Behold! My Servant: An Exegetical and Theological Study of the Identity and Role of the Servant in Isaiah 42:1-9 9781463205591, 2015033863, 1463205597

Citation preview

“Behold! My Servant”

Gorgias Biblical Studies

63

In this series Gorgias publishes monographs on the history, theology, redaction and literary criticism of the biblical texts. Gorgias particularly welcomes proposals from younger scholars whose dissertations have made an important contribution to the field of Biblical Studies. Studies of language and linguistics, the archaeology and cultures of the Ancient Near East, Judaism and religion in general each have their own series and will not be included in this series.

“Behold! My Servant”

An Exegetical and Theological Study of the Identity and Role of the Servant in Isaiah 42:1-9

Stéphane A. Beaulieu

9

34 2015

Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2015 by Gorgias Press LLC

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. 2015

‫ܝ‬

9

ISBN 978-1-4632-0559-1

ISSN 1935-6870

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Beaulieu, Stéphane A. Behold! my servant : an exegetical and theological study of the identity and role of the servant in Isaiah 42:1-9 / by Stephane Beaulieu. pages cm. -- (Gorgias biblical studies, ISSN 1935-6870) 1. Bible. Isaiah, XLII, 1-9--Criticism, interpretation, etc. 2. Servant of Jehovah--Biblical teaching. I. Title. BS1520.B434 2015 224’.106--dc23 2015033863 Printed in the United States of America

TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ..................................................................................... v List of Tables............................................................................................ ix List of Abbreviations .............................................................................. xi Acknowledgments ................................................................................xvii Chapter 1. Introduction ........................................................................... 1 Background to the Problem........................................................... 1 Statement of the Problem ............................................................ 10 Purpose of the Study..................................................................... 11 History of Interpretation of the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah....................................................................................... 11 Jewish Interpretation of the Servant in Isaiah 42 ............... 11 Jewish Interpretation of the Servant in Isaiah 53 ............... 14 Christian Interpretation of the Servant ................................ 25 Other Views of the Servant in Isaiah ................................... 34 Justification for the Study ............................................................ 36 Delimitations .................................................................................. 36 Methodology .................................................................................. 36 The Nature of Biblical Typology within Classical Prophecy .. 38 Chapter 2. An Exegetical Investigation of Isaiah 42:1–9 ................. 45 Introduction ................................................................................... 45 The Servant in Isaiah 40–55 ........................................................ 45 Literary Structure of Isaiah 40–55 ........................................ 45 The Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 ....................................................... 61 Delimitation of Passage .......................................................... 61 Literary Structure of Isaiah 42:1–9 ....................................... 62 Literary Genre of Isaiah 42:1–9 ............................................ 70 Summary ......................................................................................... 72 The Servant in Isaiah 42:1–4 ....................................................... 73 Structure of Isaiah 42:1–4 ...................................................... 73 Royal Court Imagery in Isaiah 42:1–4 ................................112 Summary .......................................................................................114 v

vi

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The Servant in Isaiah 42:5–9 .....................................................115 Its Relationship to Isaiah 42:1–4 .........................................115 Literary Meter.........................................................................116 Summary .......................................................................................161 Conclusion ....................................................................................162 Chapter 3. Intratextual Relationships With Other Servant References.....................................................................................163 Introduction .................................................................................163 Comparison of First Servant Poem to Second Servant Poem—Isaiah 49:1–12 ......................................................164 Linguistic Parallels .................................................................164 Thematic Parallels..................................................................173 Structural Parallels .................................................................175 Structure of Exodus Motif ...................................................176 Comparison of First Servant Poem to Third Servant Poem—Isaiah 50:4–11 ......................................................176 Linguistic Parallels .................................................................177 Thematic Parallels..................................................................180 Structural Parallels .................................................................183 Structure of Exodus Motif ...................................................185 Differences between the First and Third Servant Poems .............................................................................185 Comparison of First Servant Poem to Fourth Servant Poem—Isaiah 52:13–53:12 ...............................................185 Linguistic Parallels .................................................................186 Thematic Parallels..................................................................189 Structural Parallels .................................................................201 Structure of Exodus Motif ...................................................201 Differences between the First and Fourth Servant Poems .............................................................................201 Comparison of First Servant Poem to Other Isaianic ‘Servant’ Passages ...............................................................202 Comparing the Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 with the Servant of Isaiah 41:8–9...................................................................202 Linguistic Parallels .................................................................203 Thematic Parallels..................................................................205 Structural Parallels .................................................................205 Comparing the Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 with the Servant of Isaiah 42:16–25 ..............................................................206 Linguistic Parallels .................................................................206

TABLE OF CONTENTS

vii

Thematic Parallel: Judgment ................................................208 Structural Parallels .................................................................209 Comparing the Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 with the Servant of Isaiah 45:1–8...................................................................209 Linguistic Parallels .................................................................209 Thematic Parallels..................................................................212 Structural Parallels .................................................................214 Other Servant Passages in Isaiah 40–55 ..................................215 Individual Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 vs. Corporate Servant of Isaiah 43:10 .....................................................................215 Individual Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 vs. Corporate Servant of Isaiah 44:1, 2 ...................................................................220 Individual Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 vs. Corporate Servant of Isaiah 44:21 .....................................................................221 Individual Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 vs. Corporate Servant of Isaiah 44:26 .....................................................................222 Individual Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 vs. Corporate Servant of Isaiah 48:20 .....................................................................223 Individual Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 vs. Plural Servants of Isaiah 54:17 ..........................................................................223 Intratextual Links Between Isaiah 42:1–9 and Other Messianic Hope Passages outside of Isaiah 40–55........224 Comparing Isaiah 42:1–9 with Isaiah 9:1–6 ......................225 Comparing Isaiah 42:1–9 with Isaiah 11:1–10 ..................229 Comparing Isaiah 42:1–9 with Isaiah 61:1–9 ....................232 Comparing Isaiah 42:1–9 with Isaiah 63:1–6 ....................238 Summary .......................................................................................243 Conclusion ....................................................................................244 Chapter 4. Theology of the First Servant Poem in its Canonical Context ..........................................................................................247 Introduction .................................................................................247 Theology of the First Servant Poem ........................................247 Isaiah 42:1–9...........................................................................247 Development/Theology of the First Servant Poem in Light of the Other Isaianic Servant Poems ....................267 Isaiah 49:1–12; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12 ...................................267 Theology of the Servant in the Context of Isaiah 40–55 ......285 Introduction ...........................................................................285 Similarities between the Individual and the Corporate Servant ........................................................285

viii

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Differences between the Individual and the Corporate Servant ........................................................289 Who Is the Servant of the First Servant Poem? .....................291 Summary and Conclusion ..........................................................299 Chapter 5. Summary and Conclusion................................................303 Summary .......................................................................................303 Conclusion ....................................................................................307 Application ...................................................................................309 Implications for Further Study ..................................................309 Bibliography ..........................................................................................313 Index .......................................................................................................347

LIST OF TABLES 1. Corporate and Individual Servant References in Isaiah 40–55

10

2. Two Genres of Predictive Prophecy in the Old Testament

41

3. Block Parallelism in Isaiah 40–55

51

4. Corporate vs. Individual Servants in Isaiah 40–55

54

5. Kosmala’s Form & Structure of Isaiah 42:1–4

66

6. Structure of the Metrical Clauses in Isaiah 42:1–4

67

7. The Spirit of God and Human Spirit in Isaiah

89

8. Literary Meter of Isaiah 42:5–9

116

9. Comparison of False Gods and the True God

151

10. Block Parallel Structure of Isaiah 42:9a

153

11. Comparison of Isaiah 42:1–9 with Messianic Passages in Isaiah 1–12

161

12. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 49:1–12

165

13. Parallel Expressions between Isaiah 42:6 and 49:6, 8

171

14. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:6–7 and 49:6, 8–9

172

15. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 50:4–11

178

16. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 52:13–53:12

186

17. First Servant Poem: Active Verbs

190

18. Fourth Servant Poem: Passive Verbs

191

19. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 41:8–10

203

20. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 42:16–25

207

21. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 45:1–8

211

22. Similarities and Differences between the Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 and Occurrences of the Term ‘Servant’ in Isaiah 40–55

217

23. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 9:1–6

227

ix

x

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

24. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 11:1–10

230

25. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 61:1–9

233

26. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 63:1–6

239

27. Historical King of 2 Samuel 7 and Eschatological King of Isaiah 42:1–9

262

28. Structural Similarities among the Four Servant Poems

285

29. Similarities between the Individual and Corporate Servant in Isaiah 40–55

286

30. Differences between the Individual and Corporate Servant in Isaiah 40–55 290 31. Historical and Eschatological Fulfillment of the First Servant Poem

298

32. Historical, Inaugurated, and Consummated Fulfillment of the First Servant Poem

310

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AB ABD

Anchor Bible

Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by D. N. Freedman. 6 vols. New York, 1992

ACEBTra

Amsterdamse Cahiers voor Exegese van de Bijbel en zijn Tradities

AJT

AnBib

American Journal of Theology

AOTC

Apollos Old Testament Commentary

AramS ArBib

The Aramaic Bible

AsJT

ATA

Asia Journal of Theology

AUSS

Andrews University Seminary Studies

BBR

BDB

Bulletin for Biblical Research

BDS

BIBAL Dissertation Series

Analecta biblica Aramaic Studies

Alttestamentliche Abhandlungen Brown, F., S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs. The New Brown, Driver, and Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Associated Publishers & Authors, 1981

BFCT

Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie

Bib

Biblica

BJRL

BKANT

Biblischer Kommentar: Altes und Neues Testament. Edited by S. Herrmann and H. W. Wolff

BR

BRS

Biblical Research

BSac

Bibliotheca Sacra

Bulletin of the John Rylands Library

The Biblical Resource Series

xi

xii

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

BT

Bible Translator

BZ

BZAW

Biblische Zeitschrift

Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

CAD

The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago, 1956–

CBET

Contribution to Biblical Exegesis and Theology

CBQ

CHANE

Catholic Biblical Quarterly

CHB

ConBOT

The Cambridge History of the Bible

Coniectanea biblica: Old Testament Series

DJG DOTWPW DSS

Culture and History of the Ancient Near East Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Edited by J. B. Green and S. McKnight. Downers Grove, 1992 Dictionary of the Old Testament: Wisdom, Poetry and Writings. Edited by T. Longman III and P. Enns. Downers Grove, 2008 Dead Sea Scrolls

ECC

Eerdmans Critical Commentary

ETL

Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses

EvQ

Evangelical Quarterly

EvT

Evangelische Theologie

EdF

FRLANT

Erträge der Forschung

Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments

GDNES

Gorgias Dissertations. Near Eastern Studies

GHCOTS

Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures

HALOT

HB

The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament

Hebrew Bible

HBT

Horizons in Biblical Theology

HCOT

HKAT

HTKAT

Historical Commentary on the Old Testament

Handkommentar zum Alten Testament

Herders theologischer Kommentar zum Alten Testament

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS HTR

Harvard Theological Review

IB

IBC

Interpreter’s Bible

IBD

ICC

The Illustrated Bible Dictionary

Int

Interpretation

ISBE ITC

Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching International Critical Commentary

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by G. W. Bromiley. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, 1979–1988 International Theological Commentary

JATS

Journal of the Adventist Theological Society

JBL

Journal of Biblical Literature

JCS

Journal of Cuneiform Studies

JNES

Journal of Near Eastern Studies

JQR

Jewish Quarterly Review

JSOR

Journal of the Society of Oriental Research

JSOT

JSOTSup

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

JSS

Journal of Semitic Studies

JTS

KBL

Journal of Theological Studies

LXX

Septuagint

MPBP

Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series Köhler, L. and W. Baumgartner, Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti libros. 2d ed.; Leiden, 1958 The Master’s Perspective on Biblical Prophecy

MT

Masoretic Text

NACSBT

NAC Studies in Bible & Theology

NAC

NIBCOT NICOT NIDB

xiii

New American Commentary

New International Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

The New International Commentary on the Old Testament

The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by K. D. Sakenfeld. 5 vols. Nashville, 2006

xiv NIDOTTE NIVAC

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT” New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis. Edited by W. A. VanGemeren. 5 vols. Grand Rapids, 1997 The NIV Application Commentary

NKZ

NLBC

Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift

NTS

New Testament Studies

OIE

OLZ

The New Layman's Bible Commentary

Oriental Institute Essay Orientalistische Literaturzeitung

OPTAT

Occasional Papers in Translation and Textlinguistics

Or

Orientalia

OS

Oriental Studies

OTS

Old Testament Studies

OtSt

Oudtestamentische Studiën

OTL PSHL

Old Testament Library

Publications of the Society of Hebrew Literature

RB

Revue biblique

RevExp RJSS

Review & Expositor

SAA

State Archives of Assyria

SBJT

SBLSP

Southern Baptist Journal of Theology

SBT

ScrPIB

Studies in Biblical Theology

Scripta Pontificii Instituti Biblici

ST

Studia theologica

STK

SubBi

Svensk teologisk kvartalskrift

Subsidia biblica

SwJT

Southwestern Journal of Theology

TDNT

TDOT

Routledge Jewish Studies Series Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids, 1964–1976

Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G. J. Botterweck and H. Ringgren. Translated by J. T. Willis,

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

xv

G. W. Bromiley, and D. E. Green. 8 vols. Grand Rapids, 1974– ThR

TheoRhēma

TJ

Trinity Journal

TJAF

The Journal of American Folklore

TLOT

Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament. Edited by E. Jenni, with assistance from C. Westermann. Translated by M. E. Biddle. 3 vols. Peabody, Mass., 1997

TynBul

USFISCJ

Tyndale Bulletin

VE

Vox evangelica

VT

Vetus Testamentum Graecum

VTG

University of South Florida International Studies in Formative Christianity and Judaism Vetus Testamentum

VTSup

Supplements to Vetus Testamentum

WBComp

Westminster Bible Companion

WTJ YJS

Westminster Theological Journal

YOS

Yale Oriental Series

ZAW

Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

ZDPV

Zeitschrift des deutschen Palästina-Vereins

WBC

Word Biblical Commentary

Yale Judaica Series

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Richard Davidson, chair of my PhD dissertation committee, inspired me to tackle this important Old Testament passage and I am grateful for his encouragement, mentoring, and helpful feedback throughout the writing process. Thanks are also due to the other members of my committee—Jiří Moskala and Roy Gane—for their contribution to the 2014 dissertation (‘The Identity and Role of the Servant in Isaiah 42:1–9: An Exegetical and Theological Study’, Andrews University) that is the basis of this work. My deepest gratitude goes to my wife Melanie for her support, encouragement, patience, and love. She spent countless hours editing and formatting my dissertation. Finally, I praise God for the Bible and for the opportunity to learn from it.

xvii

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Recent views regarding the identity of the servant of Isa 42:1–9, as expressed in commentaries and other studies on the book of Isaiah, build on twenty-two centuries of conflicting opinion, which makes interpretation of the passage problematic. I will, first of all, outline the background to the problem, provide a statement of the problem, and specify the purpose of this study. In the section regarding the history of interpretation of the servant of the Lord in Isaiah, I will briefly explore Jewish and Christian literature to determine how prominent scholars have interpreted the servant poems of Isaiah (Isa 42:1–9; 49:1–12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12). The remainder of the chapter will cover a justification of the study, its delimitations, and methodology.

BACKGROUND TO THE PROBLEM

The book of Isaiah is widely regarded as the pinnacle of Hebrew literary art. 1 The book, especially chs 40–55 (so-called ‘Second Isaiah’), 2 presents a high quality of poetry, employing poetic devices George L. Robinson, ‘Isaiah’, ISBE 3:1495–1508; John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 8. 2 J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction & Commentary (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 1993), 23. This is the standard critical delineation of Second Isaiah. However, I accept the book of Isaiah in its final form. Regarding the unity of Isaiah and authorship by Isaiah of Jerusalem in the eighth century BCE, see the following: Joseph Addison Alexander, Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1953), 13– 78; Oswald T. Allis et al., The Law and the Prophets: Old Testament Studies Prepared in Honor of Oswald Thompson Allis (Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian & 1

1

2

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Reformed, 1974), ii; Edward J. Young, An Introduction to the Old Testament (2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1950), 202–222; Gleason L. Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Chicago: Moody, 1994), 329–351; Rachel Margalioth, The Indivisible Isaiah: Evidence for the Single Authorship of the Prophetic Book (New York: Yeshiva University, 1964), 1–42. For a further and more recent view on the unity of Isaiah, see also Archibald L. H. M. van Wieringen, The Reader-Oriented Unity of the Book of Isaiah (ACEBTra 6; ed. J. W. Dyk et al.; Vught: Skandalon, 2006). Proponents of multiple authors of Isaiah fall into two groups: two Isaiahs and three Isaiahs. Scholars who believe in two Isaiahs include Edward Kissane, Clyde Francisco, Charles Torrey, and James Smart. On the other hand, Bernhard Duhm, Samuel R. Driver, John Skinner, George Adam Smith, Thomas K. Cheyne, J. A. Soggin, and R. B. Scott prefer the hypothesis that there were three authors of Isaiah; see Stephen Roy Miller, ‘The Literary Style of the Book of Isaiah and the Unity Question’ (unpubl. diss., Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary, 1982), 3–4. Those who accept two Isaiahs believe that First Isaiah (1–39) would have prophesied in the eighth century BCE. The material in Second Isaiah (40–66) is read against the background of the Babylonian exile and its aftermath. They conclude the authorial unity of Isa 40–66 on the basis of the stylistic and thematic continuity found in these chapters. The ‘two Isaiahs’ view is now a minority among critical modern scholars, but it is still prominent among Jewish scholars, such as Shalom M Paul, Benjamin D. Sommer, and Yehezkel Kaufmann. See Shalom M. Paul, Isaiah 40–66: Translation and Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012), 2; Benjamin D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 40–66 (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1998), 187–195; Benjamin D. Sommer, ‘Allusion and Illusions: the Unity of the Book of Isaiah in Light of Deutero-Isaiah’s Use of Prophetic Tradition’, in New Visions of Isaiah (ed. Roy F. Melugin and Marvin A. Sweeney; JSOTSup 214; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 156–186; Yehezkel Kaufmann, The Babylonian Captivity and Deutero-Isaiah (New York: Union of American Congregations, 1970), 66–70. The majority of modern critical scholars who treat Isaiah as having three authors have divided it as First Isaiah (1–39), Deutero-Isaiah (40– 55), and Trito-Isaiah (56–66). They see Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah as two distinct bodies of literature. For these scholars, thematic continuity has often been explained by the fact that the two prophets had the same tradi-

1. INTRODUCTION

3

such as parallelism, echoes, plays on words, polemic, and rhythm. It also contains many prophecies of salvation and judgment, which are often viewed as contradictory. 3 According to Paul D. Hanson, tion. Ronald E. Clements suggests a book with many endings, the present book being formed by joining prophecies together. Ronald E. Clements, Jerusalem and the Nations: Studies in the Book of Isaiah, Hebrew Bible Monographs 16 (eds David J. A. Clines, J. Cheryl Exum, Keith W. Whitelam; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2011), 35–52. Linguistically these sections of Isaiah have many variations and where the instances are similar, the scholars profess that redactors added the written text of similarity. See, for more information, Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer, ‘Continuity and Discontinuity in Isaiah 40–66. History of Research’, in Continuity and Discontinuity: Chronological and Thematic Development in Isaiah 40–66 (Bristol, Conn.: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014), 13–40; Michael Thompson, Isaiah 40– 66, Epworth Commentaries (Peterborough: Epworth, 2001), xvii–xix. However, it appears that not all scholars agree with this view since these debates are not consistent. See Hans M. Barstad, ‘Isaiah 56–66 in Relation to Isaiah 40–55. Why a New Reading in Necessary’, in Continuity and Discontinuity: Chronological and Thematic Development in Isaiah 40–66 (Bristol, Conn.: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014), 41–62. Even those who accept Deutero-Isaiah and Trito-Isaiah differ on where the chapter divisions should occur. For example, Ulrich Berges takes the position that Trito-Isaiah should begin with chapter 54:17b, whereas Christopher Seitz opts for Isa 54:1. Ulrich Berges, ‘Where Does Trito-Isaiah Start in the Book of Isaiah?’, in Continuity and Discontinuity: Chronological and Thematic Development in Isaiah 40–66 (Bristol, Conn.: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014), 63–76. Christopher R. Seitz, ‘The Book of Isaiah 40–66’, in NIB 6 (ed. Leander E. Keck; Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon, 2001), 307–552. Neither is there real agreement regarding how certain chapters in both Deutero-Isaiah and Trito-Isaiah should be dated. See Henk Leene, Newness in Old Testament Prophecy: An Intertextual Study, OtSt 64 (ed. B. Becking; Boston: Brill, 2014), 131–140; Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer, ‘The Lament in Isaiah 63:7–64:11 and Its Literary and Theological Place in Isaiah 40–66’, in The Book of Isaiah: Enduring Questions Answered Anew: Essay Honoring Joseph Blenkinsopp and His Contribution to the Study of Isaiah (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2014), 52–70. 3 Christopher R. Seitz, Isaiah 1–39 (IBC 10; Louisville: John Knox, 1993), 17.

