Christians made use of bits and pieces of psalms or Isaiah 53 until finally a unified interpretation was produced…. What appears to us as coherent interpretation traditions may well be the product of our imaginations. The so-called plots of Psalm 22 or Isaiah 53 may not have been the starting point of Christian interpretation at all but only a later byproduct.
Donald Juel, Messianic Exegesis: Christological Interpretation of the Old Testament in Early Christianity
Why, then, does Paul not draw this prophecy into the open and use the servant figure as an explicit basis for his interpretation of Israel, or the church, or of Jesus?…He hints and whispers all around Isaiah 53 but never mentions the prophetic typology that would supremely integrate his interpretation of Christ and Israel. The result is a compelling example of metalepsis: Paul’s transumptive silence cries out for the reader to complete the trope
Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul
In the previous chapter, we found that various interpreters acknowledge that Isaiah 53 describes the servant as a figure with disabilities. Thus, we should ask why scholars do not typically interpret the servant as having disabilities. In Chapter 4, we will explore this question by reviewing some interpretative strategies that modern scholars use when studying this passage. We will show how these strategies enable scholars to depict the servant as an otherwise able-bodied figure who suffers rather than a figure with disabilities. In this chapter, we trace the roots of this interpretative tendency to early translations and other interpretations of Isaiah 53 from antiquity.
We begin this chapter by examining how ancient Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, and Latin versions of Isaiah 53 interpret the disability imagery in our passage. We will find a tendency to downplay the servant’s disability or to lose it in translation. Second, we examine early typological interpretations that involve Isaiah 53. We will focus on the direct quotations of Isaiah 53 in other biblical texts. Once again, the servant’s disability is largely lost in these quotations and their typologies. This chapter shows that while modern scholars may use interpretive methods different from those of their ancient counterparts, modern scholarly depictions of the servant as an able-bodied sufferer reinforce an interpretative tendency that dates back to at least the second century BCE.
We do not have an original manuscript of Isaiah 53. Instead, we have a number of later versions from antiquity in a variety of languages. If we compare these versions, however, we would soon discover that it is very difficult to decide what the original actually said because of the numerous differences between the Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic versions or even the differences between the Hebrew in the Dead Sea Scrolls versions and in later Masoretic Hebrew manuscripts (sixth to tenth century CE). The NRSV’s English translation, which appears with slight modifications in our introduction, does not translate from one ancient manuscript. At some points, it follows a Greek manuscript; at other points, a Hebrew manuscript.1 We do not have enough space in this book to discuss thoroughly all the NRSV’s translation choices. Readers should consult a critical commentary on Isaiah for more detailed discussions of translation issues.2 For our purposes, our discussion will concentrate on the verses that show a shift from the servant as a figure with disabilities towards an able-bodied servant within different versions of Isaiah 53 from antiquity.
Dead Sea Scrolls (Hebrew). The Great Isaiah Scroll (IQIsaa) found among the Dead Sea Scrolls contains one of the oldest extant copies of Isaiah 53. Yet this copy of Isaiah dates to the second century BCE, several centuries after the composition of our passage probably some time in the sixth century BCE. There are several minor differences between IQIsaa and other Hebrew versions of Isaiah 53 that need not concern us. Instead, we will concentrate on the two significant variations that have attracted a great deal of scholarly attention. In both cases, it seems unlikely that IQIsaa reflects the original Hebrew wording since most other ancient manuscripts do not confirm the wording of IQIsaa in these two cases. Both these differences appear in references to the servant’s disability in 52:14 and 53:10.
In the Introduction, we translated 52:14 as ‘Just as there were many who were astonished at him—so marred was his appearance, unlike human semblance, and his form unlike that of mortals.’ This translation suggests that the servant’s visible disability, indicated by his ‘marred appearance’, astonishes others. The word ‘marred’ translates the Masoretic Hebrew versions that spell the word as mišhat, which comes from the Hebrew root šht, meaning ‘to ruin, destroy, or disfigure’. Yet, since the word mišhat does not appear anywhere else in the Hebrew Bible, scholars debate whether this is the correct spelling of this word. By contrast, IQIsaa spells the word as mšhy instead of mišhat.3 This spelling assumes the word comes from the Hebrew root mšh meaning ‘to anoint’. Thus, if we follow 1QIsaa, we would translate 52:14 as ‘Just as there were many who were astonished at him—so I [God] have anointed his appearance, unlike human semblance, and his form unlike that of mortals.’ In IQIsaa, the servant’s visible disability does not shock those who see him. Instead, his divinely anointed appearance provides the shock.
In the previous chapter, we observed the scholarly tendency to read the other servant songs, especially 50:4–11, into Isaiah 53 when interpreting the servant in our passage. Often, the tendency to use other servant songs to interpret Isaiah 53 helps to explain the description of the servant as referring to something other than disability. Unlike contemporary scholars, the parties that produced IQIsaa did not identify Isaiah 53 as belonging to an isolated group of texts called the ‘servant songs’. Nonetheless, IQIsaa’s use of the Hebrew word meaning ‘I have anointed’ (mšhy) in 52:14 may show the influence of the other servant passages. Rather than a simple spelling correction, Martin Hengel argues that the use of ‘anointed’ in 52:14 may reflect ‘a conscious interpretation’ of the servant’s mission, possibly influenced by the servant passage in 61:1–4. Hengel cites the reference to a divine anointing in 61:1: ‘The spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, because the LORD has anointed (mšh) me.’4 If Hengel is correct, the tendency to read the other servant passages into Isaiah 53 may have begun as early as the Dead Sea Scrolls in the second century BCE. Yet the description of a future prophetic or priestly figure in 61:1–4 does not include any disability imagery. By claiming that the servant has an anointed appearance instead of a marred appearance in 52:14, the servant in our passage appears more like a presumably able-bodied prophet or priest than a figure with a disability.5 Similarly, the servant song in 50:4–11 helps modern scholars interpret the servant in Isaiah 53 as fatally injured rather than having a disability.
