How would you respond to people who claim that “No one treated Isaiah 53 as being messianic before the first century AD”?
Question:
How would you respond to people who say “No one treated Isaiah 53 as talking about the Messiah before the 1st century AD”?
Answer:
I would respond by proving that this is quite simply a false statement. Anyone who says this is either ignorant of the facts or is purposefully lying. Let us hope that it is the former, not the latter.
There are several references to Isaiah 53 being messianic in the Talmud, for example. Here are a few:
Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 98b): “Messiah …what is his name? The Rabbis say,’The leprous one’; those of the house of the Rabbi (Jehuda Hanassi, the author of the Mishna, 135-200) say: ‘Cholaja’ (The sickly), for it says, ‘Surely he has borne our sicknesses’ etc. (Isa.53,4).”
Babylonian Talmud, (Sanhedrin 98), p.2 “Rabbi Yochanan said, The Messiah-what is his name?… And our Rabbis said. “the pale one”… is his name, as it is written “Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows-yet we considered him stricken by G-d, smitten by him and afflicted.”
Talmud-Mas.Sanhedrin 98b What is his [the Messiah’s] name?… The Rabbis said: His name is ‘the leper scholar,’ as it is written, Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him a leper, smitten of God, and afflicted. (This was in direct reference to Isaiah 53:4). (1)
Midrash Tanchuma Buber interprets Isaiah 52:13 concerning the greatness of Messiah:
What is the meaning of Who are you, O great mountain? This is the Messianic King. Then why does it call him great mountain? Because he is greater than the ancestors, as stated (in Is. 52:13): Behold, my servant shall bring low. He shall be exalted, lifted up, and become exceedingly tall. He shall be exalted (rt.: RWM) more than Abraham, lifted up more than Moses, and become exceedingly tall, more so than the ministering angels.[67]
Ruth Rabbah 5.6 includes multiple interpretations of Boaz’ statement to Ruth in Ruth 2.14. The fifth interpretation includes a reference to Isaiah 53:5, interpreted as describing the sufferings of Messiah: “The fifth interpretation makes it refer to the Messiah. Come hither:’ approach to royal state. And eat of the bread refers to the bread of royalty; And dip thy morsel in the vinegar refers to his sufferings, as it is said, But he was wounded because of our transgressions (Isaiah 53:5). And she sat beside the reapers, for he will be deprived of his sovereignty for a time.”[68]
Although the allusion is not certain, it is possible that Sifre Numbers 131 identifies Pinchas (cf. Numbers 25:13) with the one in Isaiah 53:12 who makes atonement for the people of Israel.[69]
Some have claimed that there were Jews who interpreted the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 as a reference to Israel corporately. This may be true, but I have a really hard time finding such references. Let me say this: There was a range of Jewish ideas about the interpretation of Isaiah 53 before the time of Christ, but the majority view seems to have been that this passage is about the Messiah. Whoever said that this idea did not precede the first century is just plain wrong, and is guilty of not bothering to do proper research.
John Oakes