4

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

‘the verve and audacity of Second Isaiah’s visionary, God-centered worldview is enhanced by literary dimensions such as genre, poetic style, symbolism, and compositional structure’. 4 He further comments that ‘frequently one finds a prosody characterized by parallelism and regularity of metric structure that resembles the earliest poetry of the Bible. … At the same time, however, the syntax has become more complex than in earlier poetry, and many stylistic features are novel.’ 5 Within Isa 40–55, four ‘servant poems’ have been identified (Isa 42:1–9; 49:1–6; 50:4–9; and 52:13–53:12), embedded in the type of literary genre and structure outlined by Hanson above. Some scholars consider these servant poems to be interconnected 6 and contrasted with the other corporate servant passages (Isa 41:8– 9; 42:19; 44:1, 2, 21; 44:26; 45:4; 48:20; 54:17) in chs 40–55. 7 Many biblical scholars have isolated the servant units, including the servant poems of Isa 42, 49, 50, and 52–53, in terms of their literary genre, but there is no consensus among scholars as to the precise identity of the literary genre of these passages. Bernhard Duhm theorizes that an author other than Isaiah added this group of texts after Second Isaiah was written. 8 John McKenzie states, ‘It is accepted by almost all modern critics that the Servant Songs form a Paul D. Hanson, Isaiah 40–66 (ed. James Luther; Louisville: John Knox, 1995), 11. 5 Ibid. See also Thompson, Isaiah 40–66, xxv. 6 F. Duane Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah: The Servant Songs (Chicago: Moody, 1985); Bebb W. Stone, ‘Second Isaiah: Prophet to Patriarchy’, in The Prophets (ed. Philip R. Davies; Sheffield: Sheffield Press, 1996), 228. 7 Carl F. Keil and Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), 174; Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 8. 8 John L. McKenzie, Second Isaiah (AB 20; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1968), xxxiix; Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40–66 (trans. David M. G. Stalker; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969), 20–21; Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40–55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 19A; New York: Doubleday, 2002), 209–210; Karl Budde, ‘The So-Called “Ebed-Yahweh Songs” and the Meaning of the Term “Servant of Yahweh” in Isaiah, Chaps. 40–55’, AJT 3, no. 3 (1899): 500. 4

1. INTRODUCTION

5

literary unit by themselves’; 9 the literary genre often attributed to them is simply ‘a scholarly convention’. 10 F. Duane Lindsey goes further, stating that the term servant songs ‘does not correctly identify the literary genre of the passages according to more recent form-critical terminology’. 11 Isaiah 42:1–9 is God’s introduction of a servant who has a specific role to accomplish and instructions as to how that role should be carried out. The main textual issue that has preoccupied scholars is the identity of the servant. Scholarly literature has been abundant on this topic, but the subject remains disputed. 12 Even Claus Westermann, who maintains that this often-asked question should never be asked, 13 nonetheless ends up asking it himself by inferring that certain characteristics in v. 1, for example, point to ‘the designation of David’ or someone ‘appointed and equipped by God for a task whose nature is no more than suggested in the description which follows’. 14 This implies that Westermann also indirectly wants to know who the servant is and identifies the servant as being someone special sent from God. 15 There are many interpretations regarding the identity of the servant, from both Jewish/rabbinic and Christian perspectives. In Jewish/rabbinic interpretation, the identity of the servant is commonly accepted as being primarily the nation of Israel. 16 However, McKenzie, Second Isaiah, xxxviii. See also Roy L. Honeycutt, ‘Introducing Isaiah’, SwJT 11 (Fall 1968): 15. 10 Harold Henry Rowley, The Servant of the Lord and Other Essays on the Old Testament (London: Lutterworth, 1952), 6. 11 Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 3. 12 Hanson, Isaiah 40–66, 40–41. For more information on the scholarly literature, see the section on the history of interpretation. 13 Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 93; Leland E. Wilshire, ‘The ServantCity: A New Interpretation of the “Servant of the Lord” in the Servant Songs of Deutero-Isaiah’, JBL 94, no. 3 (1975): 357. 14 Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 94. 15 Although Westermann does not specify it directly, he concludes that the servant is Moses. 16 See Ralph Marcus, ‘The “Plain Meaning” of Isaiah 42:1–4’, HTR 30, no. 4 (1937): 249–259; Raphael Patai, The Messiah Texts (New York: 9

6

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Jewish scholars have also interpreted the servant to be the prophet Isaiah 17 or the Messiah. 18 The Apparatus of The Isaiah Targum suggests that the word ‘servant’ has been further clarified with ‘the Messiah’ in a number of rabbinic sources. 19 Furthermore, Solomon Freehof points out that ‘not all of the classic commentators accept the interpretation that God’s servant here means the whole people of Israel. For example, both the Targum and Kimchi say the servAvon, 1979), 1; Joel Edward Rembaum, ‘The Development of a Jewish Exegetical Tradition Regarding Isaiah 53’, HTR 75, no. 3 (1982): 289–311; Abraham Joshua Heschel, The Prophets (2 vols; New York: Harper & Row, 1969), 1:149 n. 2. 17 Abraham ben Meïr Ibn Ezra, The Commentary of Ibn Ezra on Isaiah: Edited from Mss. and Translated, with Notes, Introductions, and Indexes, by M. Friedländer (PSHL 1; London: Society of Hebrew Literature, 1873), 186. 18 David Baron, Rays of Messiah’s Glory: Christ in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1955), 225–246; Solomon B. Freehof, Book of Isaiah (New York: Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1972), 218–221, 272–276; Joseph Klausner, The Messianic Idea in Israel: From Its Beginning to the Completion of the Mishnah (ed. W. F. Stinespring; New York: Macmillan, 1955), 13–25. ‘The Targum Jonathan to the Prophets’ renders Isa 42:1 as: ‘Behold, My servant, the Messiah, whom I bring near, My chosen one, in whom My Memra takes delight; I will place My holy spirit upon him, and he shall reveal My law to the nations.’ Samson H. Levey, The Messiah: An Aramaic Interpretation; the Messianic Exegesis of the Targum (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, 1974), 59. See also ibid., 155 n. 63, where it states that ‘it is interesting that Rashi, who, because of the troubled period of the Crusades during which he lived, frequently interpreted Messianically, interprets this passage exactly as does LXX. Kimhi, however, takes it as Messianic.’ For further information on Rashi, see Joseph Sarachek, The Doctrine of the Messiah in Medieval Jewish Literature (New York: Hermon, 1968), 61–62. 19 Bruce D. Chilton, The Isaiah Targum (ArBib 11; Wilmington, Del.: M. Glazier, 1987), 80. The Apparatus for Isa 42:1 points out that ‘the Messiah’ is added to clarify ‘servant’ in the First and Second Rabbinic Bibles, the Antwerp Polyglot, Reuchlinianus, and Ms. Jews’ College.

1. INTRODUCTION

7

ant means the Messiah. Ibn Ezra also says that the servant means the prophet himself.’ 20 Interpretations by Christian scholars vary widely. Christopher R. North maintains that ultimately the servant refers to Christ. 21 Other candidates with whom the servant is often identified include Isaiah, Jeremiah, Israel, and Ezekiel, to name a few. 22 Joseph Blenkinsopp separates the first servant poem from the other three servant poems and identifies the first servant as Cyrus. He views the servant in chs 49–55 as being ‘an individual prophetic figure’, ‘presented in deliberate contrast to Cyrus’, and classifies this servant as ‘the so-called Deutero-Isaiah’. 23 John N. Oswalt, among other scholars, 24 proposes a messianic interpretation—that the servant is the ‘means whereby Israel’s Freehof, Book of Isaiah, 219. See, for more information, Klausner, The Messianic Idea in Israel, 13–25. 21 Christopher R. North, The Second Isaiah: Introduction, Translation and Commentary to Chapters XL–LV (Oxford: Clarendon, 1964), 20–22. 22 For more information, see McKenzie, Second Isaiah, xliii–lv. Also Ernst Sellin identified the servant at different times over the course of his career: Zerubbabel (1898), Jehoiachin (1901), Moses (1922), and Second Isaiah (1930); Ernst Sellin, Serubbabel; ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der messianischen Erwartung und der Entstehung des Judentums (Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1898); Ernst Sellin, Der Knecht Gottes bei Deuterojesaja (Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1901); Ernst Sellin, Mose und seine Bedeutung für die israelitisch-jüdische Religionsgeschichte (Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1922); Ernst Sellin, ‘Tritojesaja, Deuterojesaja und das Gottesknechts-problem’, NKZ 41 (1930): 73–93, 145–173. See McKenzie, Second Isaiah, xlvii n. 26. 23 Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40–55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, 356. His view is heavily based on the Deuteronomic theory of an individual ‘prophetic martyr’, patterned after von Rad’s concept that ‘Moses, the protoprophet is the pre-eminent Servant of God … and, as such, intercedes, suffers, and offers his life on behalf of his people’. Ibid., 118; see also 59–61, 118–120; Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology (trans. D. M. G. Stalker; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 261. 24 See literature review that follows for more information on those scholars. 20

8

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

servanthood is made possible’. 25 The servant is to save Israel from its state of sin. Thus, Oswalt takes the position that the servant poems speak of an individual (and not a corporate body such as Israel), most certainly the Messiah, who is able to perform the service of blessing the nations as prophesied in Gen 12:3 and in other places. 26 In contrast to these understandings of the servant as a particular prophetic individual, some scholars see the servant poems in Isaiah as having a corporate/collective fulfillment: the servant is Israel. 27 Two prominent interpreters who take this position are Arthur S. Peake and Adolphe Lods. For Peake, the servant is ‘not the ideal, but the actual, empirical Israel’, 28 and Lods views the servant as ‘the actual Israel’. 29 Roger Whybray does not see in Isa 40–55 any kind of messianic eschatology. Rather, he believes that this concern of Isaiah for the nation’s future relates to a future ideal life for Jews in this world. 30 Harold Rowley surveys the interpretations of those who see the servant in each of the servant poems as col-

Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 9. Ibid., 108. See also Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66 (NICOT 3; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979), 108–109. 27 Fleming James, Personalities of the Old Testament (London: C. Scribner's Sons, 1939), 383–387; Robert H. Pfeiffer, Introduction of the Old Testament (New York: Harper, 1941), 478–481; Rowley, The Servant of the Lord, 33–57; John M. P. Smith, The Prophets and Their Times (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1925), 188–191. 28 Rowley, The Servant of the Lord, 34. See also Arthur S. Peake, The Servant of Yahweh; Three Lectures Delivered at King’s College, London (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1931), 67; Arthur S. Peake, The Problem of Suffering in the Old Testament (London: R. Bryant, 1904), 34–72. 29 Rowley, The Servant of the Lord, 34. See, for further information, Adolphe Lods, Les prophètes d’Israël et les débuts du Judaïsme (Paris: A. Michel, 1969), 275–280. 30 Roger N. Whybray, Isaiah 40–66 (ed. Ronald E. Clements and Matthew Black; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981), 31–32. See also John D. W. Watts, Isaiah 34–66 (WBC 25; Waco, Tex.: Word, 1987), 114–118. 25 26

1. INTRODUCTION

9

lective, including Rowley himself. 31 The scholars who view the servant poems as referring to a corporate servant generally interpret this servant to be the personified nation of Israel. 32 The main proposals for the identity of the servant fall into two categories: an individual servant (for example, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Cyrus) or a corporate servant (for example, Israel). Although modern scholarship is divided on the identity and role of the first servant, many scholars also recognize that there is a relationship between this servant and the three other servant poems. This ongoing debate is best understood from the biblical context—which includes the entire book of Isaiah and the allusions to the first poem’s content in the following servant poems. 33 Some recent research has argued that the various references to ‫‘ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬servant’ in Isa 40–55 consistently alternate between the corporate servant (explicitly identified with the nation of Israel) or plural ‘servants’ and an individual servant (in the so-called ‘servant songs’, not identified with the nation of Israel). 34 This alternation is summarized in table 1 and shows many similarities but also significant differences. Yet because this alternation between corporate/plural and individual servant has not been explored in any detail, it may offer a fruitful context for fresh analysis of the identity and role of the servant in the first servant poem. As table 1 demonstrates, Isa 42:1–9 refers to an individual servant but is surrounded by corporate servant texts (41:8–9; 43:10). Because of this alternation between individual and corporate servant references, the first servant poem in Isa 42:1–9 is best For further information on the history of the interpretations regarding the individual versus the collective servant in Isaiah, see Rowley, The Servant of the Lord, 3–57. 32 This is the reasoning of C. C. Torrey and Sidney Smith; see ibid., 37. 33 Bennison Gray, ‘Repetition in Oral Literature’, TJAF 84, no. 333 (1971): 289–303. 34 See, for example, Richard M. Davidson, ‘Leadership Language in the Old Testament’, in Servants and Friends: A Biblical Theology of Leadership (ed. Skip Bell; Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 2014), 11–29. 31

10

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

re-opened for exploration within its intratextual framework—the book of Isaiah—and also within the intertextual framework of the entire Hebrew Bible. Table 1. Corporate and Individual Servant References in Isaiah 40–55

Passage in Isaiah 40–55

Servant Reference

41:8, 9

Corporate (singular)

42:19 (2x)

Individual (singular)

42:1

Individual (singular)

43:10

Corporate (singular)

44:21 (2x)

Corporate (singular)

44:1, 2 44:26 45:4

48:20

49:3, 5, 6, 7 50:10 52:13 53:11 54:17

Corporate (singular) Corporate (singular) Corporate (singular) Corporate (singular) Individual (singular) Individual (singular) Individual (singular) Individual (singular) Corporate (plural)

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The history of biblical interpretation shows that there is no consensus regarding the identity and role of the servant in Isa 42:1–9, which is crucial for understanding the theological message of this first ‘servant song’. The problem can be stated in the following question: What are the identity and role of the servant in Isa 42:1– 9? Some sub-questions designed to get at the main question include: What is the relationship between this servant poem and the

1. INTRODUCTION

11

other three servant poems? What is the theology of the first servant poem as it relates to the role and identity of the servant?

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

This study seeks to identify the servant and its role in Isaiah’s first servant poem (Isa 42:1–9) by conducting an exegetical, intratextual, and theological analysis of this literary unit in the context of the other servant passages in Isa 40–55.

HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION OF THE SERVANT OF THE LORD IN ISAIAH Jewish Interpretation of the Servant in Isaiah 42 The Jewish approach to the identity of the servant in Isaiah’s servant poems, especially Isa 42 and 53, has evolved from the time of the Targumim to the present day. Since Jewish interpreters and most Christian interpreters focus mainly on Isa 53, there is minimal historical interpretation of the servant in Isa 42. Differing interpretations of the first servant poem occur more in recent centuries. For this reason, although I will address several ancient interpretations, I will primarily overview modern interpretations of Isa 42. Servant Is the Messiah The first source that attributes the servant of Isa 42 as the Messiah is the Targum Jonathan to the Prophets, 35 which specifically refers to The Targum Jonathan is a reliable source, belonging to the earliest Bible translations. As pointed out by Pinkhos Churgin, this Targum’s ‘value may be said to rest in the fact that, forming a distinct and independent rendering of the text, it presents a helpful source in establishing the principles pursued in the early translations’. He further recognizes that Targum Jonathan’s ‘reading of the text must be [sic] far have exceeded that of the Greek and Syriac translators’. Pinkhos Churgin, Targum Jonathan to the Prophets (YOS 14; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1927), 9; David Baron, The Servant of Jehovah: The Sufferings of the Messiah and the Glory That Should Follow: An Exposition of Isaiah LIII (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1954), 11–15. 35

12

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

the servant as the Messiah. The second ancient source, the Syriac Peshiṭta, gives the impression of a messianic overtone in Isa 42. 36 A third source, Metsudat David, takes the ‘servant’ of Isa 42:1 as referring to a messianic servant because of the words ‘Behold My servant whom I support—and he is king Messiah’, 37 although he holds a contradicting view regarding the servant of Isa 53. 38 Radak also has a similar messianic view in his commentary on Isa 42:1, ‘Behold My servant … King Messiah’. 39 The same idea is supported by the Midrash Tehilim (Psalms), which identifies the ‘servant’ in Isa 52:13 and 42:1 to be the Messiah: In the decree of the prophets it is written ‘Behold My servant shall prosper, he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high’ (Isa 52:13), and it is also written ‘Behold My servant, whom I uphold; Mine elect, in whom My soul delighteth’ (Isa 42:1). In the decree of the writings it is written, ‘The Lord said unto my lord: Sit thou at My right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool’ (Ps 110:1). … And it is written, ‘The Lord said to me, you are my son’ (Ps 2:7). … R. Yudan said: ‘All

See George A. Kiraz and Joseph Bali, The Syriac Peshiṭta Bible with English Translation: Isaiah (ed. George A. Kiraz and Andreas Juckel; trans. Gillian Greenberg and Donald M. Walter; Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, 2012), 202–203; Levey, The Messiah, 61. Also, Gillian Greenberg, ‘Indications of the Faith of the Translator in the Peshitta to the “Servant Songs” of Deutero-Isaiah’, AramS 2, no. 2 (2004): 175–192. 37 A. J. Rosenberg, Isaiah: A New English Translation (trans. A. J. Rosenberg; 2 vols; New York: Judaica Press, 1982), 2:336. See also, Michael L. Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus (3 vols; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 3:43; Douglas Pyle, What the Rabbonim Say About Moshiach (N.p., 2008), 17. 38 See pp. 21–23 for more information regarding Ibn Ezra and David Kimhi. 39 Rosenberg, Isaiah: A New English Translation, 2:336. Also see Pyle, What the Rabbonim Say About Moshiach, 17. 36