Other scholars suggest that the use of ‘anointed’ in IQIsaa shows the influence of biblical texts outside Isaiah. Dominique Barthélemy connects this text to the tradition of anointing a priest in Lev 21:10: ‘The priest who is exalted above his fellows, on whose head the anointing (mšh) oil has been poured and who has been consecrated to wear the vestments, shall not dishevel his hair, nor tear his vestments.’6 Interpreting the servant’s appearance in Isa 52:14 as anointed instead of marred would avoid a potential conflict with the physical requirements for priests in Leviticus 21–22. Lev 21:10 comes from a set of instructions for priests from Aaron’s family. These instructions include an extensive list of physical blemishes that disqualify a priest from certain activities (Lev 21:16–23) as well as restrictions on priests with skin anomalies (Lev 22:4). Leviticus 21–22 seems to influence other discussions of physical requirements in non-biblical texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls.7 This may increase the likelihood that this material from Leviticus also influences IQIsaa, although we cannot know for sure. The use of ‘anointed’ may mark an interpretative shift away from disability imagery in favour of priestly imagery from Leviticus. The possibility that IQIsaa interprets the servant according to these priestly standards suggests that profiles for the servant that do not typically include disability began to develop early in the history of Isaiah 53’s interpretation.8
IQIsaa not only downplays the disability imagery in 52:14, but in 53:10 as well. In the Introduction, we translated v. 10 as ‘The LORD was delighted to crush him, to make him diseased (root: hlh).’ By contrast, IQIsaa interprets the word translated as ‘diseased’ as coming from the Hebrew root hll, meaning ‘to profane’ or ‘to wound’ instead of the root hlh. If we follow IQIsaa, we would translate 53:10 as ‘The LORD was delighted to crush him and [the LORD] made him profane/wounded him (root: hll).’ Certainly, either to be made profane or to be wounded could imply a disability. According to Lev 21:23, priests with various disabilities could ‘profane’ sacred spaces. As our translation in the Introduction suggests, 53:5 uses a form of hll in the context of the servant’s disability: ‘he was made profane (hll)’. The use of hll in v. 5 may have influenced IQIsaa’s use of hll rather than hlh in v. 10. Yet this does not mean that IQIsaa understands hll in v. 5 in the context of the servant’s disability. The NRSV translates hll in v. 5 as ‘he was wounded’. While this wound could imply an acquired disability, this seems unlikely because typically the Hebrew Bible uses forms of hll to describe human wounds as fatal rather than disabling (Gen 34:27; Josh 13:22; 1 Sam 31:8; 2 Sam 1:19; Isa 34:3; 66:16; Lam 4:9). In these verses, the NRSV usually translates forms of hll as ‘slain’ or ‘dead’. In other words, IQIsaa could understand hll in v. 5 as indicating a fatal injury and use the same root in v. 10 in a similar manner. In this case, the servant appears as an otherwise able-bodied anointed figure who suffers a fatal wound instead of a figure with disabilities.
We find similar types of fatally wounded figures in another Hebrew Bible text from the Second Temple period (515 BCE–70 CE). Although possibly written by a different author than our passage, Isaiah 57:1 describes a figure with language very similar to the description of the servant as ‘the righteous one’ in 53:11. In Isa 57:1, however, the righteous one dies: ‘The righteous one perishes, and no one takes it to heart; the devout are taken away, while no one understands. For the righteous one is taken away from calamity.’9 Similarly, Zech 12:10 states, ‘And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced (dqr rather than hll), and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.’ Although there are significant differences between Isaiah 53 and Isaiah 57 or Zechariah 12, those parties responsible for IQIsaa may have interpreted the servant in Isaiah 53 with this type of fatally wounded figure in mind.10 The profile for this type of fatally wounded figure, however, does not usually include disability. Thus, if IQIsaa interprets the servant in Isaiah 53 according to this profile, it moves away from the disability imagery in our passage.
IQIsaa does not completely erase the disability imagery associated with the servant in Isaiah 53. As with other ancient manuscripts, 53:3 in IQIsaa describes the servant as ‘acquainted with disease (hlh)’. Yet forms of hlh have a wide semantic range as we discussed in previous chapters. Since this word does not necessarily imply a disability or disease, the servant’s description in both 52:14 and 53:10 in IQIsaa could shift the context of hlh in 53:3 away from disability and towards a context of more generalized suffering. Given the wide range of possible meanings for hlh, this new context for its use in 53:3 allows us to imagine the servant as an able-bodied sufferer.
Non-biblical texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls also use vocabulary found in Isaiah 53 to describe suffering in general rather than an experience of disability. A collection of texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls that scholars call the Hodayot or ‘Thanksgiving Hymns’ (1QHa) give thanks for, among other things, divine assistance with various trials and tribulations. Scholars have considered the relationship of 1QHa and Isaiah 53. Based on the overlaps in vocabulary and imagery, some argue that the narrator of 1QHa is intentionally modelled after the servant in Isaiah 53. Yet other scholars caution against finding a significant connection.11 Considering that both texts mention ‘light’ and a positive impact on ‘many’ (Isa 53:11–12; 1QHa XII 27–8)12 among other possible connections, we agree with Joseph Blenkinsopp that ‘there are solid grounds for the conclusion that the profile of the Isaianic Servant formed a significant aspect of the self-image of the author of the hymns’.13 Yet the servant’s profile in Isaiah 53 contributes significantly to the author’s self image primarily because he identifies with the servant’s suffering rather than his disability.
