since He is also God.

Justin Martyr admits that christianity offers nothing new, that the pagans and their pagan gods didn't already have.

And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth45 of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter. For you know how many sons your esteemed writers ascribed to Jupiter: Mercury, the interpreting word and teacher of all; Aesculapius, who, though he was a great physician, was struck by a thunderbolt, and so ascended to heaven; and Bacchus too, after he had been torn limb from limb; and Hercules, when he had committed himself to the flames to escape his toils; and the sons of Leda, and Dioscuri; and Perseus, son of Danae; and Bellerophon, who, though sprung from mortals, rose to heaven on the horse Pegasus.

But far be such a thought concerning the gods from every well-conditioned soul, as to believe that Jupiter himself, the governor and creator of all things, was both a parricide and the son of a parricide

Moreover, the Son of God called Jesus, even if only a man by ordinary generation, yet, on account of His wisdom, is worthy to be called the Son of God; for all writers call God the Father of men and gods. And if we assert that the Word of God was born of God in a peculiar manner, different from ordinary generation, let this, as said above, be no extraordinary thing to you, who say that Mercury is the angelic word of God. But if any one objects that He was crucified, in this also He is on a par with those reputed sons of Jupiter of yours, who suffered as we have now enumerated.

And if we even affirm that He was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you accept of Perseus. And in that we say that He made whole the lame, the paralytic, and those born blind, we seem to say what is very similar to the deeds said to have been done by Aesculapius.

Justin Martyr gives a point, by point, by point, accounting of the similarities between paganism and the 'new religion'. Its the same thing under a new name.

[roamer_1]

It also speaks volumes of how wrong so many paintings of “Jesus” are, most show him fairly handsome [...]

Yes, and with that accursed sun-god halo surrounding His head...

[Netizen]

Yes, and with that accursed sun-god halo surrounding His head...

Well, it could be worse.

Tomb of Pope Alexander (Chigi) VII
1671-78
Marble and gilded bronze, over life-size
Basilica di San Pietro, Vatican
The sculpture is by Gian Lorenzo Bernini

The last great masterpiece of the 80-year old Bernini who was assisted by various artists. The Pontiff, kneeling and absorbed in prayer, is not disturbed by the sudden appearance of Death, who, raising a heavy pall, brandishes an hour-glass to indicate that time has passed. The four statues represent the virtues practiced by the Pontiff: in the foreground is Charity by G. Mazzuoli, with a child in her arms, and Truth, by Morelli and Cartari, who sets a foot on a map of the world, and precisely on England where the Pope sought in vain to quell the growth of Anglicanism; on the second level is Prudence, by G. Cartari, and Justice, by L. Balestri.

It looks like "Truth" is embracing something. A child perhaps. Let's look closer at what "Truth" is embracing.

Ohhh. That's not a baby.....

[blasater1960]

A bouncing baby Sun! Awwe....

[roamer_1]

Ohhh. That's not a baby.....

I KNOW, right?

What an offense to the Great God YHWH, that what is supposed to be representations of faith in His HOUSE are sprinkled over and again with the symbolism of Ba'al, Marduk, Tammuz, Dagon and Ashtoreth. HOW DARE THEY?

[Netizen]

Maybe Truth is going to ‘kiss the sun’. Wasn’t that prophesied somewhere?

[blasater1960]

Ahhh yes...good ‘ol Psalm 2.

[James C. Bennett]

Thanks for the details and reply, Blasater1960! Highly informative posts, there!

[POWERSBOOTHEFAN]

He did address your points.It’s all spelled out very clearly.It’s the truth.