1. INTRODUCTION

13

these goodly promises are in the decree of the King, the King of kings, who will fulfill them for the lord Messiah.’ 40

A messianic interpretation is further supported by Abravanel, who sees the Gentiles seeking the Messiah the son of David: ‘… Messiah the son of David … Isaiah … describes him as God’s “chosen one, in whom his soul delights” (42:1), and as the “rod of the stump” of Jesse, upon whom “the spirit of the Lord rests” (11:2), and to whom “the Gentiles will seek” (11:10).’ 41 Finally, Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, a modern scholar, perceives the servant of Isa 42 to be the Messiah. 42 Servant Is Israel Modern scholars often perceive the servant of Isa 42 as Israel. Such is the case with Solomon B. Freehof, who concludes that Isa 42 refers to Israel: ‘This Chapter [42] is devoted entirely to the thought hinted at in Chapter 41, Verse 6, “Israel, My servant”. Israel is God’s servant and is given His task to the nations.’ 43 A recent Jewish scholar, Shalom Paul, in his commentary equates the servant of Isa 42 to the Israelite nation, which is portrayed as God’s chosen one on whom God places his spirit. 44 S. Leyla Gürkan also perceives the ‘servant’ of Isa 42:1 as referring to Israel when she talks about how Israel has been ‘chosen’ by God. 45

William G. Braude, Midrash on the Psalms (YJS 13; ed. Leon Nemoy; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959), 40–41. Also see Pyle, What the Rabbonim Say About Moshiach, 15–16. 41 Isaac Abravanel, Perush al Neviim Ahronim (Tel Aviv: Alisha Press, 1955), 243. See also Pyle, What the Rabbonim Say About Moshiach, 40. 42 Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Messianic Christology: A Study of the Old Testament Prophecy Concerning the First Coming of the Messiah (Tustin, Calif.: Ariel Ministries, 1998), 45–46. 43 Freehof, Book of Isaiah, 218. 44 Paul, Isaiah 40–66: Translation and Commentary, 18, 184. 45 S. Leyla Gürkan, The Jews as a Chosen People: Tradition and Transformation (RJSS; New York: Routledge, 2009), 9–10. 40

14

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Jewish Interpretation of the Servant in Isaiah 53 Even the Jewish Encyclopedia does not comment on Isa 42 except in passing while discussing Isa 53. 46 Thus, exploring the early history of interpretation of Isa 53 may help to clarify, although not with certainty, how Isa 42 may have been perceived. 47 Although there are many conclusions about Isa 53, there are only two major schools of interpretation: those who believe that the servant is the Messiah and those who insist that the servant is Israel. This section will briefly describe these two schools and their adherents. It will not examine their methods of interpretation, since this is not the purpose of the present work. 48 ‘Servant of God’, Jewish Encyclopedia. Cited 18 December 2012. Online: http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13444-servant-of-god. 47 For one reason or another, Isa 42:1–9 has been left unexamined by major Jewish interpreters and the focus has been on Isa 53. Even in the Mishnah, I cannot find a legitimate explanation. Jacob Neusner says it best: ‘In the Mishnah, ca. A.D. 200, we look in vain for a doctrine of the Messiah. There “messiah” serves as a taxonomic indicator, e.g., distinguishing one type of priest or general from some other. … Although the figure of a Messiah does appear, when the framers of the Mishnah spoke of “the Messiah”, they meant a high priest designated and consecrated to office in a certain way, and not in some other way.’ Jacob Neusner, Judaism and Christianity in the Age of Constantine: History, Messiah, Israel, and the Initial Confrontation (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), 65. Also, Christopher R. North does not give any indication of ancient Jewish interpretation of Isa 42. Christopher R. North, The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah: An Historical and Critical Study (London: Oxford University Press, 1950). 48 Walther Zimmerli and Joachim Jeremias have already done excellent research on Jewish interpretation of the Servant of God from 300 BCE to 400 CE. See Joachim Jeremias, ‘παῖς θεοῦ’, TDNT 5:677–717; Walther Zimmerli and Joachim Jeremias, The Servant of God (SBT 20; Naperville, Ill.: A. R. Allenson, 1957), 35–78. See, also, for more information: Rav Asher Soloff, ‘The Fifty-Third Chapter of Isaiah According to the Jewish Commentators, to the Sixteenth Century’ (unpubl. diss., Drew University, 1967); Abba Hillel Silver, A History of Messianic Speculation in Israel: From the First Through the Seventeenth Centuries (Boston: Beacon, 46

1. INTRODUCTION

15

Servant Is the Messiah While there are different Aramaic targumim, 49 many of which would not consider Isa 42, Isa 53, and other servant poems as referring to the Messiah, Targum Jonathan to the Prophets 50 does specifically refer to the servant as the Messiah. 51 Yet Sydney Page suggests that Targum Jonathan may be unreliable: ‘There is no doubt that the Targumist viewed the fourth servant song as a description of the messiah, but he radically transformed the meaning of the original Hebrew.’ 52 1959); James H. Charlesworth, ed., The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992); Joseph Klausner, The Messianic Idea in Israel: From Its Beginning to the Completion of the Mishnah (New York: Macmillan, 1955). 49 For example, John Frederick Stenning, The Targum of Isaiah (ed. John Frederick Stenning; trans. John F. Stenning; Oxford: Clarendon, 1949). Targum is derived from the Akkadian targumanu, meaning ‘interpreter’. The Targum is interpretative because the author provides an interpretation of the texts rather than translating them literally. Pierre Grelot, What Are the Targums? Selected Texts (OTS 7; Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1992), 9. 50 See n. 35 in this chapter for more information. 51 See Levey, The Messiah, 59–67; Samuel R. Driver and Adolf Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters (trans. Samuel R. Driver and Adolf Neubauer; 2 vols; New York: Hermon Press, 1969), 2:5–6. See also Jostein Ådna, ‘The Servant of Isaiah 53 as Triumphant and Interceding Messiah: The Reception of Isaiah 52:13– 53:12 in the Targum of Isaiah with Special Attention to the Concept of the Messiah’, in The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources (ed. Bernd Janowski and Peter Stuhlmacher; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 189–190. See also Jean-Joseph Brierre-Narbonne, Exégèse targumique des prophéties messianiques (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1935); Jonathan Ben Uziel, The Chaldee Paraphrase on the Prophet Isaiah (trans. Christian William H. Pauli; London: London Society’s House, 1871). 52 Sydney H. T. Page, ‘The Suffering Servant Between the Testaments’, NTS 31, no. 4 (1985): 487. Jostein Ådna has also accepted a similar view to Page: ‘I believe that the word “Messiah” in Tg. Isa. 42:1 is a secondary addition because it is lacking in the most important textual witnesses. The same judgment is reached by Stenning, The Targum of Isaiah,

16

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Furthermore, Page assumes that the Targumist transferred ‘the suffering attributed to the servant in the Hebrew text to the Jewish nation (52. 14; 53. 3, 4, 8, 10)’. 53 The Syriac Peshiṭta gives the impression of a messianic overtone in Isa 53 as in Isa 42. 54 The Messiah as ‘servant’ also appears to be attested in 4 Ezra 7:28–29, which reads, ‘My Messiah shall be 140, 141 [J. F. Stenning, The Targum of Isaiah (1949; reprinted 1953)], and Chilton, The Isaiah Targum, 80, 81 [B. D. Chilton, The Isaiah Targum: Introduction, Translation, Apparatus and Notes, ArBib 11 (1987)]. By contrast, Jeremias, ‘παῖς θεοῦ’, TDNT 5:693 n. 292 [J. Jeremias, ‘παῖς θεοῦ, C. παῖς θεοῦ in Later Judaism in the Period after the LXX’, TDNT 5:677–700], argues for the reading including ‫יחא‬ ָ ‫מ ִשׁ‬. ְ Seidelin, ‘Der ‘Ebed Jahwe’, 196– 200 [P. Seidelin, ‘Der ‘Ebed Jahwe und die Messiasgestalt im Jesajatargum’, ZNW 35 (1936): 194–231], does not go into the text-critical problem and assumes the messianic interpretation of Tg. Isa. 42:1–7 as selfevident; so apparently does Koch, ‘Messias und Sündenvergebung’, 123 [K. Koch, ‘Messias und Sündenvergebung in Jesaja 53—Targum: Ein Beitrag zu der Praxis der aramäischen Bibelübersetzung’, JSJ 3 (1972): 117–148].’ Ådna, ‘The Servant of Isaiah 53 as Triumphant and Interceding Messiah’, 198 n. 28. Ådna further states: ‘For in most of the passages in Deutero-Isaiah containing the term ‫ﬠ ֶבד‬,ֶ which usually occurs in the form ‫“ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant”, the Targum applies it, as does the book of Isaiah itself, to the people of Israel. Within the so-called Servant Songs this is true of the second song, Isaiah 49:1ff.: see especially verses 3 and 6 in the Targum: “you are my servant, Israel” (Tg. = Heb.); “you are called my servants” (plural Tg.). The third song, Isaiah 50:4ff., also uses the term “servants” in the plural, but equates them with the prophets: “his servants the prophets” (Tg. Isa. 50:10). Whether the Targum of the first song, Isaiah 42:1ff., identifies the Servant with the Messiah, as the fourth song clearly does, is debated, since the term ‫יחא‬ ָ ‫ ְמ ִשׁ‬in Targum of Isaiah 42:1 (“my servant, the Messiah”) is not attested in all manuscripts. Therefore next to Targum of Isaiah 52:13, there is only one certain passage in the whole of the Targum of Isaiah equating the Servant with the Messiah, namely, Targum of Isaiah 43:10.’ Ibid., 198. 53 Page, ‘The Suffering Servant Between the Testaments’, 487. 54 See Kiraz and Bali, The Syriac Peshiṭta Bible with English Translation: Isaiah, 258–263; Levey, The Messiah, 61.

1. INTRODUCTION

17

revealed … after these years my son [or servant] the Messiah shall die.’ 55 Joachim Jeremias helpfully summarizes: The whole section is expounded Messianically because the Messianic interpretation of Is. 52:13–53:12 was now so firmly established that Tg. Is. could not avoid it. In abrupt contrast with the original, however, the passion sayings were replaced by the current view of the Messiah. The fact that this radical process of reinterpretation was carried through in respect of the Gk. text (691, 27 ff.) as well as the Aram, shows how firmly rooted the Messianic understanding was in Palestinian Judaism. 56

Jeremias also points out that, from the rabbis’ viewpoint, ‘only two of the servant passages in Dt. Is. were in fact expounded Messianically: 42:1 ff. and 52:13 ff’. 57 In reference to Isa 42:1–9, it is important to observe that in the early rabbinic literature, there is no occurrence of any interpretation of the servant other than the messianic. 58 Targum Jonathan is not alone in interpreting the servant in Isa 42 and Isa 53 as referring to the Messiah. The Midrash Ruth Rabbah 5:6 links the Messiah to Isa 53: The fifth interpretation [of Ruth 2:14] 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 suffer-

See, for more information, Michael E. Stone, Fourth Ezra: A Commentary on the Book of Fourth Ezra (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 202–217. 56 Jeremias, ‘παῖς θεοῦ’, TDNT 5:695. 57 Ibid. 58 Ibid. See Midr. Ps.2 §9 on 2:7 (Str.-B., 1,483); 43 § 1 on 43:3 (ibid., I, 87); Pesikt. r., 36 (ibid., II, 288); Jalqut Shim’oni, II, 88d, 104d (Dalman, I, 97, n. 1); Seder Gan ‘Eden (ed. A. Jellinek, Bet ha-Midvasch, III [1885], 133, 12). See also Tg. Is., ad loc., ⟶ 693, 1–5. Ibid., 695 n. 306. 55

18

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT” ings, as it is said, But he was wounded because of our transgressions. (Isa. LIII, 5). 59

Yepheth Ben ‘Ali, in the tenth century CE, also perceived Isa 53 as referring to the Messiah. He clearly states: As to myself, I am inclined, with Benjamin of Nehawend, to regard it as alluding to the Messiah, and as opening with a description of his condition in exile, from the time of his birth to his accession to the throne: for the prophet begins by speaking of his being seated in a position of great honour, and then goes back to relate all that will happen to him during the captivity. He thus gives us to understand two things: In the first instance, that the Messiah will only reach his highest degree of honour after long and severe trials; and secondly, that these trials will be sent upon him as a kind of sign, so that, if he finds himself under the yoke of misfortunes whilst remaining pure in his actions, he may know that he is the desired one. 60

Harry Freedman and Maurice Simon, Midrash Rabbah: Ruth (trans. L. Rabinowitz; London: Soncino, 1983), 64. Jean-Joseph BrierreNarbonne’s exegesis of the Midrash points out the messianic prophecies. The Pesikta Rabbati refers to the servant in Isa 42:1 as being the Messiah. The same can be found with Isa 52:13 in the Tanhuma. Jean-Joseph Brierre-Narbonne, Exégèse midrašique des prophéties messianiques (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1935), 112, 128; Jean-Joseph Brierre-Narbonne, Le Messie souffrant dans la littérature rabbinique (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1910). 60 Driver and Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters, 2:19–20. Furthermore, Yepheth Ben ‘Ali emphasizes, in another statement, what the Messiah was going to do for Israel; ‘By the words “surely he hath carried our sicknesses”, they mean that the pains and sickness which he fell into were merited by them, but that he bore them instead. … And here I think it necessary to pause for a few moments, in order to explain why God caused these sicknesses to attach themselves to the Messiah for the sake of Israel … The nation deserved from God greater punishment than that which actually came upon them, but not being strong enough to bear it … God appoints his servant to carry their sins, and by doing so lightens their punishment in order that Israel might not be completely exterminated.’ Ibid., 23–24. 59

1. INTRODUCTION

19

In the Midrash, 61 R. Shim’on Ben Yohai stated, about the servant poem of Isa 53: And Armilaus will join battle with Messiah, the son of Ephraim, in the East gate …; and Messiah, the son of Ephraim, will die there, and Israel will mourn for him. And afterwards the Holy One will reveal to them Messiah, the son of David, whom Israel will desire to stone, saying, Thou speakest falsely; already is the Messiah slain, and there is none other Messiah to stand up (after him): and so they will despise him, as it is written, ‘Despised and forlorn of men’; but he will turn and hide himself from them, according to the words, ‘Like one hiding his face from us’. 62

Many Jewish scholars in the early period interpreted the servant in Isa 53 as the Messiah. While the change of interpretation regarding the servant began with Rashi, many Jewish scholars in later periods disagreed with him, including Leqaḥ Tobh in the eleventh century, the medieval Zohar, 63 and R. Mosheh Ben Nahman 64 in the thirDate is unknown. Driver and Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters, 2:32. 63 ‘There is in the Garden of Eden a palace named the Palace of the Sons of Sickness. This palace the Messiah enters, and He summons every pain and every chastisement of Israel. All of these come and rest upon Him. And had He not thus lightened them upon Himself, there had been no man able to bear Israel’s chastisements for the transgressions of the law; as it is written, “Surely our sicknesses he has carried”.’ Ibid., 14–15; Rachmiel Frydland, What the Rabbis Know About the Messiah (ed. Elliot Klayman; Cincinnati: Messianic Publishing, 1993), 56 n. 27. 64 ‘The right view respecting this Parashah is to suppose that by the phrase “my servant” the whole of Israel is meant. … As a different opinion, however, is adopted by the Midrash, which refers it to the Messiah, it is necessary for us to explain it in conformity with the view there maintained. The prophet says, The Messiah, the son of David of whom the text speaks, will never be conquered or perish by the hands of his enemies. And, in fact the text teaches this clearly.’ Driver and Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters, 2:78. 61 62

20

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

teenth century, all insisting that the servant was the Messiah. 65 Sixteenth-century Rabbi Moshe Alshekh concurred with a messianic interpretation: ‘Our Rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of king Messiah.’ 66 Likewise, the famous eighteenth-century Jewish scholar and educator Herz Homberg stated, ‘[The servant] refers to the King Messiah’. 67 Although the Talmud expresses a variety of views on Isa 53, it clearly refers to Isa 53 and a suffering messianic servant. 68 Likewise, the Midrash Tanchuma interprets Isa 52:13 and 53:3 as referring to the Messiah, 69 as does Yalkut Shimoni (a thirteenth-century compilation of earlier midrashic writings) regarding 52:13 and 53:5. 70 Even though these scholars primarily discussed Isa 53, one may conclude that their interpretation could also be applied to the servant in Isa 42.