In IQHa XVI 26–8, the narrator states that his ‘residence is with the diseased, my heart is acquainted with plagues, and I am like a forsaken man with plagues… For my plague has increased to bitterness and incurable suffering which does not stop.’ This description shares vocabulary with Isaiah 53’s description of the servant as ‘a man of suffering and acquainted with disease… he has borne our diseases and carried our suffering; yet we accounted him plagued… plagued for the transgression of my people’ (53:3, 4, 8). In IQHa, however, these lines appear in the context of the narrator’s thanksgiving for divine assistance. A few lines later, the narrator uses the words ‘suffering’ and ‘plague’ as one example of the hardships that the narrator faces in general. ‘As for me, from ruin to annihilation, from suffering to plague, from pangs to labors, my soul reflects on your wonders; you in your kindness, have not rejected me’ (IQHa XVII 6–7). Among these examples, the presumably male narrator lists labour-pangs among his hardships. This birth imagery suggests that the narrator does not describe specific experiences that he has undergone involving labour or illness. Instead, he uses birth and disease imagery to articulate his general experience of suffering (cf. the birth imagery in IQHa XI 7–12; Num 11:12). The word translated as ‘plague’ appears again a few lines later in IQHa XVII 10–12. The context of these lines suggest that ‘hardship’ or ‘distress’ would be better translations than ‘plague’ because the context implies a more generalized suffering rather than a plague or illness or some sort: ‘I have been pleased in my hardship/plagues, because I hope for your kindness… you have not threatened my life, nor have you removed my health [shalom; cf. “made us whole (shalom)” in Isa 53:5], nor have you deserted my expectation; rather, in the face of hardship/plague you have upheld my spirit.’
Scholars also connect the so-called ‘Self-Glorification Hymn’, a hymn reconstructed from fragments of texts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, to the servant in Isaiah 53.14 In this hymn, the narrator asks, ‘who has been despised like me?… and who carries evil like me?… who bears all sorrows like me? Who carries evil like me?’ (4Q471b line 2; 4Q491c line 9). Both Blenkinsopp and Israel Knohl compare these lines with the servant’s description in Isa 53:3–4: ‘he was despised and we held him of no account. Surely he has borne our diseases and carried our suffering’.15 According to Blenkinsopp, ‘The most significant parallel is the language in which the experience of humiliation and suffering is described. The two compositions share the same verbs: both subjects are despised (verbal stem bzh), and in describing their positive acceptance of suffering the paired verbs (nś’, sbl) occur in both texts.’16 In other words, the parallels between the two compositions focus on a social experience of suffering. Yet the Self-Glorification Hymn does not include disability imagery. Instead, it addresses the more generic topics of sorrows and evils.17 If this hymn invokes the servant’s experience in Isaiah 53, it does not invoke a servant with disabilities but a more generic suffering servant.
The profile of the servant in Isaiah 53 that emerges from both the Great Isaiah Scroll and other non-biblical texts from among the Dead Sea Scrolls downplays the disability imagery to the point that it disappears in the Self-Glorification Hymn. Although the interpretative moves are different, we find a similar disappearing act in the early Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible known as the Septuagint (LXX).
Septuagint/LXX (Greek). The LXX’s translation of Isaiah 53 does not downplay the disability imagery associated with the servant as IQIsaa does.18 Instead, the LXX has the servant’s disability removed by translating 53:10 as ‘Yet the LORD determined to cleanse him [the servant] of his disease.’ This translation suggests a very different meaning than the Hebrew, ‘The LORD was delighted to crush him, to make him diseased.’ Nonetheless, the LXX may assume that the servant’s disease was a skin anomaly before it was cleansed. The LXX uses the same Greek word for ‘cleanse’ in reference to the ‘cleansing’ of a skin anomaly when translating Leviticus 13–14 (e.g. 13:6, 13, 23, 28, 34; 14:2, 57). Forms of this word also appear in Greek translations of Lev 22:4, which prohibits priests with skin anomalies from certain rituals until they are ‘clean’, as well as Num 12:15, which mentions that Miriam was ‘cleansed’ of her skin anomaly.
Moreover, the LXX uses Greek words meaning ‘sickness’ (malakia) and ‘disease’ (plege; the same Greek word describes skin anomalies in Leviticus 13–14 and Numbers 12) when referring to the servant’s condition (Hebrew: hlh) throughout our passage (53:3, 10). Yet, when translating the same Hebrew word (hlh) in reference to parties other than the servant in v. 4, the LXX uses a Greek word meaning ‘sin’ (amartia). Since the LXX uses the same word (amartia) to translate the Hebrew word for ‘iniquity’ (‘awon) in vv. 5 and 6, the LXX seems to interpret hlh in reference to other parties as a metaphor for their sin (cf. Isa 33:24). By contrast, the LXX interprets hlh in reference to the servant as a description of a physical anomaly of some sort since it uses Greek words meaning sickness and disease rather than sin to translate hlh in 53:3, 10.
Furthermore, the later Greek translation by Aquila (second century CE) also depicts the servant as having a disability. Aquila renders the first line of v. 5 as ‘he was made profane’. As we discussed earlier, a person with a disability, including a skin anomaly, could profane sacred things. Like the LXX, Aquila translates the Hebrew word for ‘diseased’ (hlh) with a Greek word meaning ‘illness’ (appostema), although this is a different word than the LXX uses.
