Identifying the "Suffering Servant" of Isaiah
A Historically-Informed Exegetical Manhunt
Table of Contents
In Christian tradition, the so-called “suffering servant” of Isaiah 52-53 has been been identified as Jesus Messiah (i.e. Christ). In the discussion below, I contend that a reading sensitive to the historical context of the original author(s)—whoever they may be—more sensibly identifies the servant with Israel being the budding people group born out of a post-exilic setting in the Achaemenid province of Yehud (i.e. Judah).
The hermeneutical debate is an ancient one, going back at least to the 2nd Century (e.g. Origen of Alexandria: see Book I, Chapter 55 of Contra Celsum; see also 1 Clement 16). There is also firm evidence for a Christological reading going back to the authors of the New Testament. (1)E.g. Matt 8.16-17, Lk 22.37, Jn 12.37-38, Acts 8.32-35, Rom 10.16, 1 Pet 2.22-25. Perhaps Paul is also interpreting Jesus’ crucifixion Christologically in the formula “in accordance with the Scriptures” in 1 Cor 15.3-8. My position seeks not to debase such a reading; rather, I am merely pointing out that, in context, the identification with Israel is hard to deny. Therefore, the traditional Christian reading requires a hermeneutical apparatus that layers additional Messianic overtones on top of the immediate historical reading.
Demarcating the Context: Second Isaiah #
Chapters 40-55 of Isaiah are often thought to be a separate source (i.e. Second Isaiah). The main reason for doing so is because Isaiah 1-39 (First Isaiah) assumes a context of Assyrian invasion and conquest whereas these chapters seem to be looking back from a time of Babylonian exile and the restoration under Cyrus. (2)See this article for a survey of post-exilic evidence in chapters 40-55. The case against singular authorship stacks up further if we also take into account the fact that chapters 36 to 39 break up the prophetic material before and after it by inserting what is likely an excerpt from 2 Kings. (3)Chapters 36-39 are almost a word-for-word duplicate of 2 Kings 18.13-20.19. Whether this is original to Isaiah or 2 Kings is probably impossible to tell for sure. Its usage in 2 Kings is more consistent with the overall historical style of the book. If the excerpt is original to 2 Kings, which I think it is, the composer of the complete corpus of Isaiah was probably writing after a time when the Hezekiah annals in 2 Kings had been composed.
Having said that, no extant manuscripts of Isaiah make this division into separate sources—including the Qumran Isaiah Scrolls, the Masoretic texts and the Septuagint. Whether Isaiah as a whole is a composite book or not has no bearing on its status as “Scripture”. All parts of the book share a common theological tradition, and the later parts seem to take up, adapt and respond to announcements made in the earlier parts of the book while staying in that same theological tradition. Certainly, second Temple Jewish communities, including the early Christians and the authors of the New Testament, had no issues with its scriptural status (quoting frequently from it) although it is unclear to what extent they viewed it as a composite book. Perhaps it was read as a whole in its canonical forms in the synagogues.
The only reason for making the distinction in composition here, is to demarcate the relevant surrounding context of the “suffering servant” and to reconstruct, as best as possible, the original intended meaning of the author to his immediate audience.
My View: Contextual and Expanded Interpretations #
In my view, reading Isaiah 52-53 in its broader context of Second Isaiah, the evidence for the case that “suffering servant” is Israel (4)Or Jacob, which seems to be used synonymously. personified is substantive.
Based on the Biblical data, it seems unlikely that the author intended for the “servant/slave” (עֶ֔בֶד) to be read as a messianic figure (nowhere is such a designation applied to him within the text) and it is unclear whether pre-Christian/2nd Temple interpreters would have read them as such. (5)It does seem like there are allusions to the language in Isaiah 53.11b behind Daniel 12.3 and 11.33. Reading this together with Daniel 7 could suggest messianic undertones. Also the presence of the scrolls in the Qumran community might be something to consider. Broadly, the author interprets the Babylonian exile (43.14) as punishment for the sin which the nation Israel took upon itself on behalf of its people (e.g. 53). Presumably their sin was, in part, neglecting the worship of Yahweh (e.g. 43.22-28). But now, having swept away their sins and refined them (48.9), God will restore Israel as a righteous and flourishing blessing to the nations. God comforts his people by pronouncing his favour and protective power, promising restoration and comfort (ch. 51), and by portraying the meagreness of other deities (i.e. those of the Babylonians cf. 45.20, 46.1-2) who need not be feared. It is clear that the author viewed this restoration as coming under the reign of Cyrus of Persia (44.28-45.1, 45.13, 46.11) and viewed him as the instrument of God’s favour to crush the yoke of Babylon (ch. 47).