‘“And let his [Israel’s] kingdom be exalted”, in the days of the Messiah, of whom it is said, “Behold my servant shall prosper; he will be high and exalted, and lofty exceedingly.”’ Ibid., 2:36. 66 Ibid., 2:258. See Michael L. Brown, ‘Jewish Interpretations of Isaiah 53’, in The Gospel According to Isaiah 53: Encountering the Suffering Servant in Jewish and Christian Theology (ed. Darrell L. Bock and Mitch Glaser; Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2012), 63; Frydland, What the Rabbis Know About the Messiah, 53–54. 67 Driver and Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters, 2:400. 68 Sanhedrin 98a; see also Frydland, What the Rabbis Know About the Messiah, 54; Sanhedrin 98b; Brown, ‘Jewish Interpretations of Isaiah 53’, 62; Driver and Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters, 2:7. 69 Brown, ‘Jewish Interpretations of Isaiah 53’, 62–63; Driver and Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters, 2:11. 70 Brown, ‘Jewish Interpretations of Isaiah 53’, 63; Driver and Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters, 2:9–10. 65

1. INTRODUCTION

21

Servant Is Israel The first instance of an early biblical text that takes the servant of Isaiah to be other than the Messiah is found in the Septuagint of Isaiah, which suggests that Israel is the servant through the use of the words Jacob and Israel. 71 Later Rashi, in the eleventh century, also suggested that the servant was none other than Israel. 72 Michael Rydelnik observes that Rashi’s interpretive methodology would have influenced medieval Jewish commentators and eventually found its way into Christian commentaries. 73 He concludes that Rashi’s more historical approach ultimately affected the way Christians interpret messianic prophecy. 74 Shortly after Rashi, Ibn Ezra (1093–1168 CE) believed that the key to understanding Isa 53 lies in the preceding text of Isa 52:12, where the ‘you’ signifies Israel, and the following text of Isa 54:1, where ‘the barren one’ designates the congregation of Israel. 75 He further stated: ‘Similarly my servant means each individual belonging to Israel, and consequently God’s servant, who is in exile.’ 76 Yet Rachmiel Frydland remarks that Ibn Ezra disagreed with Rashi and

Alfred Rahlfs, Septuaginta (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979). For example, Isa 42:1; 52:13. 72 Driver and Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters, 2:37–39. See also Rashi, ‘The Complete Jewish Bible with Rashi Commentary’. Cited 29 March 2012. Online: http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/15973/showrashi/true/je wish/Chapter-42.htm; Baron, The Servant of Jehovah, 13. 73 Michael Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic? (NACSBT 9; Nashville: B & H, 2009), 113. See also Erwin Isak Jakob Rosenthal, ‘Medieval Jewish Exegesis: Its Character and Significance’, JSS 9, no. 2 (1964): 270–273. 74 Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic?, 113, 119–122, 123–128. 75 See Driver and Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters, 2:43. 76 Ibid. See also Soloff, ‘The Fifty-Third Chapter of Isaiah According to the Jewish Commentators, to the Sixteenth Century’, 171–178. 71

22

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

interpreted the passage as referring to Isaiah himself. 77 Nevertheless, if Frydland’s observation were to be borne out, it would be another change of interpretation away from a messianic one. After Ibn Ezra, David Kimhi (1160–1235 CE) also followed Rashi’s interpretation, professing: ‘This Parashah refers to the captivity of Israel, who are here called “my servant” as in xli. 8.’ 78 And Isaac Abravanel, a Spanish Jew toward the end of the fifteenth century, in his commentary on Isa 53, while rejecting the way Rashi and other earlier Jewish and Christian interpreters reached their conclusions, used a different approach 79 in identifying the servant, Frydland, What the Rabbis Know About the Messiah, 52. However, Lev Gillet states that ‘Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Qimhi, Abarbanel interpreted the prophecy as applying to Israel. Nahmanides allowed readers to choose freely between Israel or the Messiah. But the classical Jewish exegesis, in Targum and Talmud, interpreted Isaiah liii as referring to the Messiah himself.’ Lev Gillet, Communion in the Messiah: Studies in the Relationship Between Judaism and Christianity (London: Lutterworth, 1942), 94. Yet, Rabbi Ibn Ezra, in his commentary on Isaiah, does not accept the servant of Isa 42:1 as being Israel or Cyrus, but rather he professes the servant to be the prophet Isaiah himself. Abraham ben Meïr Ibn Ezra, The Commentary of Ibn Ezra on Isaiah (trans. Michael Friedländer; New York: P. Feldheim, 1960), 1:186. 78 Driver and Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters, 2:49. See also David Kimhi and Louis Finkelstein, The Commentary of David Kimhi on Isaiah (OS 19; New York: Columbia University Press, 1926), 355–363. 79 Abravanel uses four arguments against the Christian interpretation: (1) He finds the concept of Adam’s spiritual punishment unacceptable; (2) He believes that Adam did not inherit sin; (3) He states that Isa 53 does not describe incarnation and a person that sins needs to atone for his own sin; (4) He objects on textual grounds, lists terms that cannot apply to God or the body, and posits that these therefore must not refer to the Incarnation. Against the Jewish interpretation, he argues that the ‘absence of a single, consistent interpretation for all verses is the rule rather the exception’. For this reason, he contends that the servant does not apply to Messiah ben David or Messiah ben Joseph. For Abravanel, the interpretation can be indicated contextually and historically. See Soloff, ‘The Fifty77

1. INTRODUCTION

23

but came to the same conclusion as Rashi and others that Israel is indeed meant by the term servant. 80 In the sixteenth century, Rabbi Isaac ben Abraham of Troki (Pole Isaac Troki), in his book Sefer Hizzuk Emmunah on the interpretation of Isa 52:13–53:12, declared that this pericope does not pertain to the Messiah, but to the people of Israel during their time in exile. 81 Isaac considered the Israelites to be referenced not only by the servant terminology in the fourth servant poem but also in the book of Isaiah in general, 82 summarizing that ‘in all these passages Scripture designates the Israelitish nation as a servant, or as God’s servant, in the singular’. 83 Modern Jewish scholars generally have not challenged previous rabbis/scholars regarding the identity of the servant in Isaiah. Among them is Abraham Joshua Heschel, a twentieth-century rabbi, who, in addressing Isa 40:2 (‘She has received from the Lord’s hand double for all her sins’), concluded that ‘what Israel endured was not simply chastisement for her sins; her agony far exceeded her guilt’, 84 and that: ‘She [Israel] is the suffering servant of the

Third Chapter of Isaiah According to the Jewish Commentators, to the Sixteenth Century’, 1–23. 80 See ibid. 81 Stefan Schreiner, ‘Isaiah 53 in the Sefer Hizzuk Emunah (“Faith Strengthened”) of Rabbi Isaac ben Abraham of Troki’, in The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources (ed. Bernd Janowski and Peter Stuhlmacher; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 427. 82 For Isaac of Troki, ‘my servant’ is singular as frequently elsewhere in Isaiah (for example, Isa 41:8, 9; 44:1, 2, 21; 45:4; and as we find also to be the case in the prophecy of Jer 46:27, 28; and in Ps 136:22). Driver and Neubauer, The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters, 2:244. 83 Ibid. 84 Heschel, The Prophets, 1:149.

24

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Lord’. 85 The Jewish Study Bible likewise interprets the servant in Isa 42:1–9; 49:1–6; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12 as the nation of Israel. 86 The hermeneutical approach of these scholars was shaped by different ideas and an evolution of interpretation, 87 culminating in the Enlightenment era, 88 when modern scientific approaches were being developed. But Rashi’s method paved the way, 89 as Rydelnik summarizes: The central effect of Rashi and other medieval Jewish interpreters on post-Reformation Christian interpretation was a less messianic understanding of the Old Testament. Rashi and the other medieval Jewish interpreters, arguing from a historical understanding of peshat, advanced a nonmessianic understanding of a number of key messianic texts. Afterwards, Christian interpreters adopted their views as the true peshat of those passages as well, leading to a demessianized understanding of the Old Testament, as is evident even in contemporary Christian interpretation of the Hebrew Bible. 90

Ibid. See Philip Birnbaum, The Concise Jewish Bible (ed. Philip Birnbaum; trans. Philip Birnbaum; New York: Sanhedrin Press, 1976), 128. 86 See the study notes on these particular passages in Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler, eds., The Jewish Study Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004). 87 See Soloff, ‘The Fifty-Third Chapter of Isaiah According to the Jewish Commentators, to the Sixteenth Century’, 209–220. 88 See Donald A. Hagner, The Jewish Reclamation of Jesus: An Analysis and Critique of Modern Jewish Study of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Academie, 1984), 53–60. See also, on the development of the Jewish hermeneutic, Edward Breuer, ‘Jewish Study of the Bible Before and During the Jewish Enlightenment’, in Hebrew Bible / Old Testament: The History of Its Interpretation (ed. Magne Saebø; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008), 1008–1023. 89 See Erwin Isak Jakob Rosenthal, ‘Rashi and the English Bible’, BJRL 24, no. 1 (1940): 3–32; Baron, The Servant of Jehovah, 18. 90 Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic?, 122–123. Also, Israel Slotki, regarding the interpretation of the servant, 85

1. INTRODUCTION

25

This thought leads us to next examine Christian exegesis, both those scholars who interpret Isaiah’s servant as the Messiah and those who see the servant as Israel. Christian Interpretation of the Servant Servant Is the Messiah In recent years, few Christian scholars have interpreted the servant as the Messiah. There seem to be two reasons that have led recent scholars to interpret the servant to be other than the Messiah: the first is the influence of Rashi and his new hermeneutical approach. 91 Second, since the eighteenth century, the Enlightenment observes for Isa 42:1: ‘The Jewish commentators are divided between Israel, the King Messiah and the prophet himself.’ He further adds, for Isa 52:13–53:12: ‘The servant’s martyrdom and ultimate triumph. The servant is the ideal Israel or the faithful remnant. That he is not an individual is the opinion of all Jewish and most modern non-Jewish commentators. “Whatever causes may have tended to stimulate the advocacy of this form of interpretation (viz. the Christological), it is important for Christian exegetes to recognize that this path of Jewish exposition is in the main right, and that the path of Christian interpreters down to the time of Rosenmüller (i.e. 1820) has been in the main wrong” (Whitehouse) [O. C. Whitehouse (Christian Hebraist), Isaiah (Century Bible)].’ Israel W. Slotki, Isaiah, Hebrew Text & English Translation with an Introduction and Commentary (ed. A. Cohen; London: Soncino, 1949), 199, 260. 91 ‘Rashi lived in an era of religious disputations between Christians and Jews, which included both public debates and written pamphlets designed to convince Jewish people of the messiahship of Jesus based on messianic prophecy. Therefore, Rashi initiated the attempt to rebut Christian interpretation of messianic passages through the use of peshat. … Rashi’s use of peshat took on an additional nuance. In order to refute Christian claims, Rashi made a significant shift in the meaning of peshat: he equated the simple meaning of the text with the historical interpretation. This means that Rashi would often rebut the Christian claim that a given verse was messianic and referred to Jesus by countering that it referred “to a biblical historical person or event”. Hence, Rashi no longer understood the peshat as the plain sense of the text but the historical sense.

26

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

era and a scientific approach 92 to the Bible have also affected the interpretation of the servant throughout the Old Testament. 93 However, there are still some Christian scholars who interpret Isaiah’s servant as the Messiah. A short overview of these follows. The earliest Christian interpretation of the Servant is found in Mt 12:17–21, where Matthew quotes Isa 42:1–4 in reference to Jesus. Luke also refers to Isa 53 in Acts 8:27–32. Jesus Himself, on the road to Emmaus with two disciples, interprets the Scripture from Moses to all the prophets as concerning Himself (Lk 24:25– 27). 94 That the Bible authors and Jesus refer to the servant in Isa 42 Moreover, Rashi frequently argued for the historical sense of a passage even if this meant that “he had to depart from traditional exposition”.’ Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic?, 116. See also Erwin Isak Jakob Rosenthal, The Study of the Bible in Medieval Judaism (CHB 2; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969), 257–264. ‘Rashi had a secondary purpose in his methods, namely to give courage to Jewish people, who were seriously suffering during the Crusades. Rashi sought to bring encouragement by citing some traditional messianic passages and interpreting them as the future hope of the Jewish people. Thus, some of Rashi’s interpretations are quite messianic while others are historical. The deciding factor was whether a particular messianic passage could be understood to refer to the first coming of Jesus or to Jesus’ deity. If this was an issue, then Rashi would commonly interpret those texts as referring to a historical figure. However, if the passage fit the traditional Jewish conception of the Messiah or referred to what Christians perceived as the Second Coming, Rashi would maintain the messianic interpretation.’ Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic?, 117. 92 ‘Scientific approach’ here refers to an interpretive method that discounts revelation and is skeptical about the veracity of the Bible. In this approach, the events in Scripture cannot be accepted as absolute history but only as ‘history-like’. While a ‘scientific approach’ has strengths—such as doing exegesis—it is too often separated from the veracity of revelation. 93 For example, after B. Duhm, who isolated the four servant poems, these passages have been generally viewed as secondary within the overall context of Deutero-Isaiah. Helmer Ringgren, ‘‫’ﬠ ֶבד‬, ֶ TDOT 10:376–405. 94 James D. G. Dunn makes this accurate observation about Jesus: ‘It must be judged highly likely that Jesus anticipated suffering and rejec-

1. INTRODUCTION

27

and 53 as relating to Jesus indicates that a different method of interpretation must have been observed at those times or that there was a change of interpretation in subsequent centuries. Here, W. Zimmerli and J. Jeremias’s extensive research on the Servant of God trope in the Old Testament as well as both Jewish and Christian views on Deutero-Isaiah’s servant is helpful. Regarding the messianic exegesis on Isa 42:1; 43:10; 49:6; 52:13; and 53:11, they remark: ‘Messianic interpretations of certain Deut. Isa. servant passages can most probably be traced back to pre-Christian times.’ 95 For example, early second century CE Aquila, a student of Rabbi Akiba but not a Jewish descendant, in translating the Old Testament Hebrew into Greek to replace the LXX, 96 interpreted the servant of God in Isa 53:8 as being a judge; as in the Targum, 97 this pointed to a messianic understanding. 98 Theodotion, who followed Aquila in the second century, understood Isa 53 messianically. 99 Fourteen centuries later, Martin Luther, in his commentary on Isa 40–66 (1527–1530 CE), interpreted the servant poems as referring to Christ, even though he did not use the word Messiah. 100 tion for his message and himself—that is, that Jesus saw himself in the tradition of the suffering righteous.’ James D. G. Dunn, ‘Messianic Ideas and Their Influence on the Jesus of History’, in The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity (ed. James H. Charlesworth; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 379. See also Jacques B. Doukhan, On the Way to Emmaus: Five Major Messianic Prophecies Explained (Clarksville, Md.: Lederer, 2012). 95 Zimmerli and Jeremias, The Servant of God, 57. 96 Jeremias, ‘παῖς θεοῦ’, TDNT 5:689. 97 See Harald Hegermann, Jesaja 53 in Hexapla, Targum und Peschitta (BFCT 56; Gütersloh: C. Bertelsmann, 1954), 42, 112, 122–133. 98 Jeremias, ‘παῖς θεοῦ’, TDNT 5:690. 99 Ibid., 5:691. Theodotion did not translate the Old Testament to Greek but used the LXX and improved it by following the Hebrew text. See Hegermann, Jesaja 53, 53–66. Symmachus supports a messianic interpretation, as pointed out by Jeremias; see ‘παῖς θεοῦ’, TDNT 5:691 n. 287. 100 See Martin Luther, Lectures on Isaiah: Chapters 40–66 (ed. Hilton C. Oswald; trans. Herbert J. A. Bouman; St. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1972), 17:60–61, 172, 193, 215.

28

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

And in the nineteenth century, Alfred Edersheim dared to stand against the popular view that Isaiah’s servant referred to Israel, and professed instead that the servant was the Messiah. More particularly, he believed that Isa 53 was the pinnacle fulfillment of all previous prophecy regarding the Messiah. 101 In the last forty years, many scholars have interpreted the servant messianically. In the apparatus of The Isaiah Targum, Bruce D. Chilton agrees that the servant refers to the Messiah (see Isa 42:1; 52:13). 102 Gerard van Groningen lists more than six scholars over the last 200 years who interpreted Isa 53 as being in some way messianic, though some of those scholars approach the messianic nature of the servant differently. 103 Robert L. Thomas briefly outlines the four servant poems and suggests that, while the words ‘my Servant’ can apply variously to ten individuals and one corporate body, one individual is referred to as ‘my Servant’, and that is God’s Servant, the Messiah. 104 Regarding the four servant poems, he states: It is impossible to identify the Servant of the songs with corporate Israel for reasons already stated. His unique relationship to God poses the possibility of His equality with God (Isa.

Alfred Edersheim, Prophecy and History in Relation to the Messiah: The Warburton Lectures for 1880–1884 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1955), 106–107, 116–117. Also note that Edersheim compiled a list containing ‘the passages in the OT applied to the Messiah or to Messianic times in the most ancient Jewish writings. They amount in all to 456, thus distributed: 75 from the Pentateuch, 243 from the Prophets, and 138 from the Hagiographa, and supported by more than 558 separate quotations from Rabbinic writings.’ He also points out in this list that Isa 42:1 is applied in the Targum to the Messiah, as also in the Midrash on Ps 2:7. Isaiah 52:13 also has the same application, and he has provided many more ancient texts in Appendix 9. Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (2 vol.; New York: E. R. Herrick & Co., 1890), 2:710–741. 102 Chilton, The Isaiah Targum, 80. 103 See Gerard van Groningen, Messianic Revelation in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990), 643–650. 104 Robert L. Thomas, The Mission of Israel and of the Messiah in the Plan of God (MPBP 4; Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2002), 14. 101

1. INTRODUCTION

29

50:10), distinguishing Him from every other person who has ever lived. The only possible identification is the promised Messiah of Israel, who was in Isaiah’s time still to come. The life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth perfectly fit Isaiah’s portrayal of Phase 1 of that Servant’s mission. 105

In recent years, F. Duane Lindsey and J. Alec Motyer 106 have challenged the popular views of the twentieth century by suggesting that the servant poems all point to the Messiah. 107 For example, regarding the first servant poem, Lindsey states: ‘The anonymous Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 [can] be neither Israel nor Cyrus nor any person other than the royal Davidic Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ.’ 108 Concerning the servant of the Lord being the Messiah, ‘conceived as the Head of His people’, 109 Edward J. Young agrees: ‘That the servant points to the Messiah is seen in that his work is spiritual in nature, the redemption of his people from the guilt and power of their sins.’ 110 Though Herbert M. Wolf recognizes that the term ‘servant’ has different meanings, he insists that when referencing the servant of the Lord, the servant is an individual who is ‘the Davidic Messiah whom Isaiah previously alluded to’. 111 Finally, John Oswalt acknowledges that the servant of the Lord is sometimes left unidentified or, at times, hard to identify. 112 He believes that when the servant of the Lord is described, the reader should seriously consider that ‘the atmospheric change indicates that the terminology is being used in a different way in these places’. 113 Thus, Oswalt concludes that the four servant poems in Ibid., 21. J. Alec Motyer, ‘Messiah’, IBD 2:987–994; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 13–16. 107 See Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 139–145. 108 Ibid., 57. 109 Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 109 n. 1. 110 Ibid. 111 Herbert Wolf, Interpreting Isaiah: The Suffering and Glory of the Messiah (Grand Rapids: Academie, 1985), 190–191. 112 Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 108. 113 Ibid. 105 106

30

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Isaiah refer to an individual, ‘almost certainly the Messiah, who will be the ideal Israel’. 114 Servant Is Israel Christopher North, in The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah: An Historical and Critical Study, has carefully delineated the Christian interpretation of the servant poems of Isaiah from the New Testament period to 1955 CE. 115 Thus, this section will only briefly outline the major interpretations, beginning with the LXX. The LXX, a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, may have been the earliest pre-Christian text that influenced the interpretation of the Servant of God in Isaiah. The LXX translated Isa 42:1 by including the words ‘Jacob’ and ‘Israel’, giving the impression that the Servant was Jacob or Israel (Israel being just another name for Jacob). Zimmerli points out that the LXX is an important text, since ‘it shows quite unmistakably in what direction the passage was interpreted, and is thus an early witness to the collective understanding’. 116 This is also the case with Isa 49:1–6. However, it is not the case with Isa 52:13–53:12 in the LXX, where the Servant may be taken to be an individual. 117 In the third century, Origen records a discussion with a rabbi who interpreted Isa 53 as referring to the Jewish nation. 118 However, this does not appear to be the position of Origen himself. Ibid. See North, The Suffering Servant, 23–116. 116 Walther Zimmerli, ‘παῖς θεοῦ’, TDNT 5:654–677. 117 See ibid., although Karl F. Euler has argued that the individual martyr is portrayed to be the prophet Isaiah himself. Karl Friedrich Euler, Die Verkündigung vom Leidenden Gottesknecht aus Jes 53 in der Griechischen Bibel (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1934), 85–91; North, The Suffering Servant, 8. 118 Baron, The Servant of Jehovah, 18. About Isa 53, Origen states: ‘I remember that once in a discussion with some whom the Jews regard as learned [Rabbi] I used these prophecies. At this the Jew said that these prophecies referred to the whole people as though of a single individual, since they were scattered in the dispersion and smitten, that as a result of the scattering of the Jews among the other nations many might become proselytes. In this way he explained the text: “Thy form shall be inglorious 114 115