Regarding the two Greek words for ‘disease’ and ‘cleanse’ used by the LXX in v. 10, Hengel observes, ‘The two words [disease and cleanse] could suggest leprosy, but in fact they are only meant metaphorically.’19 While Hengel acknowledges that this translation may assume a skin anomaly, he does not provide any reason for why we should take them as metaphors for something other than a physical anomaly or disability in the LXX. Against Hengel’s position, we should return to our earlier observation that when the LXX understands disability imagery in Isaiah 53 as a metaphor, it glosses the metaphor (hlh as ‘sin’ in v. 4). Rather than taking the servant’s condition as a metaphor for sin, the LXX suggests that the servant undergoes a divine removal of a disease when the LORD determines to cleanse him in v. 10. This interpretation of v. 10 fits with a larger tendency in the LXX’s version of Isaiah 53. Hebrew versions of Isa 53:8–11 emphasize the servant’s suffering as divinely intended. By contrast, as Karen H. Jobes and Moisés Silva observe, the LXX’s version of Isaiah 53 contains ‘several examples where the translator clearly avoids statements that attribute the servant’s suffering to God’s actions’ (cf. vv. 4, 8 [LXX]).20
This attempt to provide an explicit physical healing of the servant in the LXX may reflect an assumption on the translator’s part that the servant’s glorification in vv. 10–12 would have to include such a healing. This would fit with a theme found in other texts from the Second Temple period. For example, in addition to living in prosperity following his ordeal, Tobit receives a detailed physical restoration from his blindness (Tob II:10–15). According to the LXX’s translation of Job 42:16, Job lived one hundred and seventy years ‘after his plege’.21 According to the pseudepigraphic book, Testament of Job, special cords given to Job by God restore and even enhance Job’s body once he girds his loins (cf. Job 38:3) with them. Once Job puts these cords on, the worms and plagues (cf. Job 7:5) disappear from his body. He becomes as strong as if he had not suffered at all and he forgets the pains of his heart (T. Job 47:5–8). The LXX’s translation of Isaiah 53:10 may reflect the tendency towards healing that we find in Tobit, the LXX’s version of Job, and the Testament of Job.
Rather than a deliberate attempt to provide the healing that is absent in the Hebrew texts, the verb ‘cleanse’ may also have resulted from a simple mistranslation of the Hebrew root dk’ (‘to crush’). The translator(s) of the LXX may not have recognized the root dk’. Aramaic was a spoken language in the Second Temple period. Thus, some scholars suggest that translator(s) may have mistaken the Hebrew root dk’ for the similar Aramaic root dk’/zkh, which can mean ‘pure’ or ‘innocent’.22 This seems unlikely, however, because earlier in the passage the translator(s) seem to have recognized the Hebrew root dk’ in the phrase ‘crushed for our iniquities’ (v. 5) because they translate dk’ with the Greek word meaning ‘sick’ (malakia). The LXX also uses malakia to translate the Hebrew word hlh in reference to Hezekiah’s illness (Isa 38:1, 9; 39:1). Thus, the LXX seems to be playing on the Hebrew and Aramaic meanings of dk’ to indicate that although the sins of others made the servant sick (v. 5) and diseased (plege;vv. 3), God ‘cleansed’ (Aramaic dk’) him of his disease (plege) in v. 10. The LXX implies that the servant had a disease or disability of some sort but the LORD chose to heal him. By the end of the passage, the servant emerges as healthy or able-bodied.
Targum (Aramaic). All translation involves some interpretation. Yet the Aramaic Targum of Isaiah 53 (second century CE) differs so extensively from the Hebrew or Greek versions that scholars debate whether it is a translation, paraphrase, commentary, or so on.23 One significant difference between the Targum and other ancient versions of Isaiah 53 is that the Targum shows no trace of the servant’s disability or even generic types of suffering. As Jostein Ådna observes, ‘In the Targum, the Suffering Servant has become a triumphant Messiah. The suffering and blows which strike the Servant… are redirected in the Targum to other groups and entities.’24 We encounter this change in the first verse of our passage, which the Targum renders as ‘my servant, the Messiah, shall prosper’; whereas the Hebrew reads as, ‘my servant shall prosper’ (52:13).25
Earlier, we discussed how, according to IQIsaa, the servant has an ‘anointed’ (mšhy) appearance rather than a ‘marred’ (mišhat) appearance in 52:14: ‘so marred/anointed was his appearance, unlike human semblance, and his form unlike that of mortals’. Unlike IQIsaa, the Targum retains the imagery associated with a visible disability in this verse. Yet, it redirects this imagery away from the servant and onto Israel. ‘Just as the house of Israel hoped for him [the servant/messiah] many days—their appearances were so dark among the peoples, and their aspect beyond that of the sons of men’ (Tg. Isa. 52:14). In the Targum, God does not disfigure the servant. Instead, the long wait for the messiah changes the people’s appearance.
Our translation of 53:2–4 implies that the servant had a socially undesirable physical appearance: ‘He had no form or majesty that we should look at him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him… a man of suffering and acquainted with disease… he was despised and we held him of no account… we accounted him plagued, struck down by God, and afflicted.’ By contrast, the same verses in the Targum present the servant’s appearance as extraordinary and worthy of considerable attention. ‘His appearance is not a common appearance and his fearfulness is not an ordinary fearfulness and his brilliance will be holy brilliance, that everyone who looks at him will consider him’ (Tg. Isa. 53:2b). Moreover, according to the Targum, the ‘glory of all the kingdoms’ rather than the servant will become ‘as a man of sorrows [or suffering] and appointed for sicknesses [or diseases]… they are despised and not esteemed…. We were esteemed wounded, smitten before the LORD and afflicted’ (Tg. Isa. 53:3, 4).
In v. 5 of our translation the LORD makes the servant profane. As discussed in Chapter 2, this could describe a person with a disability or disease. In v. 5 of the Targum, however, the people’s sins profane the sanctuary. Furthermore, in the Targum, vv. 7–9 do not depict the servant’s experience of social oppression at the hands of others. Instead, these verses claim that the servant will intercede and free the people from exile and Gentile rule. Like the LXX, v. 10 of the Targum uses the verb ‘cleanse’ (dk’) rather than ‘crush’. Yet, in the Targum, the servant does not undergo a cleansing of his disease. Instead, a remnant of the people experiences the cleansing in order to purify them from sin.
