לתשובת המינים

What Isaiah 53 Doesn't Say!

When it comes to Messianic "proof texts" none is more used, over used, than Isaiah 53. This is certainly not surprising since while they cite many passages to "prove" Mashiach must suffer, Isaiah 53 is the only one used to indicate that Mashiach's suffering would provide atonement for sin (with the exception of Daniel 9 which has a brief phrase similarly interpreted by some). And while there has been much discussion on how to understand what Isaiah 53 says, I think it is equally significant for what it doesn't say! While this passage (supposedly) provides the only direct support in T'nakh for several Christian doctrines about Mashiach, it entirely omits others related ones leaving them with no basis in the Jewish Bible even from a Christian perspective (though I doubt they would admit it outright). So let's concede for the sake of argument that this is in fact a Messianic prophecy of the Nazarene, and highlight that the Christian program for salvation is un-biblical.

"As Lapides progressed through the Scriptures, he was stopped cold by Isaiah 53. With clarity and specificity, in a haunting prediction wrapped in exquisite poetry, here was the picture of a Messiah who would suffer and die for the sins of Israel and the world" (Case for Christ, page 177, 178).

One verse which Christian's use to derive Mashiach's "saving" role is verse 8, "for the transgression of my people he was stricken." Apologists also point out that, since Isaiah is writing "my people" must refer to Israel (this assumes that the first person in this context is Isaiah, which may not be the correct way of looking at it, but we are working on that assumption). However in such a case we find no clear indication that the servant suffers on behalf of non-Jews! In contrast Christianity teaches, "For God so loved the world..." not limiting belief in the Nazarene's "atoning sacrifice" as being effective for Jews only. So while there are other verses Christians use say T'nakh predicts the Nazarene teaching to non-Jews, they have no verses from which they can derive that he would die for them. (I will attempt to evaluate Isaiah 52:15 with respect to this issue in the next revision, but for the moment it suffices to say that no explicit reference to the forgiveness of sin is made).

Another thing that this passage does not teach us is that the suffering of the servant is the only means of finding atonement for one's sins. This is little surprise since elsewhere in T'nakh we find explicit references to obtaining forgiveness through other means. On the other hand Christianity teaches "if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing" (Gal. 2:21). While we will contend elsewhere that in fact his death was for nothing, that is it had no spiritual significance since T'nakh give explicit alternatives to obtain forgiveness, we nevertheless see Isaiah 53 doesn't support the contention that no one can go to "the Father" except through the Nazarene.

Additionally one may note that while the servant's suffering is described as the "healing" agent, not so in Christianity. Theologically speaking the Nazarene's suffering should irrelative. Man is saved through his death by shedding blood. Had he not died his suffering would have been useless. Likewise had he died by crucifixion without being whipped and beaten before then according to Christianity his atonement would have been no less complete. Christianity makes the suffering secondary and frankly inconsequential while the efficacy is derived from the Nazarene's death. This cannot be derived from Isaiah 53.

Isaiah 53 has frequently been called the "Gospel According to Isaiah" or the "Gospel of the Old Testament", but we see that it comes nowhere close to matching Christian doctrine of salvation. Christianity teaches that man's only chance for reconciliation with God, both Jews and Gentiles, is for the Nazarene to have died. Even if we where to concede that Isaiah 53 is Messianic we would have no basis on which to draw such a conclusion. Missionaries who triumphantly proclaim Isaiah 53 are overstating the extent to which this passage could even conceivably be seen as confirming Christian belief.