1. INTRODUCTION

31

Subsequently, Rashi’s influential eleventh-century hermeneutical and interpretative shift to the servant as Israel influenced not only Jewish interpreters but also Christian interpretation, ‘first, Roman Catholic, and then Protestant’. 119 The first Catholic who accepted Rashi’s method of interpretation was Hugo of St. Victor (d. 1141 CE), followed by one of his disciples, Andrew of St. Victor (d. 1175 CE), 120 who reiterated the same meaning of the servant historically as being the collective Israel rather than the messianic Suffering Servant. 121 Catholic Nicholas de Lyra (1270–1349 CE) in turn declared his own reliance on Rashi: ‘In like manner, I intend, for making clear the literal sense, to introduce not only the statements of the catholic doctors, but also of the Hebrews, especially of Rabbi Salomon [Rashi], who among the Hebrew doctors has spoken most reasonably.’ 122 This would suggest that de Lyra would have used the same objective as Rashi’s interpretation of the peshat; 123 however, when it came to messianic passages, de Lyra followed Jewish interpretations from before the time of Rashi and he would prove that the messianic passages were indeed messianic prophecies. 124 That John Sailhamer points out that ‘Christian heamong men”; and “those to whom he was not proclaimed shall see him”; and “being a man in calamity”. I then adduced many arguments in the disputation which proved that there is no good reason for referring these prophecies about one individual to the whole people.’ Origen, Origen: Contra Celsum (ed. Henry Chadwick; trans. Henry Chadwick; Cambridge: University Press, 1965), 50. 119 Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic?, 119. 120 See Herman Hailperin, Rashi and the Christian Scholars (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh, 1963), 105–111. 121 Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic?, 120; Beryl Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages (Oxford: Blackwell, 1952), 164–165. 122 Eugene H. Merrill, ‘Rashi, Nicholas de Lyra, and Christian Exegesis’, WTJ 38, no. 1 (1975): 71. 123 See n. 79 above. 124 Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic?, 120–121. Of de Lyra, Eugene Merrill suggests: ‘It is small wonder then

32

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

braists were also responsible for the adoption of the medieval Jewish concept of peshat in their interpretation of the narrative texts of Scripture’ 125 even before the time of the Reformation, 126 again indicates what an impact Rashi, and Jewish interpretation from the eleventh century on, had on Protestantism: The aim of Jewish commentary in the development of the peshat was primarily polemical. Specifically, it was directed against the Christians’ messianic claim that the Hebrew Scriptures pointed to Jesus. Thus a bewilderingly ironic shift with enormous consequences was introduced into the Christian interpretation of the OT. The polemical, anti-messianic, ‘simple’ meaning of the Hebrew text, was identified by the Christian hebraists as the ‘literal sense’ (sensus literalis), that is, ‘historical sense’ of the Hebrew Scriptures. From the start, Protestant theologians thus found themselves in a quandary. 127

Thus, Calvin, for example, followed the same hermeneutical approach as medieval Jewish commentaries, which depended on Rashi’s hermeneutical approach that had impacted the Jewish peshat interpretation. 128 Calvin’s dependence on the medieval Jewish that de Lyra came to be known as “Rashi’s ape”, a not altogether flattering epithet, but it is important that we understand, with Hailperin, that this aping of Rashi was not merely a transcribing of the rabbi but was the paying of a scholar's deference to a long tradition of Jewish exegesis summed up and most ably represented by Rashi.’ Merrill, ‘Rashi, Nicholas de Lyra, and Christian Exegesis’, 71–72. 125 John Sailhamer, Introduction to Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 140. 126 Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, 102–103; Sailhamer, Introduction to Old Testament Theology, 140. 127 Sailhamer, Introduction to Old Testament Theology, 140–141. See also Baron, The Servant of Jehovah, 10–11. 128 See Sailhamer, Introduction to Old Testament Theology, 141. David Baron also states: ‘Modern Rabbis, in spite of the definite statement in the chapter itself, that it was “for the transgressions of My people” (Israel) that the righteous servant was stricken, put verses 1–9 into the mouth of the Gentile nations, and make them say that “he (i.e. Israel) suffered the

1. INTRODUCTION

33

commentaries made him hesitant to accept or see Christ in the Old Testament texts (for example, Gen 3:15). 129 However, that Calvin did not fully depend on the peshat alone 130 is apparent in how Calvin sees the servant in Isa 42:1 as referring to Christ. 131 Most modern scholars have continued in the interpretive footsteps of previous scholars by interpreting all of the servant poems as referring to Jacob/Israel. 132 Rainer Albertz, a contemporary scholar, makes this statement: ‘The Servant of the Servant Songs is not a single figure, certainly not a single individual, but Israel under various guises (golah, Zion, prophetic group), seen from the common perspective of their function—different in different situations—in God’s plan of salvation.’ 133 In a similar vein and buttressed by a footnote referencing Isa 42:1, Michel Remaud, in Israel, sickness and sufferings which we Gentiles deserved”; but this is only part of the self-deception which characterizes the modern teachers and leaders of the Synagogue, and which has led them to perversive views of their own Scriptures and facts of history.’ Baron, The Servant of Jehovah, 39. 129 Sailhamer, Introduction to Old Testament Theology, 141. 130 Ibid. 131 John Calvin, Isaiah (Calvin’s Commentaries 15; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948), 283. See also Walter C. Kaiser Jr., The Messiah in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 174. 132 For example: Laurence E. Brown, The Messianic Hope in Its Historical Setting (London: SPCK, 1951), 29–36; John Goldingay, God’s Prophet, God’s Servant: A Study in Jeremiah and Isaiah 40–55 (Exeter: Paternoster, 1984). 133 Rainer Albertz, Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. (ed. Dennis T. Olson and Sharon H. Ringe; trans. David Green; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003), 407–408. Other modern scholars have accepted the servant to be Israel, including Roger Brooks (‘A Christological Suffering Servant? The Jewish Retreat into Historical Criticism’, in Hebrew Bible or Old Testament? Studying the Bible in Judaism and Christianity [ed. Charles S. J. Kannengiesser; vol. 5 of Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity, ed. Roger Brooks and John J. Collins; Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1990], 209– 210) and Emanuel G. Singgih (‘The Character of the Servant’s Mission in Isaiah 42’, AsJT 14, no. 1 [2000]: 3–19).

34

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Servant of God, points out that ‘the Jewish people is the Servant of the Lord by divine choice and nowhere in the Scripture do we read that it has lost this identity’. 134 Recent critical scholarship has interpreted Isa 40–55 as referring to Israel in exile and dated it to the period of 586–522 BCE. By dating this section of Isaiah so late, these scholars identify the servant more specifically as the exiled Israel. 135 Furthermore, these critical hermeneutical approaches personify Israel as Zion, yet still refer to the exiled Israel. 136 Following the footsteps of early scholars who designated the servant as Israel (personification), this view now further identifies the servant as Israel in exile (time period). Shalom M. Paul’s variation sees the servant of Isa 53 as being a faithful group within Israel. 137 Other Views of the Servant in Isaiah The following authors held other views on the identity of the servant of the Lord in Isa 40–55: 138 Rabbi Saadia ben Joseph (892–942 BCE) believed the servant of Isa 53 referred to the prophets or to Jeremiah. 139 A. van Hoonacker professed the servant to be Jehoiachin, 140 R. Kraetzschmar believed it was Ezekiel, 141 E. Sellin idenMichel Remaud, Israel, Servant of God (trans. Margaret Ginzburg and Nicole Francois; London: T&T Clark, 2003), 59. 135 Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer, ‘Lamentations in Isaiah 40–55’, in Great Is Thy Faithfulness? Reading Lamentations as Sacred Scripture (ed. Robin A. Parry and Heath A. Thomas; Eugene, Oreg.: Pickwick, 2011), 56. See also Albertz, Israel in Exile, 380. 136 Jill Middlemas, ‘Did Second Isaiah Write Lamentations III?’, VT 56, no. 4 (2006): 522–524. 137 Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 398. 138 For more details, see lists compiled by both scholars: North, The Suffering Servant, 20–22, 39–42; Rowley, The Servant of the Lord, 3–32. 139 Sarachek, The Doctrine of the Messiah, 37. 140 Albin van Hoonacker, The Servant of the Lord in Isaiah XL ff (Expositor 11; ed. W. Robertson Nicoll; London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1916), 11:210. 141 Richard Kraetzschmar, Das Buch Ezechiel, übersetzt und erklärt (HKAT 3; Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1900), 46. 134

1. INTRODUCTION

35

tified Zerubbabel, 142 W. von Erbt suggested Jehoiakim, 143 whereas A. Bertholet implicated the Maccabaean hero Eleazar. 144 K. F. Bahrdt and J. Konynenburg interpreted the servant as being Ezekiel, 145 C. F. Stäudlin advanced Isaiah as servant, 146 G. L. Bauer followed Stäudlin, but for Isa 42 suggested Cyrus, 147 and J. C. W. Augusti professed Uzziah. 148 Other scholars hold further diverging views of the servant. 149 In summary, this brief historical overview of Jewish and Christian interpretation reveals the challenge of identifying Isaiah’s Sellin, Serubbabel, 148–182. Wilhelm von Erbt, ‘Die Chronologie des ersten nachexilischen Jahrhunderts’, OLZ 21, no. 2 (1918): 35. 144 Alfred Bertholet, Zu Jesaja 53: ein Erklärungsversuch (Frieburg i. B.: J. C. B. Mohr, 1899), 23–32. 145 Karl F. Bahrdt, Die Kleine Bibel, Erster Band; Geschichte von Erschaffung der Welt bis auf die Zerstörung Jerusalems durch die Römer (Berlin: n.p., 1780); Heinrich Corrodi, Freymüthige Versuche über verschiedene in Theologie und biblische Kritik einschlagende Materien (Berlin: Bey Friedrich Nicolai, 1783), 99–144. 146 C. F. Stäudlin, Neue Beiträge zur Erläuterung der biblischen Propheten (Göttingen: 1791). 147 G. L. Bauer, Scholia in Vetus Testamentum. 9 Posteriorem Iesaiae Partem Complectens (Norimbergae: Grattenauer, 1795), 204, 327. 148 Johann C. W. Augusti, Apologien und Parallelen theologischen Inhalts (Gera; Leipzig: Illgen, 1800), 1–40; Johann C. W. Augusti, Ueber den König Usia, nebst einer Erläuterung Jesaia 53 (Ueber den König Usia 3; Helmstädt: C. G. Fleckeisen, 1795), 282–299. 149 Other views on the servant vary widely, from being the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, or Ezekiel, to Moses, Zerubbabel, Cyrus, or a myth. See Rowley, The Servant of the Lord, 12–19; Katharine J. Dell, ‘The Suffering Servant of Deutero-Isaiah: Jeremiah Revisited’, in Genesis, Isaiah and Psalms: A Festschrift to Honour Professor John Emerton for His Eightieth Birthday (ed. Katharine J. Dell et al.; VTSup 135, ed. H. M. Barstad et al.; Leiden: Brill, 2010), 119–134. See Gillet for a short list; Gillet, Communion in the Messiah, 94; North, The Suffering Servant, 2; Herbert Haag, Der Gottesknecht bei Deuterojesaja (EdF 233; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1985), 15–24; William Horbury, Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ (London: SCM Press, 1998), 36–46. 142 143

36

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

servant. Even the servant in Isa 53 has been widely interpreted and debated throughout the centuries. Thus, one can sense the challenge of pinpointing the servant of Isa 42, which is much harder to identify.

JUSTIFICATION FOR THE STUDY

As demonstrated in this overview of the history of interpretation, a variety of scholars have contributed valuable theological insights regarding the servant poems and their biblical meaning. Yet the overview also shows the ongoing tension and lack of consensus regarding the identity and role of the servant in Isa 40–55. Given that there has been no comprehensive exegetical-intratextual study focused upon the first servant poem in the context of other servant passages in the second half of Isaiah in its final form, this work examines more fully the first servant poem in light of possible alternation between the corporate and the individual servant in the servant poems, and examines the intratextual linkages between the first servant poem and the other servant poems.

DELIMITATIONS

This study will focus on Isa 42:1–9 in the extant form of the Masoretic Text (MT), the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), the Septuagint (LXX), and the Targumim. It will not engage in theoretical historical reconstructions of the book of Isaiah. Detailed but not exhaustive exegesis of the other servant texts in Isa 40–55—limited to those in which the phrase ‘ebed YHWH is found—will be undertaken in order to assess the servant theology in each text. The research will examine the role of the servant and his identity with limited reference to the rest of Isaiah. Aspects unrelated to the purpose of the study will not be pursued.

METHODOLOGY

This study combines biblical exegesis and theology. The biblical exegesis follows widely accepted procedures involving wholistic

1. INTRODUCTION

37

analysis 150 of a given biblical passage in its canonical form, including examination of its delimitations, historical context, genre, literary structure, grammar, syntax, and lexicography. From this analysis, the meaning of the passage and its theology will emerge. 151 The exegetical and theological method outlined by both Walter Kaiser, Jr., and Gerhard Hasel 152 will be applied to the study of the first servant poem. Chapter 1 is the introduction, including the background of the problem, and a short history of interpretation of the Jewish and Christian exegetical concepts of the servant in Isaiah. A full exegetical investigation of Isa 42:1–9 within the literary context of Isa 40– 55 will be presented in chapter 2. Chapter 3 will deal with the intratextual component of the first servant poem in correlation with the other servant poems. In chapter 4, a theology of the first servant poem will be explored, both in the light of the other servant poems and in the context of Isaiah as a whole. Chapter 5 will present the summary and conclusions of the research, application, and implications for further intertextual study in the Hebrew Bible. For more information on wholistic analysis, see Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 1–20 (AB 22; New York: Doubleday, 1983), 18–27. 151 See, for more information, Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Exegesis for Preaching and Teaching (8th ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989); Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2006); Joseph Bonsirven, Exégèse rabbinique et exégèse Paulinienne (Paris: Beauchesne et ses Fils, 1938), 5–10; Jacques Doukhan, On the Way to Emmaus (Clarksville, Md.: Lederer, 2012); Michael Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), 10– 14, 287–288. For an outline of this methodology, see Douglas K. Stuart, ‘Exegesis’, ABD 2:682–689. For more information on ‘Exegesis and the Original Text’, see Douglas K. Stuart, Old Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors (3d ed.; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 33–66. 152 Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Toward an Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991), 1–69; Gerhard Hasel, Old Testament Theology: Basic Issues in the Current Debate (4th ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 198–208. 150

38

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

THE NATURE OF BIBLICAL TYPOLOGY WITHIN CLASSICAL PROPHECY

A definition and description of ‘typology’ in the OT is essential to eliminate any confusion in interpreting the first servant poem. Typology can be misused, particularly if this method is used with the inappropriate genre in relation to prophecies. Thus, it is essential to differentiate between classical prophecies and apocalyptic prophecies. Classical and apocalyptic prophecies 153 each have a different typological hermeneutic for interpretation. Classical prophecy is In classical prophecy, the prophet sees historically what is happening during the time of the prophet, and in the far future, without any intervening historical events. In apocalyptic prophecy, the prophet also sees historically from his time to the time of the end; however, the prophet outlines the events at every step of this historical line from his day to the time of the end, with no gap between the time of the prophet and the time of the end. Thus, apocalyptic prophecy has specific events that occur in sequence in history. Therefore, there is no room in apocalyptic prophecy for multiple fulfillments or the ‘apotelesmatic principle’. See William H. Shea, Daniel: A Reader’s Guide (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press, 2005), 11–12, 19; Kenneth A. Strand, ‘Foundation Principle of Interpretation’, in Symposium on Revelation—Book I (ed. Frank B. Holbrook; vol. 6 of Daniel and Revelation Committee Series, ed. Frank B. Holbrook; Silver Spring, Md.: Biblical Research Institute, 1992), 11–19. As John Collins defines, apocalyptic is ‘a genre of revelatory literature with a narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial insofar as it involves another, supernatural world’. This definition, according to Collins, applies to various books such as 1 Enoch, Daniel, 4 Ezra, and 2 Baruch, but he does not apply his definition to the socalled classical prophets such as Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. Why not? It is because his definition applies to the apocalyptic genre and not to the classical genre. In classical prophecy, the revelation to the prophet is rarely introduced by an angel, whereas in apocalyptic prophecy, the message is presented by an angel. Classical prophecy is not given as a vision, while apocalyptic prophecy involves visions. Classical prophecy is temporal, 153

1. INTRODUCTION

39

based on predictive prophecy found in such OT books as Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. The visions of Daniel belong to the genre of apocalyptic prophecy. Richard M. Davidson outlines the differences between classical and apocalyptic prophecy in table 2. In identifying which OT persons, events, or institutions are typological, the OT classical prophecy may pinpoint one entity who is a type and then describe the work of a later OT entity in similar language as of the original typological figure, thus indicating that the later OT figure is likewise a type of the coming Messiah. G. K. Beale describes it this way: ‘A later OT author may style some historical character being narrated about according to the pattern of an earlier OT character in order to indicate that the earlier histori-

while apocalyptic prophecy involves both a temporal and a spatial dimension. The list goes on, as demonstrated in table 2 comparing classical prophecy and apocalyptic prophecy. John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature (2d ed.; BRS; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 5–7, 11–12. See also Adela Y. Collins, ‘Introduction: Early Christian Apocalypticism’, in Early Christian Apocalypticism: Genre and Social Setting (ed. Adele Y. Collins; vol. 36 of Semeia: An Experimental Journal for Biblical Criticism, ed. Adela Y. Collins; Decatur, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1986), 7; John J. Collins, ‘Apocalypses and Apocalypticism’, ABD 1:282–288; John J. Collins, ‘Introduction: Towards the Morphology of a Genre’, in Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre (ed. John J. Collins; vol. 14 of Semeia: An Experimental Journal for Biblical Criticism, ed. John J. Collins; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1979a), 9, 12–13; Roy Gane, ‘Genre Awareness and Interpretation of the Book of Daniel’, in To Understand the Scriptures: Essays in Honor of William H. Shea (ed. David Merling; Berrien Springs, Mich.: Institute of Archaeology, Siegfried H. Horn Archaeological Museum, Andrews University, 1997), 137–148; Bradley C. Gregory, ‘Wisdom and Apocalyptic’, DOTWPW 847–853; Paul D. Hanson, ‘Apocalypses and Apocalypticism’, ABD 1:279–280; George E. Ladd, ‘Apocalyptic Literature’, ISBE 1:161–178; Christopher Rowland, ‘Apocalypticism’, NIDB 1:190–195. Some scholars having a different view, but worth looking at, include Paul D. Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic: The Historical and Sociological Roots of Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology (rev. ed.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 8–12; Leon Morris, Apocalyptic (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 9–12.