Vulgate (Latin). Blenkinsopp makes an important observation regarding the difference between the Targum of Isaiah 53 and Jerome’s Latin translation of our passage (early fifth century CE). He writes,
Jerome was certainly convinced that the Servant passages spoke about Jesus… Unlike the Targumist, however, he was engaged in translating the Hebrew original (the Hebraica veritus [or ‘Hebrew truth’]) as accurately as possible and therefore could not permit himself the freedom to indulge in the kind of paraphrase which is routine in Targum Jonathan. This he left to his commentary on the book.26
For Jerome, an accurate translation meant that he would use Latin vocabulary for illness, disability, or disease to translate the disability imagery that Isaiah 53 uses to describe the servant’s condition. For example, in 53:4, Jerome uses the Latin word leprosum for the Hebrew term that we translated as ‘plagued’. The Latin word refers to a skin anomaly, although probably not leprosy or Hansen’s Disease as we discussed in Chapter 2. In addition, Jerome uses the Latin word infirmitate (‘illness’) for the Hebrew term which we translated as ‘diseased’ (a form of hlh).
Jerome’s translation of Isaiah 53 presents the servant as a figure with disabilities (cf. b. Sanh. 98b) even if Jerome connects the servant with a presumably able-bodied Jesus in other contexts. The servant’s disability remains as a prominent trait in Jerome’s translation of Isaiah but not in his commentary on Isaiah. Jerome’s work provides an example from antiquity of both a recognition that Isaiah 53 depicts a disability and how early interpreters associate the servant with able-bodied figures.
In the non-biblical texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls (IQHa and the Self-Glorification Hymn), we found that the narrator presents himself or herself as a type of figure similar to the servant in Isaiah 53. This typological approach, in which two or more figures or characters are interpreted as reflecting a particular character type or profile, represents a common reading strategy for interpreters of Isaiah 53 in antiquity. In order to interpret a figure or character as a type that reflects a certain profile, one must emphasize certain traits and downplay or ignore others. The servant has more traits than simply his disability. Isaiah 53 also presents him as a servant of the LORD who has knowledge and is characterized by righteousness (53:11). Thus, ancient readers did not need to build a typological interpretation around his disability because they had his other traits at their disposal.
In fact, most typologies involving the servant do not include his disability at all. For example, Dan 12:2–3 (second century BCE) reads, ‘Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.’ Many scholars claim that this passage reflects an early typological interpretation of the servant based on Isa 52:13, which reads, ‘See, my servant shall prosper; he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high.’ Daniel 12:3 creates a typological connection between the ‘prospering’ (Hebrew root: skl) of the servant and those who are ‘wise’ (Hebrew root: skl). The imagery of exaltation, and possibly even resurrection, in both passages furthers this typology. The positive outcome for the ‘many’ in Dan 12:3–4 reinforces the typology with the servant’s experience because references to the ‘many’ appear throughout Isaiah 53: ‘Just as there were many who were astonished at him… so he shall startle many nations… yet he bore the sin of many’ (52:14, 15; 53:12).27 Thus, Daniel 12 creates a typological connection between the experience of the servant and the experience of the ‘wise’ in a later period. Yet this connection does not incorporate the servant’s disability.
Although Daniel 12 never quotes Isaiah 53 directly, we may still discern an allusion to the servant figure based on the overlaps in the vocabulary, themes, and imagery cited earlier. Like Daniel, many of the typologies involving the servant in Isaiah 53 allude to our passage without quoting it directly. Outside the book of Isaiah, Daniel probably represents the earliest extant allusion to Isaiah 53, but it is not the only one. Scholars have argued that many texts from the New Testament and other Second Temple literature evoke Isaiah 53 (e.g. Aramaic Apocryphon of Levi 4Q540–541; Testament of Benjamin 3:8; Wisdom 1–6; Mark 10:45; 1 Cor 15:3–5; Rom 4:25; Phil 2:6–9; Heb 9:28).28
Some of these typologies, however, come from intertextual connections that scholars make instead of allusions that the texts’ authors or editors may have intended.29 None of them, however, is structured around disability imagery. The New Testament contains eight quotations from Isaiah 53 (Matt 8:17; Mark 15:28; Luke 22:37; John 12:38; Acts 8:32–33; Rom 10:16; 15:21; 1 Pet 2:22–25). We will limit the following discussion to those texts that quote our passage directly due to both space constraints and the fact that a quotation of Isaiah 53 provides a solid criteria for deciding whether a later text alludes to our passage intentionally. These New Testament texts, all in Greek, create typological connections between Isaiah 53 and Jesus or members of the early church.
Jesus as miracle worker and healer (Matt 8:17 and John 12:38). Quotations of Isaiah 53 appear in the context of Jesus’ miracles and healings in both Matt 8:17 and John 12:38. Matt 8:16–17 reads, ‘That evening they brought to [Jesus] many who were possessed with demons; and he cast out the spirits with a word, and cured all who were sick. This was to fulfill what had been spoken through the prophet Isaiah, “He took our infirmities and bore our diseases.”’ Matthew’s quotation of Isa 53:4 does not come from the LXX’s Greek translation. As we noted earlier, the LXX translates the Hebrew word hlh (‘diseases/infirmities’) as ‘sin’. Matt 8:16, however, discusses the healing of sicknesses rather than the forgiveness of sin. Thus, Matthew’s Greek rendering of this verse seems to come directly from a Hebrew text rather than the LXX.30 This translation technique allows Matthew to connect Jesus’ healing activities with Isaiah 53. Yet Matthew invokes the servant as one who heals disabilities rather than has disabilities.31
Scholars debate whether Matthew quotes Isa 53:4 as an isolated proof text without regard for the quotation’s context within Isaiah 53 or if the quotation invites the audience to recall the larger context of Isaiah 53, which would include the servant’s suffering as well. Noting the occasional practice in antiquity of quoting scripture without concern for the context of the quotation, Ulrich Luz writes, ‘Precisely that part of Isa 53:3–5 is used here that does not speak of the suffering of God’s servant. Our quotation is an example of the way early Christian exegesis, like the Jewish exegesis of the time, sometimes quotes individual words of scripture without any regard for their context.’32 If Luz is correct, at least in the case of Matt 8:17, then the selective quotation of Isa 53:4 ignores aspects of the servant connected to disability that the verses immediately preceding the quoted verse would provide (Isa 53:2–3). This quotation technique helps create a typology in which Jesus and the servant become examples of a healer of disabilities rather than a figure with disabilities.