Although, as noted above, the text does not suggest Jesus directly in its original context, there are echoes and (sometimes striking) resonances with the gospel accounts and New Testament traditions in Isaiah 53. This perhaps is the more interesting phenomenon. A cynical reader might contend that the authors of the New Testament were familiar with these texts and wrote ahistorical correspondences into their portrayals of Jesus’ life, trial and crucifixion. This view cannot be completely written off since there is clear internal evidence within the gospels themselves that the authors had knowledge of this text (Mt 8.16-17, Mat 12.18-20, Lk 22.37, Jn 12.37-38) but seems difficult to justify without further evidence. After all, why fabricate a crucified Messiah (e.g. 1 Cor 1.18)?
Contrary to the cynic’s view outlined above, I think that, as a baseline, the historical crucifixion of Jesus forced early Christians to find scriptural ways of understanding this event and that the gospel writers (and by extension Christians) informed and shaped their ideas about who Jesus was through these passages—e.g. the interpretation of Jesus’ death and suffering as an atoning sacrifice and a fulfilment of the hopes of Israel. This understanding that Christians interpreted Jesus into the “suffering servant” after the fact, while jarring to our modern interpretive sensibilities, does not necessarily stand at odds with maintaining a “God-breathed” inspiration of the text. (6)See 2 Tim 3.16. Note however that Pauline authorship of the letter is contested. Maintaining that these texts are inspired by God does not necessitate that the author(s) had to know anything about Jesus as they penned these words. Rather, if these texts were inspired in a broader sense, correspondences were being embedded into the text without the authors’ knowledge that would later echo something resounding in Jesus’ experience and which later Christians interpreted as clearly pointing to Jesus.
References to the Servant in Second Isaiah #
The below is a list of references to the “servant” (or “slave”) throughout Second Isaiah. I contend that, read in context, the prima facie referent is Isaiah.
Isaiah 41.8-9:
But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, the offspring of Abraham, my friend; you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, saying to you, “You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you off”.
Isaiah 42.1-9:
The transition from 41 to 42 is thematically awkward. This text, or a part of this text (vv. 1–4), is one of four texts (49.1–7; 50.4-11; 52.13-53.12) that some scholars have identified as “servant songs”. Both the isolation of these songs from their larger context and the identification of the servant in them are disputed. Those who isolate the songs often identify the servant as an individual (perhaps Cyrus—see 44.28, ch. 45). However, I think this view is not supported in the text since he is never identified with “the servant” but rather as God’s “anointed” (45.1)—that is, messiah (לִמְשִׁיחוֹ֮) or christ (χριστῷ) in Septuagint—or “shepherd” (44.28). These are royal (or priestly) designations. Traditional Christian readings have read them as Jesus but this does not fit neatly with the immediate context; e.g. vv 1-4 is a personification of the people who God “delights in”.
Isaiah 42.18-20:
Listen, you that are deaf; Who is blind but my servant, or deaf like my messenger whom I send? Who is blind like my dedicated one, or blind like the servant of the LORD? He sees many things, but does not observe them; his ears are open, but he does not hear.
God criticises the idolatry of Israel, possibly identifying Israel with the “servant of the LORD”.
Isaiah 42.24-25:
Who gave up Jacob to the spoiler, and Israel to the robbers? Was it not the LORD, against whom we have sinned, in whose ways they would not walk, and whose law they would not obey?
The author claims that God himself gave them up. This conforms with the imagery of the suffering servant in chapter 53 being identified as being punished for the transgressions of its people.
Isaiah 43.10:
You are my witnesses, says the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he.
Isaiah 44.1-3:
But now hear, O Jacob my servant, Israel whom I have chosen! Thus says the LORD who made you, who formed you in the womb and will help you: Do not fear, O Jacob my servant, Jeshurun whom I have chosen. “Jeshurun” (Deut 32.15; 33.5, 26), is an old poetic name for Israel, perhaps meaning “upright one” in Hebrew.