40

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

cal person is a typological pointer to the latter person in focus.’ 154 He continues by elaborating on typology: Typology involves OT prophets who issued prophecies that were to be fulfilled in the short term, at least at some point within the OT epoch itself. When the prophecy is fulfilled, it is clear that the full contours of the prophecy have not been consummately fulfilled. Then the partial historical fulfillment itself becomes a foreshadowing of or points to a later complete fulfillment in the latter days. 155

This method is used in OT classical prophecy in order for its authors to reveal which persons, events, or institutions that God has specifically designed to correspond to the predictive prefiguration. 156 This hermeneutical method is found in numerous places in the OT; for example, Ex 12:46; Num 9:12; and Ps 34:20 appear to be used by Jn 19:36. However, the author of Ps 34:20 (where David is the focus) appears to also make use of Ex 12:46 and Num 9:12, which refer to God’s deliverance of the righteous from their

Gregory K. Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament: Exegesis and Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012), 16. See also Darrell L. Bock, ‘Scripture Citing Scripture: Use of the Old Testament in the New’, in Interpreting the New Testament Text: Introduction to the Art and Science of Exegesis (ed. Darrell L. Bock and Buist M. Fanning; Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2006), 272–274; Leonhard Goppelt, Typos: The Typological Interpretation of the Old Testament in the New (trans. D. H. Madvig; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 42–58; Geoffrey William H. Lampe and Kenneth J. Woollcombe, Essays on Typology (SBT 22; Napierville, Ill.: A. R. Allenson, 1957), 1–75. 155 Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 16. See also n. 153 of this chapter for more information on the aspect of typology as opposed to the ‘apotelesmatic principle’. 156 See Richard M. Davidson, ‘The Eschatological Hermeneutic of Biblical Typology’, ThR 6.2, no. 2 (2011): 5–48; Richard M. Davidson, ‘Typological Structures in the Old and New Testaments’ (unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 1981), 405–406. 154

1. INTRODUCTION

41

afflictions. 157 John, in Jn 19:36, could have had Ps 34:20 in mind, in which case the reference would be attributed to David, or John could have referred to Exodus and Numbers, which discusses the Passover lamb. Thus, Ps 34:20 attributes the Passover lamb to David, which in turn in Jn 19:36 is attributed to Jesus. The only way to make sense of this is to apply the typological hermeneutical method to these passages. Table 2. Two Genres of Predictive Prophecy in the Old Testament General (Classical) Prophecy

(Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Minor Prophets) 1. 2.

3.

Primary focus: local/national, contemporary Eschatology— within history (national, geopolitical, ethnic) Some contrasts

Apocalyptic Prophecy (Daniel and Revelation)

1.

Primary focus: universal, sweep of history, with emphasis on end time

2.

Eschatology—outside of history (final, universal)

3.

Striking contrasts (dualism) • • •

temporal (this age/age to come) spatial (earthly/heavenly) ethical (righteous/wicked)

It is not that Ex 12:46 and Num 9:12 predicted David, but Ps 34:20 uses Exodus and Numbers to demonstrate that although David is afflicted, God delivers him. The reference to ‘his bones’ are not ‘broken’ harkens back to Exodus and Numbers. In this Psalm, David is a shadow of the antitypical Jesus. David did not fulfill all the characteristics given in Exodus and Numbers (this is the reason why he is a shadow) but Jesus did. David could not bear people’s sin nor be a sacrifice, but Jesus did and was a sacrifice. 157

42

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT” 4. 5. 6.

7.

Limited symbolism with true-to-life imagery

4.

Profuse, composite symbolism

Basis: ‘word of Lord’ (plus some visions)

5.

Basis: visions/dreams, angel interpreter

Conditionality (two possible scenarios are delineated to the prophet’s own generation, the way of blessing or curse, dependent on the covenant response of the people), although an ultimate fulfillment of the covenant promises to God’s people is certain

6.

Determinism (the actual course of human events, as shaped by the divine hands in history and recognized by divine foreknowledge of human choices, is set forth, and sealed up, to be revealed to the end-time generation), with an ultimate positive outcome for God’s people

Three aspects of eschatological fulfillment:

7.

Only one aspect of fulfillment for each detail of visions:

• • •

Inaugurated (First Advent) Appropriated (time of church) Consummated (Second Advent and beyond)

Visions give full sweep of history to end of time, with no room for reapplication to different stages of eschatological fulfillment

Source: Richard M. Davidson, ‘Biblical Principles for Interpreting Old Testament Classical Prophecy’, in Prophetic Principles: Crucial Exegetical, Theological, Historical and Practical Insights (ed. Ron du Preez; Berrien Springs, Mich.: LithoTech, 2007), 8.

1. INTRODUCTION

43

One more example presses this point home. Richard M. Davidson has clearly demonstrated that Moses is eschatologically a representation of Jesus as a prophet (Deut 34:5–12; also Acts 3:22; 7:37) as echoed in Deut 18:15–16. 158 However, the words of Deut 18 also suggest a typological usage both in the person of Joshua and the future eschatological person, Jesus. Deuteronomy 34:9 reveals that a prophet like Moses—Joshua—was going to be raised as a successor to Moses, yet Joshua was not the eschatological prophet (Deut 34:10). However, Davidson points out: At the same time, by juxtapositioning the last eight verses of the Torah just before the book of Joshua, and in harmony with the repetition of numerous descriptions of Joshua in the book of Joshua that are fashioned after those of Moses, it becomes apparent that the final editor of the canon (perhaps Ezra) considered Joshua to be a prefiguration along the way to the messianic New Moses that was to arise. 159

The implication from these texts is that Joshua partially fulfilled the prediction, but yet the complete antitypical fulfillment remains in the future in the person of the Messiah—Jesus. 160 The OT reveals Moses and Joshua (see Heb 4:8–9) as typological representations of the coming Messiah. Thus, the typological principle reveals both a partial fulfillment and a complete fulfillment of persons, events, or institutions. 161 See Richard M. Davidson, ‘The Eschatological Literary Structure of the Old Testament’, in Creation, Life, and Hope: Essays in Honor of Jacques B. Doukhan (ed. Jiří Moskala; Berrien Springs, Mich.: Old Testament Department, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University, 2000), 361–362; Richard M. Davidson, In the Footsteps of Joshua (Hagerstown, Md.: Review & Herald, 1995), 26. 159 Davidson, ‘The Eschatological Literary Structure of the Old Testament’, 361–362. 160 See Davidson, In the Footsteps of Joshua, 30. 161 Many more examples could be given, including the ‘seed’ where Adam fails (Gen 3:15), reiterated to Noah (Gen 9:1, 6–7) and Abraham (Gen 12:2–3; 17:2, 6; 22:17–18). Isaiah 7:14; 8:3–5; 9:1–6; and 11:1–6 also reveal a typological concept. 158

CHAPTER 2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 INTRODUCTION

In this chapter, the literary context of the individual and corporate servant in Isaiah will be examined, then a literary structure of the first servant poem will be explored. Finally, there will be a full exegetical examination of the first servant poem of Isa 42:1–9. 1

THE SERVANT IN ISAIAH 40–55 Literary Structure of Isaiah 40–55 Scholars have perceived the larger context of Isaiah in various ways. 2 For example, Richard Davidson suggests that the structure of Isaiah is balanced in a chiastic structure, with the peak of the chiasm occurring in chs 36–39, consisting of prose and referred to as the ‘nature of trust’. In this model, Isa 42 would be considered as part of the ‘volume of comfort’, opposed by the ‘volume of woes’ in chs 28–35. 3 Craig Evans, on the other hand, sees Isaiah as The exegetical investigation of the Isaiah passages will be taken in the context of Isaiah’s final form. 2 For more information, see Ronald E. Clements, ‘Beyond TraditionHistory: Deutero-Isaianic Development of First Isaiah's Themes’, JSOT 31 (Fall 1985): 95–113. 3 Richard M. Davidson, ‘The Messianic Hope in Isaiah 7:14 and the Volume of Immanuel (Isaiah 7–12)’, in ‘For You Have Strengthened Me’: Biblical and Theological Studies in Honor of Gerhard Pfandl in Celebration of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday (ed. Martin Pröbstle; St. Peter am Hart: Seminar Schloss Bogenhofen, 2007), 85–96. 1

45

46

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

having a parallel structure, with Isa 42 being located within the section of chs 41–45 called ‘agents of deliverance and judgment’ and its opposing chs 9–12 referred to as ‘agents of divine blessing and judgment’. 4 William J. Dumbrell delineates the structure of Isaiah, as most other scholars do, by dividing the book of Isaiah in two parts: chs 1–39 and chs 40–66, 5 and believes that the second part of Isaiah was written at a later time. His theological approach to the structure of Isaiah provides important details: ‘We thus have the following arrangement of the overall structure of the entire prophecy’: Isaiah

1–12 History and Eschatology 13–23 History

24–27 Eschatology 28–33 History

34–35 Eschatology 36–39 History

40–55 Eschatology

56–66 History and Eschatology 6

Dumbrell and Childs 7 perceive Isa 40–55 as eschatology; however, the result and timing of their eschatology raises questions. They See Craig A. Evans, ‘On the Unity and Parallel Structure of Isaiah’, VT 38 (1988): 129–147. 5 William J. Dumbrell, ‘The Purpose of the Book of Isaiah’, TynBul 36 (1985): 113, 123. See also David McLain Carr, ‘Isaiah 40:1–11 in the Context of the Macrostucture of Second Isaiah’, in Discourse Analysis of Biblical Literature (ed. Walter R. Bodine; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995), 52; Brevard S. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 328–334; John Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40–55: A Literary-Theological Commentary (New York: T&T Clark, 2005), 3–7. 6 Dumbrell, ‘The Purpose of the Book of Isaiah’, 123. 7 See Brevard S. Childs, Isaiah (OTL; Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 296–297. However, it must be pointed out that Childs’s view of eschatology separates the historical persona of Isaiah and 4

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

47

suggest that the eschatology in these passages occurs during the time of Cyrus, yet the text may suggest a more wholistic eschatology that reaches beyond Cyrus’s time; for example, Isa 65 and 66 refers to consummated eschatology (see Isa 11:6–11; 45:24–25; 54:17). If this is the case, then their definition of eschatology may need to be revised. For Dumbrell, the first servant poem consists of only Isa 42:1–4. Dumbrell appropriately points out that Isa 40:1–11 introduces chs 40–55 8; however, he concludes that ‘Isaiah 40:12–42:4 form a continuous argument’, 9 implying that this is the first structure of Isa 40–55. While the continuous argument aspect may be true, is it really the first structure, since ending his first structure at Isa 42:4 divides the first servant poem in the middle? His presuppositions are based on W. A. M. Beuken’s structural interpretation, 10 which becomes apparent when he refers to Isa 42:1–4 as follows: ‘The crucial figure of the servant is presented in 42:1–4 in both royal and prophetic terms. He [the servant] is an idealised figure whose ministry will control Israel's future and that of the world.’ 11 On the other hand, David Carr argues that Isa 40:1–11 not only envelops Isa 42:4, but the theme and vocabulary in Isa 40:1– 11 are found all the way to Isa 48:21. 12 Thus, he, along with Westermann, Melugin, and Haran, has noted a shift in Isa 49, 13 in the word of God. Thus, for him the important aspect falls on the word of God. 8 Carr, ‘Isaiah 40:1–11 in the Context of the Macrostucture of Second Isaiah’, 54; Dumbrell, ‘The Purpose of the Book of Isaiah’, 123; Terry W. Eddinger, ‘An Analysis of Isaiah 40:1–11 (17)’, BBR 9 (1999): 123; Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40–55, 9–10. 9 Dumbrell, ‘The Purpose of the Book of Isaiah’, 124. 10 See Willem A. M. Beuken, ‘Mišpāṭ: The First Servant Song and Its Context’, VT 22, no. 1 (1972): 1–30. 11 Dumbrell, ‘The Purpose of the Book of Isaiah’, 124–125. 12 See Carr, ‘Isaiah 40:1–11 in the Context of the Macrostucture of Second Isaiah’, 59–65. 13 Ibid., 63. See also Menahem Haran, ‘The Literary Structure and Chronological Framework of the Prophecies in Is. XL–XLVIII’, in

48

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

contrast to Dumbrell and Beuken’s view that the first section of Isa 40–55 ends in Isa 42:4. However, if the first section ends with ch. 49, then the first servant poem would be isolated from the other three servant poems, which are in the second section. John Watts, on the other hand, structures Isa 40–55 differently. His first section consists of Isa 40:1 to 44:23, with the prologue in Isa 40:1–9 followed by five scenes. 14 The next section includes Isa 44:24 to 48:25, also with five scenes, all centered on Cyrus, the Lord’s Anointed. 15 The following section is Isa 49:1 to 52:12, the servant of rulers, again with five scenes. Then, for the purpose of this study (Isa 40–55), Watts’s last section is Isa 52:13 to 57:21, restoration pains in Jerusalem, with five scenes. 16 Watts preserves the first servant poem as one pericope, being Isa 42:1–9. Watts’s structure also reveals similarities with other scholars who divide the first servant poem from the other poems; however, Watts also isolates the fourth servant poem from the second and third, weakening the interrelationship between the servant poems. David Dorsey suggests a literary structure for Isa 40–54 based on the traditional view that Isa 40–48 is one section and 49–54 a second section. Both of them have an identical structure of A, B, C, D, C’, B’, A’. 17 For him, the center of Isa 40–48 is a ‘call to sinful Israel to respond to Yahweh and his punishment; promise of Israel’s restoration (42:18–43:7)’ 18 and the center of Isa 49–54 is ‘Mother Jerusalem, bereaved of her children, will be restored! (51:17–23)’. 19 Dorsey has done groundbreaking work, but there is a Congress Volume: Bonn 1962 (VTSup 9, ed. G. W. Anderson et al.; Leiden: Brill, 1963), 127–155; Roy F. Melugin, The Formation of Isaiah 40–55 (BZAW 141; New York: W. de Gruyter, 1976), 77–86; Claus Westermann, Sprache und Struktur der Prophetie Deuterojesajas (Stuttgart: Calwer, 1981), 91–92. 14 See Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 68. 15 Ibid., 147. 16 Ibid., 180, 219. 17 See David A. Dorsey, The Literary Structure of the Old Testament: A Commentary on Genesis-Malachi (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), 226–227. 18 Ibid., 226. 19 Ibid., 227.

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

49

challenge with his model. In his first structure, Isa 40–48, the C’s in the chiasm do not have any common Hebrew words to strengthen Dorsey’s categories. However, his proposal that the center of Isa 40–48 is the ‘call to sinful Israel to respond to Yahweh’ is a good possibility of being at the center of Isaiah’s message in representing the corporate servant. Antti Laato’s approach to the structure of Isa 40–55 is the most satisfying in integrating both a rhetorical and thematic approach and using the parallelismus membrorum (grammatical parallelism) that is well attested in Hebrew poetry. He is also the first one to recognize chiastic structures among different cycles, although chiastic structures have been well attested in single units. 20 For this reason, Laato suggests a chiastic macro-structure of Isa 40–53 which has ‘five cycles A – B – A’ – B’ – A’’, where the A cycles display a chiastic arrangement of its units and the B cycles a parallel arrangement. Chapters 54–55 constitute a summary.’ 21 At this point, it is important to examine the first cycle suggested by Laato, where the first servant poem is integrated. He suggests this structure for A:

Antti Laato, ‘The Composition of Isaiah 40–55’, JBL 109, no. 2 (1990): 208–209. 21 Ibid. Laato’s five cycles A – B – A’ – B’ – A’’ could also be seen as a chiastic structure of Isa 40–55 with its five cycles appearing as follows: Isa 40:1–2 Prologue to the cycles A Isa 40:3–42:17 – Cycle I (Return to Jerusalem) (Chiastic) B Isa 42:14–44:8 – Cycle II (Babylon’s fall ‘predicted’) (Parallel) C Isa 44:9–46:2 – Cycle III (Cyrus) (Chiastic) B1 Isa 46:3–48:21 – Cycle IV (Babylon’s fall ‘realized’) (Parallel) A1 Isa 48:20–52:12 – Cycle V (Rebuilding of Jerusalem) (Chiastic) Isa 52:13–53:12 Epilogue to the cycles. See ibid., 212–213. 20

50

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

40:3–8

9–11

a

12–26

b

27–31

c

41:1–7

d

8–20

21–29

42:1–4

5–9

10–13

14–17

a’

b’

c’

d’

e e’

F

Return to Jerusalem 22

Laato’s first cycle reveals a unity among chs 40 to 42 and the center is found at ‘my servant’, referring to Israel (41:8–20). Thus, for Laato, the first servant poem would parallel ch. 40:12–31, a view that differs from that of most scholars, who suggest a relationship with ch. 41. Therefore, according to this structure, the first servant poem would not have any strong tie to the first words of ‘my servant’ in Isa 41:8–10. However, it is important to note that Laato’s chiastic structure of Isa 40–53 does isolate the first servant poem from the other servant poems. Yet it also can be argued that the first servant poem, found in the first cycle as A, would be reflected in the fifth cycle A’, where the second and third servant poems are found. While Laato’s chiastic structure may have flaws, his attempt leads scholars to reflect on possible options that can be found in Isa 40–55. Here I will suggest my own structure of Isa 40–55. In this section, the author may be using a similar pattern or structure from an earlier part of his book. Isaiah 6–12 reveals a flow of theological thoughts that appears to be duplicated in Isa 40–55, as Davidson and Dumbrell demonstrate. Isaiah 6 reveals the holiness of God and how Isaiah is purged from sin. In Isa 7 the king Ahaz trusts in himself, and in Isa 8–11 the messianic promise is given. Finally, Isa 22

Antti Laato, ‘The Composition of Isaiah 40–55’, 212.