John connects a different verse from Isaiah 53 to Jesus’ healing activities. Yet, like Matthew, John’s quotation does not include the verses of Isaiah 53 that contain disability imagery. Instead, John uses the quotation to explain the rejection of Jesus despite his role as a healer.
Although [Jesus] had performed so many signs in their presence, they did not believe in him. This was to fulfill the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah: “Lord, who has believed our message, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?” And so they could not believe, because Isaiah also said, “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, so that they might not look with their eyes, and understand with their heart and turn—and I would heal them”. Isaiah said this because he saw his glory and spoke about him. (John 12:37–41)
Elsewhere, John uses the term ‘signs’ for Jesus’ miracles, often, the healing of the sick (John 4:48; 6:2; 9:16). Thus, the two quotations from Isaiah (Isa 53:1 and 6:10) appear in the context of Jesus’ healings or miracles. Nonetheless, these miracles do not convince all of Jesus’ audience. John understands this situation as prophesied in Isa 53:1 and quotes the LXX’s translation. In Isaiah, the verses immediately surrounding the quotation from Isa 53:1 connect the servant’s rejection to his marred and unattractive appearance (Isa 52:14–53:3). Isaiah 53 relates the servant’s rejection to his disability. In John, the rejection of Jesus has nothing to do with a disability. In fact, this rejection takes place despite Jesus’ healings of disabilities.
John’s second quotation from Isaiah further distances Jesus from the disability imagery in Isaiah 53. The disability imagery in John 12:37–41 does not come from the servant’s description in Isaiah 53. Instead, it comes from a description of the people who witness the prophecy in Isa 6:10. John quotes this passage to explain why certain people did not believe Jesus (cf. Matt 13:15; Mark 4:12;Luke 8:10).33 In Isa 6:10, God prevents the people from understanding a prophetic message by blinding their eyes and hardening their hearts. John applies this disability imagery to those who do not believe Jesus rather than to Jesus himself. John associates Jesus with miracles and healings, but associates those who reject Jesus with blindness.
Jesus as innocent figure (Luke 22:37 and Mark 15:28). According to Isa 53:12, the servant ‘was numbered with the transgressors’. While certain New Testament passages may allude to other parts of this verse (cf. Matt 20:28; 26:28; Rom 5:15; Phil 2:7–8; Heb 9:28), this phrase is quoted directly in Luke. Jesus instructs his disciples to arm themselves in order to fulfill prophecy. ‘[Jesus] said to them, “But now, the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag. And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was counted among the lawless’; and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled”’ (Luke 22:36–37). The NRSV translates the same Greek word as both ‘transgressors’ (Isa 53:12; cf. 53:8) and as ‘lawless’ (Luke 22:37). In Luke, Jesus draws a connection between himself and an innocent figure associated with wrongdoers. Luke does not use Isaiah 53 to depict Jesus as a figure with disabilities, but as an innocent figure.
Luke 22:35–38 does not comment on Jesus’ physical condition. By contrast, Mark 15:25–28 depicts his crucifixion. The NRSV translates vv. 25–27 as ‘It was nine o’clock in the morning when they crucified him. The inscription of the charge against him read, “The King of the Jews.” And with him they crucified two bandits, one on his right and one on his left.’ While the NRSV skips v. 28, it includes the following footnote at the end of v. 27: ‘Other ancient authorities add v. 28, “And the scripture was fulfilled that says, And he was counted among the lawless”’ (italics original). Although v. 28 is most likely a secondary addition since it does not appear in the early Greek manuscripts known as Sinaiticus,34 if we restore v. 28 to the main body of Mark 15, then, like Luke, Mark uses Isa 53:12 to depict Jesus as an innocent figure associated with wrongdoers.
That Mark quotes Isaiah 53 while narrating Jesus’ death could suggest a connection based on physical suffering. Yet, as we discussed in Chapter 2, the servant in Isaiah is not fatally wounded by humans. Rather, Isaiah 53 depicts him as living with an unspecified disability. By contrast, Mark 15 portrays Jesus as an otherwise able-bodied character who suffers and ultimately dies. Moving from able-bodied to dead in a matter of hours does not make Jesus a character with disabilities nor does it parallel the servant’s experience as depicted throughout Isaiah 53.35 Nonetheless, we find Isaiah 53 quoted in other New Testament texts that focus on Jesus as an able-bodied martyr.
Jesus as able-bodied martyr (Acts 8:32 – 33 and 1 Peter 2:22). In Acts 8, Philip encounters an Ethiopian eunuch reading from the book of Isaiah.
[Philip] heard [an Ethiopian eunuch] reading the prophet Isaiah. He asked, ‘Do you understand what you are reading’? He replied, ‘How can I, unless someone guides me’?… Now the passage of the scripture that he was reading was this: ‘Like a sheep he was led to the slaughter, and like a lamb silent before its shearer, so he does not open his mouth. In his humiliation justice was denied him. Who can describe his generation? For his life is taken away from the earth’. The eunuch asked Philip, ‘About whom, may I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else’? Then Philip began to speak, and starting with this scripture, he proclaimed to him the good news about Jesus (Acts 8:30–35).