Isaiah 44.21-22:
Remember these things, O Jacob, and Israel, for you are my servant; I formed you, you are my servant; O Israel, you will not be forgotten by me.
Isaiah 44.26:
…who confirms the word of his servant, and fulfills the prediction of his messengers; who says of Jerusalem, “It shall be inhabited,” and of the cities of Judah, “They shall be rebuilt, and I will raise up their ruins”.
Possibly an allusion to the prophet himself, but seems to fit better in context with the “cities of Judah” being synecdoche for the nation.
Isaiah 45.4:
For the sake of my servant Jacob, and Israel my chosen…
Isaiah 48.20:
Go out from Babylon, flee from Chaldea, declare this with a shout of joy, proclaim it, send it forth to the end of the earth; say, “The LORD has redeemed his servant Jacob!”
Isaiah 49.3:
And he said to me, “You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will be glorified.”
Isaiah 49.5:
And now the LORD says, who formed me in the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob back to him, and that Israel might be gathered to him, for I am honoured in the sight of the LORD, and my God has become my strength.
The first person singular voice is ambiguous here. Probably better read as the prophet which could be suggestive of a clever blurring of categories.
Isaiah 49.6:
“It is too light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the survivors of Israel; I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth.” Thus says the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel and his Holy One, to one deeply despised, abhorred by the nations, the slave (7)Same word as what is elsewhere rendered “servant.” of rulers.
Isaiah 50.10:
Who among you fears the LORD and obeys the voice of his servant, who walks in darkness and has no light, yet trusts in the name of the LORD and relies upon his God?
The context of this particular “song” (50.4-11) suggests that the servant here, contrary to usages elsewhere, is the prophet himself.
Isaiah 52.13:
See, my servant shall prosper; he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high.
Given the preceding context, it seems sensible to read the “suffering servant” as personification for Israel. God had punished Israel to the point that the nations despised it; but now God will restore its fortunes.
Isaiah 53.11:
Out of his anguish he shall see light; he shall find satisfaction through his knowledge. The righteous one, my servant, shall make many righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities.
In view of the above citations, this is talking about the nation Israel being punished for the iniquity of its people and thereby making them whole again.
Isaiah 54.16-17:
See it is I who have created the smith who blows the fire of coals, and produces a weapon fit for its purpose; I have also created the ravager to destroy. No weapon that is fashioned against you shall prosper, and you shall confute every tongue that rises against you in judgement. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD and their vindication from me, says the LORD.
Reference to servants in the plural referring to God’s people.
Summary of Alternative Readings #
Brettler and Levine’s Isaiah’s Suffering Servant: Before and After Christianity seems to provide a fairly comprehensive view of both Christian and Jewish interpretations of the passage throughout the centuries which proposes other alternatives:
We cannot identify the servant. Tryggve Mettinger typified the list of candidates, including Isaiah himself, Moses (b. Sot. 14a), Jeremiah (Saadia Gaon and Ibn Ezra, cf. Jer 10:18–24; 11:19), Hezekiah, the Davidic king in exile or Zerubabbel, the people Israel (b. Sanh. 98a; Numbers Rab. 13.2), the righteous in every generation (b. Ber. 5a), Cyrus, the messiah (b. Sanh. 98b; Ruth Rab. 5.6; cf. Isa 45:1), the faithful remnant mentioned by Isa 10:20–22 (David Kimchi), the high priest Onias, and others, as “resemble[ing] the contents of a successful big-game hunt on the exegetical savannah.”
Perhaps other exegetical game might also include: King Josiah, who was killed by Pharoah Neco at Megiddo (2 Kings 23.29-30) or King Jehoiachin, who was exiled to Babylon (2 Kings 24.10-16). Brettler and Levine themselves don’t read the servant as a collective for a nation, but suggest a single unidentified person:
In sum, Isaiah 52:13–53:12 most likely originally referred to one of the prophet’s exilic contemporaries, whom he viewed as vicariously atoning for the guilt-ridden exilic (or early post-exilic) community. We know neither this individual’s name nor anything about him beyond what this passage says.