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

51

12 ends with a hymn of praise and singing to God. Likewise, in Isa 40 sin is pardoned, revealing the power of God. In Isa 41 Israel trusts in pagan gods, and in Isa 42–53 the servant of the LORD is promised. Isaiah 54–55 also ends with an invitation of singing and a result of abundant life (Isa 55). Also, within Isa 40–55 there is block parallelism between Isa 40–44 and 51–55, as shown in table 3. Table 3. Block Parallelism in Isaiah 40–55

A. Isaiah 40 – God Comforts People B. Isaiah 41 – God Calls for Reasoning Together for a Judgment C. Isaiah 42:1–9 – God’s Servant D. Isaiah 42:10–17 – New Song of Peace E. Isaiah 43–44 – Redeemer that Quenches Thirst

A’. Isaiah 51 – God Comforts People

B’. Isaiah 52 – God Calls for Preparation for a Judgment C’. Isaiah 52:13–53:12 – God’s Servant

D’. Isaiah 54 – Song of Peace on the Covenant E’. Isaiah 55 – LORD that Quenches Thirst

A chiastic structure of chs 45–50, located in the middle of chs 40– 55, follows: A. Isa 45 – Cyrus as Servant of Hope

B. Isa 46 – False Servant as Idols and the True God C. Isa 47 – Humiliation of Babylon C’. Isa 48 – Glory of God

B’. Isa 49 – True Servant as the Light of the True God

A’. Isa 50 – Servant as LORD of Hope

52

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

In the first (block parallel) structure 23 above, the center would be the two servant poems at the extremities of Isa 40–55 (Isa 42:1–9 and 52:13–53:12), while the second (chiastic) structure (Isa 45–50) also demonstrates a center in the middle of the block parallel structure, while not being part of it. The chiastic structure acts as the center, which would reveal on one side (Isa 45–47) the false aspect of gods or the false type pointing to the false antitype, while the second side (Isa 48–50) reveals the true aspect of God or the true type pointing to the true antitype. Thus, these few examples reveal inconsistency in scholars’ divisions of Isa 40–55. While there may not be one correct answer regarding the literary structure of Isa 40–55, literary context may help to delineate more clearly the corporate and servant poems. I suggest that the servant poems and the corporate servant can demonstrate that there is a flow of theology among the chapters of Isa 40–55. 24 Table 4 compares the corporate and individual servants in Isa 40–55. Using this table, I draw two observations from these servant passages. First, in the corporate servant passages, eight out of thirteen references are specified by the proper name Jacob or Israel (41:8, 9; 44:1, 2, 21(2x), 45:4; 48:20), and in four out of thirteen, although Jacob or Israel is not specified, the context is plural, suggesting a corporate servant (42:19 (2x); 43:10; 54:17); 25 therefore, Block parallel structure can also be called a panel structure. The second half mirrors the order of the first half. 24 This will be discussed in ch. 3. 25 While these four occurrences (Isa 42:19 (2x); 43:10; 54:17) reveal a corporate servant in a singular stage by using the term ‘servant’ in singular, the context in which these passages are found reveals a plural servant. Thus, the singular servant in these instances reveals a collective servant. For example, Isa 43:10 is a singular servant, but the context suggests plurality by the terms ‫אַתּם ֵﬠ ַדי‬ ֶ ‘you are my witnesses’, where both the personal pronoun and the noun are plural. Thus, the singular term of ‘servant’ would suggest by its context a singular collective of Israel. In Isa 54:17, the term ‘servant’ is plural; in this particular passage, the term itself reveals that the servant refers to the Israelites. For Isa 42:19, see ch. 3 where I consider this passage. 23

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

53

this leaves just one of the thirteen references that does not have the proper name Jacob or Israel nor a plural context as such (44:26), 26 but only one word—‘messengers’ ‫אָכי‬ ָ ‫מ ְל‬. ַ In poetry, the second clause is parallel to the first one, which could be the indication here. Thus, when the proper name Jacob or Israel or both is not found, the plural is used in the context to help the reader to determine the nature of the servant. Second, the individual servant generally lacks a proper name (Jacob or Israel) and is always in the singular. The only exception to this observation is Isa 49:3, 27 where the name Israel is used. For this sole verse, the context, especially vv. 5–6, appears to suggest someone else other than the nation of Israel; otherwise there would be a contradiction of identity or role in that Israel would have to save itself. 28 Based on these observa187F

18F

Roy F. Melugin does observe that the terms ‘servant’ and ‘messenger’ in Deutero-Isaiah are used somewhat ambiguously. For that reason, he states that ‘in 44, 26 we find the terms used to refer to prophetic activity; Yahweh “confirms the word of his servant, the counsel of his messengers”’. Melugin includes by the word ‘servant’ a footnote stating ‘or perhaps, “servants”’, acknowledging that there is a possibility that Isa 44:26 refers to servants in plural. Melugin, The Formation of Isaiah 40–55, 147. 27 This might be because of a gloss. The masora parva points out, for Isa 49:3, that the noun ‘Israel’ is lacking in the MSk; however, this noun is found in all the major manuscripts: MT, LXX, DSSIsa, Tg, and Vg. 28 See Doukhan, On the Way to Emmaus, 112–114. Furthermore, Doukhan also makes this observation about Isa 49:3. ‘The text of Isa 49:3 does not contradict our observation. Indeed the Masoretic accentuation of the text, which puts the greatest disjunctive athnach under the word “you” suggests that the Servant should be read disconnected from Israel, according to the following literal translation: “He [God] said to me: ‘my Servant are you [athnach]; as far as Israel is concerned [anticipatory emphasis], it is in [through] you that I will glorify myself.’” Since God is addressing the Servant in the masculine second person singular “you” (’atah), it is logical that the other second person of the verse bekha “in you” also applies to the Servant and not to Israel. Verse 5 confirms this application since God’s glorification is also there achieved through the Servant: “I shall be glorified [note the Niphal echoing the Hitpael of ‘glorify’ in v. 3] in the eyes of the Lord.” In other words, as far as Israel is concerned (her 26

54

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

tions, the differences between indications of the corporate and individual servant in Isa 40–55 provide some clues as to the identity of the servant in the first servant poem. Table 4. Corporate vs. Individual Servants in Isaiah 40–55 Passage in Isa 40–55 41:8, 9

Servant Reference

Corporate (singular)

Noun that Defines the Servant Jacob and Israel

Context of the Passage Singular

42:1

Individual (singular)

No Name

Singular

42:19 (2x)

Corporate (singular)

No Name

Plural

43:10

Corporate (singular)

No Name

Plural

Summary of the Servant Passages God will save Israel. He comforts Israel. As per Isa 41:21–29, Israel has sinned before. The individual servant means that God will save Israel divinely.

Israel has sinned by not listening to God. God is the Savior of Israel. Israel is the Witness.

salvation and destiny), God will glorify Himself through (in) the Servant (see the same use of the preposition bekha in Gen 12:3). It is through the Servant that God’s glorification will take place in regards to the salvation of Israel; see Isa 44:23 and 60:21, where God’s glorification (with the same Hebrew word Hitpa’el) is associated with the salvation of Israel.’ Ibid., 113 n. 6.

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 Passage in Isa 40–55 44:1, 2 44:21 (2x)

Servant Reference

Corporate (singular)

Context of the Passage Plural

No Name

Singular/ Plural

Jacob and Israel

Singular

Corporate (singular)

Jacob and Israel

Singular

48:20

Corporate (singular)

Jacob

Plural

49:3

Individual (singular)

Israel

Singular

49:5

Individual (singular)

No Name

Singular

49:6

Individual (singular)

No Name

Singular

49:7

Individual (singular)

No Name

Singular

44:26 45:4

Corporate (singular)

Noun that Defines the Servant Jacob, Israel and Jeshurun

Corporate (singular)

55

Summary of the Servant Passages God is the Creator. God redeems Israel.

Cyrus is God’s instrument for saving Israel politically.

God calls Israel out of its sinful realm.

God talks about his servant, who will deliver Israel. God shares the reason why the servant will come: to bring Israel back.

God has a mission for the servant.

God’s servant is the redeemer of Israel, and nations will honor him.

56

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Passage in Isa 40–55 50:10

Servant Reference

Individual (singular)

Noun that Defines the Servant No Name

Context of the Passage Singular

52:13

Individual (singular)

No Name

Singular

53:11

Individual (singular)

No Name

Singular

54:17

Corporate (plural)

No Name

Plural

Summary of the Servant Passages In Isa 50:1–3, Israel has sinned. In Isa 50:4–11, God’s servant obeys and carries out his mission. God gives his servant for a sacrifice.

God’s servant bears the iniquities of Israel and receives pardon. God’s servants/Israel are saved; they become the Lord’s heritage.

Note: Medium shading indicates the passages of the Individual Servant. Light shading indicates the passages of the Corporate Servant. Dark shading indicates the exceptional passages that could be either the Individual or Corporate Servant.

In its immediate context, Isa 42 is also found soon after the prose chapters of 36–39, but within a larger unit that includes chs 40–55, which are prophecies of comfort that outline the ways in which God will save His people and carry out a new creation paradigm in the future. These chapters express a theme that could be described as ‘the nature and purpose of God in His immanence in Israel as the Servant of the universe’. 29 George A. F. Knight, Servant Theology: A Commentary on the Book of Isaiah 40–55 (ITC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 5. See also, for more 29

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

57

As pointed out by Robert Chisholm, Jr., chs 40–55 reveal the sovereign Creator, who can announce how the future of Israel will unfold because God’s work has transpired in history and assures a degree of reality. Thus, Isa 42 is found in the context of what will happen to a future generation as if it is present. 30 This unit begins with a prologue based on the Lord’s promises to restore demoralized Jerusalem (40:1–11), followed by an attempt to encourage the people that He is able to accomplish His promises (40:12–31). Isaiah 55 is a call to covenantal renewal between God and the people. Between these poles, we find the Lord stressing the weakness of His people in their turning to idols, who cannot achieve the purpose God has in mind for them. Thus, Isa 42 is found with three other servant poems in the context of how God will save His people during a Babylonian exile that will come upon them, and, most importantly, how God will deliver them from the exile of this world. The four servant poems in Isaiah fit into the literary structure found in the earlier part of Isaiah. Specifically, a messianic age is also mentioned in Isa 7 to 12, 31 which would demonstrate that Isaiah speaks of a messianic age at both the beginning and the end of his writings. Though this is not conclusive evidence that Isa 42 is a deliberate parallel with Isa 7–12, the servant poems found in Isa 49–55 cannot be said to have no deliberate resonance with Isa 42, especially since chs 42 and 49 have much in common both structurally and grammatically, as will be demonstrated in ch. 3 of this work. In relation to the first servant poem’s location, I also see a parallel that Isaiah has used previously in his book. At the beginning of the book (chs 1–5), Israel’s condition is shown as being information about chs 1–39 and 40–55, David Carr, ‘Reaching for Unity in Isaiah’, JSOT 57 (March 1993): 69–70. 30 Robert B. Chisholm, Jr., Handbook on the Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Minor Prophets (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), 93. Isaiah may well refer to the ‘exodus motif’ in terms of God’s work in history. See chs 3 and 4 of this work. 31 Marjo C. A. Korpel and Johannes C. de Moor, The Structure of Classical Hebrew Poetry: Isaiah 40–55 (Leiden: Brill, 1998), 119–158.

58

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

sinful and turning away from God. In chs 7–12, Isaiah demonstrates how God will provide a way out by accomplishing his covenant through a child. This reference to a child seems to have a dual application: one during Isaiah’s time and a future application to the Messiah. The following chapters then give a description of God’s judgment, both on Israel and the surrounding nations. This parallel is also seen around the first servant song. In 41:21–29, it is found that Israel was idolatrous. Immediately after, a servant is proclaimed as given as a covenant; this is followed in chs 46–47 by a judgment scene. 32 Thus, this first servant song is located centrally between idolatrous Israel and the scene of judgment, and the servant and covenant are the essential elements of this passage. An even closer context that has been observed is the unit of Isa 41:1–42:9, 33 although others would prefer to make it the larger unit of Isa 41:1–44:23. 34 While they may not agree on where the unit ends, modern scholars have pointed out in literary studies that small units such as Isa 41:1–42:9 are found throughout the book of Isaiah; for example, ‘oracles against foreign nations’ (13–23; also Jer 46–51; Ezek 25–32; Am 1–2), the ‘Isaiah apocalypse’ (24–27), ‘Deutero-Isaiah’ (40–55), and so on. 35 Thus, the first servant poem is found in a larger and immediate context and this servant poem is not a ‘cut-and-paste’ unit of only Isa 42:1–4, as suggested by Duhm and other modern scholars. 36 There is a direct relation to the time of Isaiah in the passage’s placement and role within the book of Isaiah; chs 1–39 would suggest some motifs, addressees, and voices that occur throughout the chapters in the second half of Isaiah. ‘Melugin has observed that See Hyun Chul Paul Kim, ‘An Intertextual Reading of a “Crushed Reed” and “A Dim Wick” in Isaiah 42:3’, JSOT 83 (1999): 113–124. 33 Richard J. Clifford, ‘Isaiah, Book of’, ABD 3:490–501; Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 109. 34 Willem A. VanGemeren, Interpreting the Prophetic Word (Grand Rapids: Academie, 1990), 273. 35 See John F. A. Sawyer, The Fifth Gospel: Isaiah in the History of Christianity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 189. 36 See Knight, Servant Theology: A Commentary on the Book of Isaiah 40– 55, 2–3. 32

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

59

40:1–8 forms a microcosm of chs. 41–48 and 40:9–11 corresponds to 49:14–55:13. Thus, this passage [Isa 40:1–11] sets the stage and tone for what follows.’ 37 Lindsey recognizes this point: ‘The Servant song forms the conclusion of the second section, in which Yahweh proves He controls history by demonstrating His ability to prophesy (41:1–42:9).’ 38 Perhaps the overall macro-structure of Isaiah is chiastic, and chs 7–12 could also be chiastic in structure. 39 Chapters 7–12 could refer both to the child at the present time and to the Messiah born in the future. Since the author has already demonstrated the potential in the earlier structure of his book, there may be a greater chance to find repetitive elements being used in the second part of the book. Among conservative scholars, the fourth servant poem is generally understood to refer to the Messiah. 40 Because of this, the servant found in Isa 42, who makes a covenant, could have a greater potential to also point ultimately to a messianic prophecy. Lastly, thematic structure can also determine the literary context within Isa 40–55. Scholars have observed that the ‘exodus’ or ‘second exodus’ (sometimes called the ‘return’) is a prominent theme in Isa 40–55. Norman H. Snaith remarks: ‘The Return is not merely one of the themes of these sixteen (eighteen) chapters, to be outshone by world-wide humanitarian ideals. It is the prophet’s dominant theme. … Basically the Return is this prophet’s ONE theme, and all else is subservient to it.’ 41 It is remarkable to see, in Jim W. Adams, The Performative Nature and Function of Isaiah 40–55 (New York: T&T Clark, 2006), 93. Also see Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 35. 38 Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 35. 39 See Davidson, ‘The Messianic Hope in Isaiah 7:14’, 85–96. 40 See Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 98. 41 Norman H. Snaith, Isaiah 40–66: A Study of the Teaching of the Second Isaiah and Its Consequences (VTSup 14; Leiden: Brill, 1967), 147. See also Carroll Stuhlmueller, Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah (AnBib 43; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970), 59. On the fourth servant poem and its relationship to the exodus theme, see Anthony R. Ceresko, ‘The Rhetorical Strategy of the Fourth Servant Song (Isaiah 52:13–53:12): Poetry and the Exodus–New Exodus’, CBQ 56, no. 1 (1994): 42–55; Walther Zimmerli, ‘Le nouvel “Exode” dans le message des deux grands 37

60

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

the context of the servant poems, a structural theme that leads to each servant poem. 42 The prevalent theme that recurs prior to each servant poem is the exodus theme. For example, most scholars recognize that Isa 41:17–20 exhibits the exodus motif. 43 The terms ‫‘ ָה ֲﬠנִ יִּ ים וְ ָה ֶא ְביוֹנִ ים‬the poor and the needy’ could point to the Israelites as slaves (see Ex 2:23–25), ‫‘ ְמ ַב ְק ִשׁים ַמיִ ם‬seeking water’ (Ex 15:27), ‫‘ ְלשׁוֹנָ ם ַבּ ָצּ ָמא נָ ָשׁ ָתּה‬their tongue exhausted in thirst’ (Ex 17:1–3), in the ‫‘ ִמ ְד ָבּר‬wilderness’ (Ex 15:22), and the mention of many types of ‫‘ ֵﬠץ‬tree[s]’ (Ex 15:27). In Exodus, the Israelites’ exit is celebrated with the song of Moses (Ex 15). Similarly, the servant poem in Isa 42:1–9 follows the exodus theme of Isa 41 and is itself followed by a hymn in vv. 10–12.

prophètes de l'exil’, in Maqqél shâqédh, la branche d'amandier: Hommage à Wilhelm Vischer (ed. Wilhelm Vischer; Montpellier: Causse, Graille, Castelnau, 1960), 216–227. 42 I am indebted to Cullen Story for the concept that I am using here. Cullen I. K. Story, ‘Another Look at the Fourth Servant Song of Second Isaiah’, HBT 31, no. 2 (2009): 103–104. 43 Bernhard W. Anderson, ‘Exodus Typology in Second Isaiah’, in Israel's Prophetic Heritage: Essays in Honor of James Muilenberg (ed. Bernhard W. Anderson and Walter J. Harrelson; New York: Harper, 1962), 177–195; Klaus Baltzer and Peter Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55 (ed. Peter Machinist; trans. Margaret Kohl; Hermenia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible, ed. Frank Moore Cross et al.; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 107–114; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 314; North, The Second Isaiah, 101–102; Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 172; Stuhlmueller, Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah, 71. Only a few scholars appear to deny the existence of this motif: Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40–55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, 2:202–203; Eva Hessler, ‘Die Struktur der Bilder bei Deuterojesaja’, EvT 25, no. 7 (1965): 349–469; Edward J. Kissane, The Book of Isaiah, Translated from a Critically Revised Hebrew Text with Commentary (2 vols; Dublin: Browne & Nolan, 1943), 2:32.

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

61

THE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 Delimitation of Passage The delimitation of Isa 42:1–9 is determined by several factors. 44 First, it is important to note that Isa 42:1–9 is not an isolated text; it flows from what comes before it and what follows. However, Isa 42:1–9 is also a sectional text within its context. Isaiah 42:1–9 is demarcated by a clear inclusio found in vv. 1 and 9 with the word ‫‘ ֵהן‬behold’, which is a grammatical clue of transition to another servant. Second, the repeated word ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ‘justice/judgment’ also suggests a switch to a new section. Third, there is a change of verb tense from the imperfect with a jussive (Isa 41:28) to simply an imperfect in Isa 42:1. Fourth, there is a change of direct object: in ch. 41 it is the second person plural (vv. 21, 24) whereas in Isa 42:1–8 the direct object is third masculine singular. Fifth, the tone is different in Isa 41:21–29 versus Isa 42:1– 9. Isaiah 41:21–29 has a tone of judgment and accusation, while in Isa 42:1–9 the tone is more gracious, gentle, kind, and supportive. Finally, in Isa 42:1–9, the repetition of the suffix first common singular signals a change of section. After Isa 42:1–9, the tone again changes in v. 10. A vibrant tone is expressed by the vocative of address using the term ‫ִשׁירוּ‬ ‘sing’ in the imperative. The imperative also reveals a change of tense, which suggests a different section. The subject changes: In Isa 42:1–9 the subject is first common singular, while in Isa 42:10– 13 the subject is third masculine plural. Isaiah 42:1–9 reveals a servant’s call and mission, while Isa 42:10–13 is a hymn toward God. Thus, based on these factors, the first servant poem is best delimited to vv. 1 through 9.

See, for more information on the delimitation of biblical passages, Kaiser, Toward an Exegetical Theology, 71–77. 44

62

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Literary Structure of Isaiah 42:1–9 Bernhard Duhm’s theory that Isa 42:1–4; 49:1–6; 50:4–9; and 52:13–53:12 are a distinctive group of servant poems 45 has been widely accepted for a century. Is Duhm correct in his assumption that Isa 42:1–4 is the extent of the first servant poem, or could it be comprised of more verses? For the most part, scholars agree that the first servant poem is part of a larger literary structure. They are also largely agreed in their analysis that Isa 42 works in conjunction with ch. 41 and thus they do not function as two separate chapters, even though scholars may not exactly agree where this pericope may end. 46 Edward Young, contrary to Duhm who perceived Isa 42:1–4 as a unit, sees a connection with the following verses. 47 Johannes Lindblom believes that vv. 1–4 fit with v. 5 and following but were divorced from their context by Duhm and others, who interpret them allegorically. 48 Claus Westermann also concludes that Isa 42:1–4 is the first servant poem and that Isa 42:5–9 was a later addition to the poem. 49 As Robert L. Thomas points out, WesterSee Bernhard Duhm, Die Theologie der Propheten als Grundlage für die innere Entwicklungsgeschichte der israelitischen Religion (Bonn: Marcus, 1875), 288–289; Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40–55, 149. 46 For example, Baltzer sees Isa 41:1–42:13; Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, viii–ix. Childs sees Isa 41:1– 42:13; Childs, Isaiah, 316–317. Goldingay sees Isa 41:21–42:17; John Goldingay, Isaiah (NIBCOT 13; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2001), 236. Motyer sees Isa 40:1–42:17; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 289. Oswalt sees Isa 40:1–48:22; Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 8–9. Wolf sees Isa 40:1–48:22; Wolf, Interpreting Isaiah, 183. See also Hyun Chul Paul Kim, ‘The Spider-Poet: Signs and Symbols in Isaiah 41’, in The Desert Will Bloom: Poetic Visions in Isaiah (ed. A. Joseph Everson and Hyun Chul Paul Kim; vol. 4 of Ancient Israel and Its Literature, ed. Steven L. McKenzie; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1999), 159–180. 47 Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 116–117. 48 Johannes Lindblom, The Servant Songs in Deutero-Isaiah: A New Attempt to Solve an Old Problem (Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1951), 19–24. 49 Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 101. Ulrich Berges also reaches a similar conclusion in his commentary, that Isa 42:1–4 and 5–9 are two sepa45

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

63

mann makes this observation without convincing evidence, 50 as the Jewish Study Bible keeps the first servant poem from vv. 1 to 9 together. 51 John Goldingay sees Isa 42:1–9 as being part of Isa 41:1– 42:17, thus expanding the pericope to 42:17 which would keep Isa 42:1–9 within the same unit. 52 In his article ‘Mišpāṭ: The First Servant Song and Its Context’, W. A. M. Beuken states that the structure of Isa 42:1–4 is a chiasm with a juridical literary genre. ‘The structure of the oracle is quite clear: A B C D

la lb’ lb” 2–3a

Yhwh designates his Servant Yhwh equips his Servant his mission: mišpāṭ his behaviour: no shouting, no violence against the oppressed C’ 3b his mission: mišpāṭ B’ 4a’ his destiny: oppression A’ 4a”–b his mission: mišpāṭ and tôrâ.’ 53

Beuken appears somewhat restrained with the analysis of this text. He does not provide a clear answer to the question as to whom vv. 5 to 9 refer. John Watts does not give a distinctive structure of this passage, but he sees a relationship between ch. 41:21–29 where God’s people advocate idols for their gods (vv. 21–24), and where God is God alone (vv. 25–29), and ch. 42:1–9. In Isa 42:1–9, Watts sees vv. 1–4 as talking about the servant and vv. 6–7 as addressed to the servant directly about his role. Finally, vv. 8–9 address the court and witness about what God has done. 54 Similarly Alec Motyer observes a combination where the ‘Lord speaks of his servrate units because of the obvious third person in vv. 1–4 and the ‘you’ in vv. 6–9. Ulrich Berges, Jesaja 40–48 / übersetzt und ausgelegt (HTKAT; Freiburg: Herder, 2008), 212. 50 Thomas, The Mission of Israel and of the Messiah in the Plan of God, 32 n. 4. 51 See Berlin and Brettler, The Jewish Study Bible, 867. 52 Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40–55, 150. 53 Beuken, ‘Mišpāṭ’, 3. 54 Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 114.