The quotation from Isaiah comes from the LXX’s translation of 53:7–8. The LXX differs from our translation of these verses since we followed a Hebrew version for these verses. We translated the last half of v. 8 as ‘he was excluded from the land of the living, plagued for the transgression of my people’. As we found in Chapter 2, our translation suggests the servant’s isolation, possibly due to some disability (‘plagued’). By contrast, Acts’ quotation from the LXX implies the servant’s death and possible ascension to heaven more clearly than the Hebrew text since the LXX ends with the phrase ‘For his life is taken away from the earth’.
Yet, even in the LXX, the portion of v. 8 and v. 9 that immediately follows the quotation in Acts does not suggest that the servant died or ascended to heaven. Acts 8 does not include the last line of 53:8 or the first half of v. 9, which the LXX translates as ‘Due to the transgressions [cf. Isa 53:12 LXX] of my people, he was led to death, but I [God] turned over the wicked instead of his grave and the rich instead of his death’ (author’s translation). In the LXX, the larger context of vv. 8–9 suggests that the servant’s life was threatened but that God delivered him. As we discussed earlier, the next verse (v. 10) depicts the servant’s ‘cleansing’ with Greek terms used for the cleansing of skin anomalies elsewhere in the LXX. Moreover, the LXX may interpret the servant’s condition as a skin anomaly based on its translation of vv. 3 and 4. By quoting v. 7 and only the first part of v.8 rather than vv. 3–4 or vv. 8–10, Acts ignores the disability and healing imagery in the LXX’s translation of Isaiah 53. The isolated quotation from v. 7 and only the first part of v. 8 allows the servant to appear as an otherwise able-bodied figure who loses his life.
The discussion of whom the prophecy refers to does not consider a figure with disabilities. Instead, the candidates include Isaiah and Jesus. The eunuch’s mention of Isaiah may reflect a tradition, that may date to the first century CE if not earlier, that Isaiah was martyred by Manasseh and ascended to heaven (cf. Lives of the Prophets 1; Martyrdom of Isaiah 5; Justin, Dialogues with Trypho 120.5; Tertullian, De patientia 14; Josephus, Jewish Antiquites 10.38; Yebamot 49b; Heb 11:37).36 Philip’s connection between the experience of suffering and death in the quotation from Isa 53:7–8 and the ‘good news about Jesus’ recalls events that include Jesus’ death (cf. Luke 24:19–27). Yet the traditions about either Isaiah or Jesus’ death present them as otherwise able–bodied people who suffer and die from humanly inflicted torture. Even if Acts hints at a connection between the eunuch and the servant’s respective social experiences of disability,37 the selective quotation of Isa 53:7–8 shifts Philip and the eunuch’s discussion onto able-bodied martyrs rather than persons with disabilities.
In 1 Peter 2, we also find a reference to the servant’s suffering as that of an able-bodied martyr rather than part of a social experience of disability. In this passage, the author of 1 Peter advises slaves to accept the authority of their masters, even if their masters abuse them. The passage holds up Jesus as an example for how to handle suffering. In the process, the author connects Jesus with an innocent sufferer by quoting from Isa 53:9:
If you endure when you are beaten for doing wrong, what credit is that? But if you endure when you do right and suffer for it, you have God’s approval. For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you should follow in his steps. ‘He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth’. When he was abused, he did not return abuse; when he suffered, he did not threaten; but he entrusted himself to the one who judges justly. He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross, so that, free from sins, we might live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. For you were going astray like sheep, but now you have returned to the shepherd and guardian of your souls (1 Pet 2:20–25).
1 Pet 2:18–25 shows some awareness of the context of its quotation from Isaiah 53. Although it only quotes Isa 53:9 directly, it alludes to Isaiah 53 elsewhere with near quotations from the LXX such as ‘bore our sins’ (cf. 53:4), ‘by his wounds you have been healed’ (cf. 53:5) and ‘you were going astray like sheep’ (cf. 53:6). Attention to the larger context of Isaiah 53 requires greater focus on the servant’s physical condition than we found in the Gospels’ isolated quotations from Isaiah 53.
Yet, unlike Isaiah 53, 1 Peter does not connect this physical condition with disability. Instead, it understands Isaiah 53 as a prophecy about Jesus’ suffering and death. According to 1 Pet 1:11, the Spirit of Christ through the prophets ‘testified in advance to the sufferings destined for Christ and the subsequent glory’ (cf. 1 Pet 3:18). If, for 1 Peter, these testimonies include Isaiah 53, then Isaiah 53 becomes a prophecy about a future martyr and not a depiction of a social experience of disability. In this prophecy, the suffering involves fatal wounds through crucifixion rather than a social byproduct of living with disabilities. This use of Isaiah 53 should not surprise us since 1 Peter largely focuses on persecution and suffering.
The experience of disability becomes experiences of enslavement or martyrdom. 1 Peter also uses references to the servant’s suffering as an example for how others should handle hardships. As we found in IQHa, however, these hardships are the generalized suffering of presumably able-bodied persons rather than persons with disabilities. For example, 1 Pet 2:20 connects the servant’s suffering with the beatings endured by slaves rather than anything to do with disability. Both in terms of the suffering of Jesus and the slaves whom 1 Peter 2 addresses, the servant’s experience in Isaiah 53 describes the suffering and social oppression of the presumably able-bodied. The servant’s disability is lost in this appropriation of his experience.
Outside of the New Testament, we also find the use of the servant’s suffering to encourage others to imitate Jesus in 1 Clement. Like 1 Peter, 1 Clement comes from the late first century CE and shows awareness of the larger context of Isaiah 53. In fact, it cites all of Isa 53:1–12, mainly from the LXX.38 First Clement calls the Corinthian church to keep the peace by living in humility.39 Nevertheless, although 1 Clem 16:3–14 cites a large portion of our passage, the focus shifts from an experience of disability to an experience of humility. 1 Clement connects the servant with a presumably able-bodied Jesus as humble figures who should be imitated by the members of the Corinthian church.
