christian@geneva.rutgers.edu (12/17/90)
There has been some discussion between David Wagner and Yaakov Kayman about the interpretation of Is 53. David claims that Is 53 was taken to be about the Messiah until Rashi (12th Cent, I believe), who supposedly invented the interpretation that it is referring to Israel as a whole. Yaakov does not believe any practicing Jew ever interpreted Is 53 as about a suffering Messiah. I told both of them I would spend some time this weekend in our library and see if I could settle things. It turns out that our library's collection in Biblical areas is wretched. I found references to the major monographs, but we don't have any of them. However I think I have enough information to give at least a summary of the picture. Basically the truth appears to be somewhere between the two. In particular, it appears that both a Messianic and a collective reading of Is 53 were made in the Jewish community in the early Cent.'s C.E. I don't have enough information to be sure which was dominant, but both references I used left the impression that before Rashi it was the Messianic one. Unfortunately the evidence I have is all in tertiary sources, because I couldn't get hold of the secondary ones (and probably wouldn't be able to make sense of the primary sources). [Primary: actual documents from the period; secondary: major scholarly studies citing the primary sources in detail; tertiary, commentaries and other material citing secondary sources]. I'm miffed that our library doesn't even have a good collection of commentaries. I'd hoped for at least the Anchor Bible, as it normally deals with issues like this. In case anyone wants to hunt down the secondary sources, the major monographs on the subject are North, C. R., "The Suffering Servant in ..", and Peake, A. S. "The Servant of Yahweh". Apparently North is both more recent and somewhat better. There's some indication that the Jewish Encyclopedia and the Interperter's Bible may have useful summaries. For the collective interpretation as Israel: Pfeiffer (in his Intro to the OT), cites Origen's woork Contra Celsum (3rd Cent.) as indicating that the Jew he was opposing took the collection interpretation. Pfeiffer comments that this interpretation "prevailed" with the work of Rashi and Ibn Ezra, but not that it originated there. H.J. Schoeps, in "Paul", cites J. Jeremias (in "Melanges offertes a M. Goguel", 1950, p. 118ff) that the collective interpretation developed first in Hellenistic Judaism. Since Schoeps (who, by the way is a Jewish scholar, and is my standard source for information about the Jewish background for Paul) is writing about Paul, there's no reason to expect him to spend much time on the collective interpretation. For the Messianic interpretation: First, it's important to understand that the Jewish concept of a suffering messiah is not necessarily identical to the Christian one. Schoeps quotes Billerbeck (a standard reference work that summarizes Jewish interpretation relevant to the NT: Kommentar zum NT aus Talmud und Midrash) II, 2, 273: "The ancient synagogue knows a suffering Messiah [the Messiah ben David -- clh], to whom death was not appointed, and it knows a dying Messiah, of whom no sufferings are predicated, the Messiah ben Joseph". Thus Schoeps wants to be clear that the concept of a Messiah who dies as redeemer to save the world is foreign to Judaism. The earliest evidence he cites for a Messianic reading of Is 53 is the apocalypses of Enoch, Baruch, and IV Ezra, though I recall some suggestions that the LXX implies a Messianic reading. Schoeps believes that the Messianic interpretation was present in the rabbincal tradition from early times, however generally the texts are from the 3rd or 4th Cent. For earlier evidence he cites Justin (Dial 89), which implies that the Jew Trypho took a Messianic reading. Also, the Hodayoth of Qumran applied Is 53 to the "teacher of righteousness". For the early rabbincal evidence, he cites G. H. Dalman "Der Leidende Messias nach der Lehre der Synagoge in este nachchristlichen Jahrtausend", and H. Fischel's unpublished study summarized in HUCA, 1943/44, pp 53ff. Here is a partial list of rabbinical citations: Sanh. 88a (early 3rd Cent.), Sanh. 98a (Joshua ben Levi), Sanh. 93b (R. Alexandria), Midr. Teh. 2, 7, etc. (Huna and Idi). He comments that the sufferings of the Messiah is a favorite theme of haggada. As evidence of the earlier comment that these references do not extend to a dying redeemer, he cites Targum Jonathan (5th Cent., but with an indication in Sanh. 94b that the tradition was known to R. Joseph ben Hiyya, ca. 300) that applies Is 53:12 to the Messiah, but tones down the wording so that there is no serious danger of death. Finally, I'd like to comment that the Messiah and Israel as a whole are not the only possibilities. I saw a study by Orlinsky proposing that the reference is to the suffering of the prophet himself. In this interpretation, the suffering is not vicarious, but simply a result of the fact that as one of Israel he suffers along with his nation. This is only one of about a half dozen interpretations (the most interesting of which is that the suffering is of the non-Israelite nations watching the Exile).
kutz@cis.ohio-state.edu (Kenneth J. Kutz) (12/24/90)
In article <Dec.16.17.33.08.1990.20524@athos.rutgers.edu>, christian@geneva.rutgers.edu writes: > Finally, I'd like to comment that the Messiah and Israel as a whole > are not the only possibilities. I saw a study by Orlinsky proposing > that the reference is to the suffering of the prophet himself. In > this interpretation, the suffering is not vicarious, but simply a > result of the fact that as one of Israel he suffers along with his > nation. The message at church last Sunday was on Isaiah 53. This interpretation came up in the message as an example of a bad interpretion. Isaiah 53:9 says no deceit was found in the Servant's mouth - something Isaiah says is not true for himself. -- Kenneth J. Kutz Internet kutz@andy.bgsu.edu Systems Programmer BITNET KUTZ@ANDY University Computer Services UUCP ...!osu-cis!bgsuvax!kutz Bowling Green State Univ. US Mail 238 Math Science, BG OH 43403