Reactions to the servant (Rom 10:16 and 15: 21). Paul quotes Isaiah 53 twice in Romans. As Richard Hays observes in the epigram for this chapter, he does not invoke the servant directly in either case. Instead, Paul quotes the verses that focus on reactions to the servant’s experience or mission. In Rom 10:16, Paul explains the widespread rejection of the gospel message (or ‘good news’) as the fulfilment of prophecy. Like John 12:38, Paul quotes the LXX’s translation of Isa 53:1. Paul writes, ‘But not all have obeyed the good news [or “gospel”]’; for Isaiah says, ‘Lord, who has believed our message?’ (Rom 10:16). In the verses that immediately precede Isa 53:1, the disbelief over the servant comes from the fact that God exalts him (52:13) despite his marred appearance (52:14). In fact, the LXX emphasizes this point when it translates the first line in 52:15 as ‘he shall startle many nations’ instead of ‘he shall sprinkle many nations’ as some Hebrew versions do. In this context, 53:1 helps to depict the servant’s disability as not just a physical description but a social experience. By contrast, the context in which Paul quotes Isa 53:1 has nothing to do with a report involving an experience of disability. Rather, Paul uses Isa 53:1 as a prophetic explanation for a very different experience, namely, the rejection of his gospel message. This social experience differs considerably from the one described in Isaiah 53.
Paul quotes the LXX’s translation of Isaiah 53 again in Rom 15:21. He uses 52:15 to explain why he is spreading the gospel among the Gentiles (cf. Rom 15:16). Paul writes, ‘Thus I make it my ambition to proclaim the good news [or “gospel”], not where Christ has already been named, so that I do not build on someone else’s foundation, but as it is written, “Those who have never been told of him shall see, and those who have never heard of him shall understand”’ (Rom 15:20–1). Paul does not quote the first half of Isa 52:15, which reads, ‘so he shall startle many nations’. Yet this unquoted phrase may explain why he associates the last half of Isa 52:15 with his mission to the Gentiles. The LXX uses the same Greek word for ‘nations’ in Isa 52:15 as the NRSV translates as ‘Gentiles’ throughout Rom 15:15–21.40 While this connection may show some awareness of the larger context for the quotation, it does not include the disability imagery in the surrounding verses. The nations (or ‘Gentiles’) are startled by the servant’s marred appearance in Isaiah 53. Yet, for Paul, what the nations will learn has nothing to do with the nuanced portrayal of living with a disability that Isaiah 53 commemorates.
The servant in Isaiah 53 has a number of traits and experiences other than disability. Thus, while disability imagery saturates this passage, later biblical texts tend to draw on these other traits. Other Hebrew Bible texts may connect the servant to the experience of righteous martyrs (Isa 57:1; Dan 12:1–3). Likewise, some recent scholarship also interprets Isaiah 53 in relation to violence experienced by contemporary oppressed communities. Jorge Pixley interprets the servant’s suffering as violence inflicted upon exiles that resist the Babylonian empire. He connects the political violence in Isaiah 53 to the political violence in Nicaragua.41 Similarly, François Kabasele Lumbala and Cyris Heesuk Moon connect the servant’s suffering to violence experienced by communities in Africa and Asia respectively.42 Nevertheless, the specific examples of violence focus on violence inflicted on the able-bodied in these comparisons of Isaiah 53 to contemporary communities.
In fact, only one reference to people with disabilities appears in these essays. Lumbala recounts the story of a mother who goes to prison to serve her oldest daughter’s sentence. During her incarceration, she worries that she cannot care for two of her other children described as ‘epileptic’ and ‘mentally retarded’ respectively.43 Lumbala does not compare the servant to the children with disabilities, but rather their elderly, but otherwise able-bodied, mother. As with their ancient typological counterparts, the servant’s disability disappears in these contemporary comparisons.
Yet, within ancient typological interpretations, the servant was not only positioned as an example of an able-bodied sufferer. Certain New Testament texts quote isolated verses from Isaiah 53 as examples of various other typological figures such as a healer, an innocent one, or a martyr. Along with early translations of Isaiah 53, these typologies show how quickly interpretations can move away from our passage’s focus on the servant’s experience of disability. At the same time, the ancient translations and quotations of our passage do not suggest that there was a unified interpretation of the servant as an able-bodied sufferer that began with Isaiah 53 itself. Instead, Isaiah 53 describes the servant as a figure with disabilities while other biblical texts incorporate the servant into a variety of typologies that have little to do with disability.
Nor does this mean that interpretations involving the servant began with a unified understanding of the servant as the typical able-bodied sufferer. That would not account for the diversity among early typological uses of the servant. In other words, the idea of the able-bodied suffering servant does not naturally arise from Isaiah 53’s depiction of the servant. Rather, this idea emerges slowly from a long process of interpretation in which the servant becomes increasingly used as an example in typologies of able-bodied suffering.
Eventually, the servant becomes more than an example of a suffering type. Instead, he becomes identified as a suffering character independent of not only his disability but also his typological framework. Once the servant is not understood as representing a typological figure nor as having a disability, interpreters are free to identify him as biblical characters traditionally understood as suffering but able-bodied. In short, this interpretative process invented the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 as we will discover in our next chapter.
Several of the biblical texts that we discussed in this chapter quote verses from Isaiah 53 but never address the passage as a whole (Isa 52:13–53:12). This practice changed by the end of the first century CE when 1 Clem 16:3–14 quotes all Isa 53:1–12. As interpreters focused more on Isaiah 53 as a whole, the servant became more worthy of study in his own right. Over time, the primary focus for interpretation of the servant began to shift from the type of figure that he represents to the historical person or community that he represents. In our next chapter, we find that scholars identified the servant with individuals or communities rarely associated with disability. Nevertheless, translations and typological interpretations from antiquity had already begun to sever the link between the servant and disability long before historical identification of the servant became the dominant scholarly approach to Isaiah 53.