64

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

ant in Isa 42:1–4, elaborating his task; and in verses 5–9 he speaks to his servant, confirming his task’. 55 Thus, Motyer structures the first four verses as such: A1. The servant’s ministry of the truth: the divine relationship and endowment on which it rests and its world-wide scope (1)

B. The servant’s ministry to people: its style and objectives (2– 3b)

A2. The servant’s ministry of the truth: faithful, unfaltering, successful, and meeting the world’s needs (3c–4). 56

He structures Isa 42:5–9 in three stanzas:

A. The Lord of creation: the Lord as God, Creator, and life-giver (5)

B. The Lord of the servant: the Lord’s worldwide purpose of covenant, light, and liberty (6–7)

C. The Lord of the false gods: the Lord directs history, past and future (8–9). 57

Motyer then explains these stanzas with the following:

Each stanza opens with a statement of self-identification (5a, 6a, 8a). The Lord (Yahweh) as God is Creator and sustainer of all (5); he has a beneficial purpose for the whole world (6–7); he is the only God, apart from whom there is nothing but idols (8); and he controls history by his predictive word (9). 58

Another chiasm is found in vv. 5 to 9. I would suggest the following structure:

Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 318. Ibid., 319. 57 Ibid., 321. 58 Ibid. 55 56

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 A B

5 6a

C

6b–7

A’

9

B’

8

65

God’s creative acts ‘I Yhwh’ demonstrates his character to the servant/you (emphasis on ‘righteousness’) The servant as a covenant to the people and his work ‘I Yhwh’ demonstrates his character to the servant (emphasis on ‘my glory’) God’s creative acts by telling the future ‘new things’.

Finally, vv. 1 to 4 have a specific poetic feature to which Hans Kosmala has applied a metrical hermeneutic. At first glance, one can see a pattern of three stanzas between the end of v. 1 and the end of v. 4 (see table 5). 59 However, the first stanza is not exactly like the second and the third stanzas. Kosmala has suggested that this piece of poetry is a ‘well-constructed poem of exceptional beauty’. 60 But to have uniform stanzas of 4:4:3 meter, something appears to have been changed in the first stanza. Kosmala suggests that, although rare, in Hebrew poetry there can be displacement of lines. 61 This could be the cause of the irregularity in this first stanza. He suggests that the first three words at the beginning of the stanza used to be at the end, but the editor displaced the line and put it at the beginning. If this were the case, we would have three concise, symmetrical stanzas of 4:4:3 meter. 62 Is Kosmala right in his analysis? Significantly, Kosmala has overlooked the final form of Isa 42:1–4 and addressed only one methodology—form criticism. In addition, the discovery of the DSS scrolls has led the BH to almost totally abandon its conjectures based on similar metrical analysis. 63 In light of this general abandonment, more evidence is required to This concept is adapted from Hans Kosmala, ‘Form and Structure in Ancient Hebrew Poetry’, VT 16, no. 2 (April 1966): 158. 60 Ibid. 61 See ibid., 157–160. 62 For more details, see ibid. 63 See the BHS now as opposed to the BH. 59

66

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

establish a positive metrical form such as Kosmala’s that demonstrates the beauty of the passage’s metrical structure. Table 5. Kosmala’s Form & Structure of Isaiah 42:1–4 Meter

Isaiah 42:1–4

Stanza ‫ֵהן‬

Verse 1

/‫בּ ִח ִירי ָר ְצ ָתה נַ ְפ ִשׁי‬/ ְ ‫ַﬠ ְב ִדּי ֶא ְת ָמ�־בּוֹ‬ 3

‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‫נָ ַת ִתּי‬

4

‫יוֹציא׃‬ ִ ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט ַלגּוֹיִ ם‬

4

‫וְ לֹא־יַ ְשׁ ִמ ַי� ַבּחוּץ קוֹלוֹ׃‬

3

‫וּפ ְשׁ ָתּה ֵכ ָהה לֹא יְ ַכ ֶבּנָּ ה‬ ִ

4

‫לֹא יִ ְכ ֶהה וְ לֹא יָ רוּץ‬

4 4

1

‫לֹא יִ ְצ ַﬠק וְ לֹא יִ ָשּׂא‬ ‫ָקנֶ ה ָרצוּץ לֹא יִ ְשׁבּוֹר‬

4

‫יוֹציא ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט׃‬ ִ ‫ֶל ֱא ֶמת‬

3

‫אָרץ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ֶ ‫ַﬠד־יָ ִשׂים ָבּ‬ ‫תוֹרתוֹ ִאיִּ ים יְ יַ ֵחילוּ׃‬ ָ ‫וּל‬ ְ

2

2

3

3

4

A better question should be asked instead: Why would there be a uniform stanza of 3:4:4 in the first stanza while the other stanzas are of 4:4:3 meter? The switch of meter from 3:4:4 to 4:4:3 appears to purposely break the rhythm to highlight a contrast between the first stanza and the other stanzas. The text in the short meter describes the characteristics of the servant and the text in the long meter describes what the servant’s mission is about. As if to reinforce this distinction, the last two stanzas begin with a long meter, demonstrating the mission of the servant, and conclude with a short meter, revealing the characteristics of the servant. 64 Table 6 outlines my suggested metrical structure for the first four verses.

64

See Figure 1 (p. 74).

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

67

Table 6. Structure of the Metrical Clauses in Isaiah 42:1–4 Meter 3

Verses ‫ֵהן ַﬠ ְב ִדּי ֶא ְת ָמ�־בּוֹ‬

Stanza 1

3

‫ְבּ ִח ִירי ָר ְצ ָתה נַ ְפ ִשׁי‬

2

4

‫יוֹציא‬ ִ ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט ַלגּוֹיִ ם‬

4

‫וְ לֹא־יַ ְשׁ ִמ ַי� ַבּחוּץ קוֹלוֹ‬

3

‫וּפ ְשׁ ָתּה ֵכ ָהה לֹא יְ ַכ ֶבּנָּ ה‬ ִ

4

‫לֹא יִ ְכ ֶהה וְ לֹא יָ רוּץ‬

3 3 4 4

‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‫נָ ַת ִתּי‬ ‫לֹא יִ ְצ ַﬠק וְ לֹא יִ ָשּׂא‬ ‫ָקנֶ ה ָרצוּץ לֹא יִ ְשׁבּוֹר‬

4

‫יוֹציא ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ִ ‫ֶל ֱא ֶמת‬

3

‫אָרץ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ֶ ‫ַﬠד־יָ ִשׂים ָבּ‬

Verse 1

3

2

4

3

5

4

‫תוֹרתוֹ ִאיִּ ים יְ יַ ֵחילוּ‬ ָ ‫וּל‬ ְ

Based upon the above analysis, it is safe to conclude that the passage of Isa 42:1–9, the first servant poem, is comprised of nine verses forming two separate chiasms. 65 As Beuken points out, the first four verses would form the first chiastic structure, with the central message found at the middle of the four verses (vv. 2–3a), referring to the servant’s characteristics. The second chiasm would consist of the last five verses, the central message, being 6b and 7, referring to the servant’s actions in implementing the covenant. Even though this passage has two separate structures, they are complementary in subject. 66 For example, the central message of For more details on the delimitation of cola, verse-lines, strophes, canticles, and macrostructure of this amazing piece of poetry, see Korpel and de Moor, The Structure of Classical Hebrew Poetry, 119–158. 66 Joseph Blenkinsopp captures part of the idea; however, while he does not come out strongly enough about the identity of the servant, he recognizes a close relationship between God and the servant: ‘The two conjoined passages—in the first of which (vv 1–4) the servant is referred to in first person, and in the second (5–9) is addressed directly—form a literary unit that does not correspond directly to any particular institutional 65

68

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

the first chiasm refers to the servant’s behavior, which is surrounded by the adjacent verses describing his mission, while the second chiasm demonstrates how this mission is accomplished in his behavior, the central message of the chiasm, where the servant is given as a covenant to the people. The servant is designated by God to fulfill God’s special act that is found in the behavior of the servant (vv. 1–4); however, the image of equipping him functions in conjunction with the description of the work that he is doing in v. 7. The notion of bringing justice (vv. 1, 3, and 4), referred to as ‘his mission’ of justice, is reinforced in the name of God that is given to the servant: Creator and Redeemer (vv. 6–8). The Torah is related to God’s creative acts in Genesis (v. 4); both the law and God’s creative acts (v. 5) also appear throughout the Pentateuch in the imagery of the sanctuary, in the form of the law found in the Ark of the Covenant and in the form of the sacrifices revealing God’s re-creative power, pointing to something taking place in the future—a ‘new thing’ (v. 9). It appears to me that there is a definite parallelism between the two chiasms, with one reflecting the other. Yet R. N. Whybray would not be convinced of this. He argues that Isa 42:1–9 must be two separate units because of the change of form, for example, a liturgy in which the heir apparent to the throne is presented to the heavenly court. The speaker is Yahveh, identified as “the God Yahveh” (hā’ēl YHVH) at the beginning of the second saying, no doubt because of the further identification as creator. … The discourse is addressed neither to celestial beings nor to foreigners but to the congregation, to whom the designated person is represented as if present to them. The special relationship to God enjoyed by this person is encapsulated in the term ’ebed and reinforced by his being chosen, the object of God’s good pleasure, and endowed with divine charism (“spirit”), as were so many judges, rulers, and prophets before him.’ Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40–55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, 211–212. Childs does not take a strong stand on the unity of these so-called two-part servant poems, but he does admit that ‘in the larger literary context of Second Isaiah the two passages clearly supplement each other’ (referring to vv. 1– 4 and 5–9), although ‘the two passages may indeed be redactional’ for Childs. Childs, Isaiah, 326.

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

69

wording based on the ‘you’ in v. 6 that is singular. 67 This I consider a weak argument for the simple reason that God in vv. 1–4 is described as presenting the servant to the audience and outlining what he will do, whereas in v. 6, God talks directly to the servant to tell him that God is with him in this ministry. For his part, Roy Melugin contends that vv. 5–9 complement vv. 1–4, although he also says that they differ in other aspects. Thus, for Melugin, ‘the juxtaposition of these two genre units enriches the understanding of the purpose of the servant’s commissioning; the juxtaposition brings together the respective emphases of each unit concerning the servant’s mission’. 68 Both Whybray and Melugin address the theme of idolatry and see that ch. 41:21–29 is juxtaposed with ch. 42:1–9 (vv. 1–4 for Whybray), but they cannot accept the overall unity of Isa 42:1–9. Chris Franke is helpful in her analysis of Isa 46, 47, and 48, which have the same scenario as Isa 42:1–9, when she states that: What is assumed is that in a given unit or poem the theme must remain exactly the same. We might expect just the opposite in a creative poet. A theme may be changed or developed within a given poem so that the poet can move the audience to a new level of awareness. Melugin is a champion of the creativity of DI’s uses of genres, and yet he would restrict evidences of this creativity in order to fit the notion that genres usually are indicators of different units. 69

Bebb Wheeler Stone observes that the servant poems, ‘if they may be taken out of context and sung consecutively, have a chiastic structure of voice. They move from an external voice of God describing the servant (“Behold my servant”, 42:1) to two internal, subjective reflections by the servant in first person (49.1–6; 50.4– 9), returning to the external voice echoing the opening line (“Behold my servant”, 52.13).’ 70 He further observes that, in Isa 42:1–4, See Whybray, Isaiah 40–66, 73–74. Melugin, The Formation of Isaiah 40–55, 100. 69 Chris Franke, Isaiah 46, 47, and 48: A New Literary-Critical Reading (Biblical and Judaic Studies 3; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1994), 75. 70 Stone, ‘Second Isaiah: Prophet to Patriarchy’, 228. 67 68

70

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

the servant poem has one stanza of a four-stanza song embedded. This, along with the other servant poems, could have become responsorial community songs describing the servant deliverer. These four songs could be heard as a structure of four consistent stanzas, which happen to be interwoven throughout the text. 71 It appears that the first servant poem’s ambiguity gives the author freedom to point both to a local/near prophecy and also to a distant/future prophecy. Gene R. Smillie suggests that ‘verses 1–4 describe the servant in the third person, while verses 5–7 address the servant by using the second person. Though the person described in verses 1–4 is the same as the one addressed in verses 5– 7, the ambiguous use of the second person in the latter verses and those following them enabled Isaiah to make a strategic shift here.’ 72 My tentative conclusion about the central point made by the author in the first chiastic structure (Isa 42:1–4) is that author reveals the identity of this servant by defining his behavior as humble, submissive, and doing what is right. In contrast, the servant found in ch. 41 is defined as proud, unwilling to reflect God or be molded by God, and behaving as a pagan. In the second chiasm (Isa 42:5–9), the author again demonstrates that the servant of ch. 42 is a covenant for the people, and that his work reflects his success (vv. 8–9), whereas the servant in ch. 41 cannot be a covenant for the people because of his idolatrous behavior in going after other gods. Literary Genre of Isaiah 42:1–9 Often the literary genre and style of a text give clues to its intended meaning, audience, and purpose. The book of Isaiah is largely poetry, though prose predominates in chs 36 to 39. 73 The genre of Isa

Ibid. Gene R. Smillie, ‘Isaiah 42:1–4 in Its Rhetorical Context’, BSac 162, no. 645 (2005): 50–65. 73 Davidson, ‘The Messianic Hope in Isaiah 7:14’, 85–96. 71 72

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

71

42:1–9 is poetry; the style of the first four verses is encomium, 74 while the last five verses are a mix of encomium and contrast. While this passage has a chiastic structure, it could also fit within the context of the entire book of Isaiah as a key descriptive passage, since the book itself has an overall chiastic structure. However, determining the genre of the book of Isaiah is not always easy, since different genres are often mixed within a single unit or passage. Thus, the author leaves his audience or reader to struggle with a mixed literary genre. Although this makes the passage harder to interpret, it also creates beauty by overlapping several genres. Perhaps the author did this purposely to communicate different emotions, sensations, text characteristics, and imagery of ambiguity so that he could proclaim different aspects of salvation at the same time. Isaiah 42:1–9 is definitely a piece of poetry; 75 however, it is not limited to poetry alone, 76 but it is also a prophecy, a song, and a hymn/liturgy, 77 all of which include poetry. Claus Westermann agrees that the author ‘clothed his message of salvaEncomium means enthusiastic or high praises of a person. It is a formal practice of writing or speaking words in praise of someone or something. 75 For example, Hebrew poetry is based on parallelism. Throughout Isa 42:1–9, parallelisms are revealed (for example, ‘my servant’ and ‘my chosen’ in v. 1); see later in ch. 2 where I analyze these verses. For more information on Hebrew poetry, see ‘Parallelism in Hebrew Poetry’, Jewish Encyclopedia. Cited 4 December 2012. Online: http://jewishencyclopedia. com/articles/11902-parallelism-in-hebrew-poetry. 76 For more information on poetry and Lowth’s concepts of Hebrew poetry and Isaiah, see Gary Stansell, Lowth’s Isaiah Commentary and Romanticism (SBLSP 39; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000), 148– 182. 77 See Sigmund Mowinckel, He That Cometh (ed. G. W. Anderson; New York: Abingdon, 1956), 143; Ivan Engnell, ‘The Ebed Yahweh Songs and the Suffering Messiah in “Deutero-Isaiah”’, BJRL 31, no. 1 (January 1948): 54–93. Mowinckel sees the Servant of Yahweh passages as ‘a prophetic re-modeling of a liturgical composition belonging to the Annual Festival’. Mowinckel, He That Cometh, 190. 74

72

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

tion in the language of the psalms of praise’. 78 Knight suggests a variety of categories: DI [Deutero-Isaiah]’s work can be classified within the various categories that are to be found either within Israelite literature, or else in Ugaritic or Babylonian. … While he made use of a number of ancient forms of artistic writing for the sake of variety, he has threaded these units together to form one closely knit argument and developing thesis. 79

I conclude that poetry is the overarching genre which embraces all the other sub-genres that arise in Isa 42:1–9, 80 that these sub-genres include prophecy, song, and hymn/liturgy, and that Isaiah employs multiple genres in order to show the diverse richness of salvation.

SUMMARY

A number of scholars have analyzed the literary structure of Isa 40–55 with varying conclusions, many of which suggest viable possible literary structures. I have provided an alternative literary structure in table 3, demonstrating that the first servant poem is part of a larger unit that incorporates the entire passage of Isa 42:1–9. The chiastic structure of Isa 42:1–9 falls into two parts: one structure for vv. 1–4 and the second for vv. 5–9. These structures complement each other, the first identifying the mission of the servant, the second outlining the direction of the servant’s mission. In other words, the central message of the first chiasm refers to the servant’s behavior, which is surrounded by the nearby verses of his mission, while the second chiasm demonstrates how this mission is accomplished in his actions. Finally, Isa 42:1–4 has a distinct poetry pattern of three stanzas. The first stanza has a different rhythmic meter, suggesting that the meter of three reveals the servant’s purWestermann, Isaiah 40–66, 10. Knight, Servant Theology: A Commentary on the Book of Isaiah 40–55, 2. 80 For more information on the Hebrew poetry of Isaiah, see Kosmala, ‘Form and Structure in Ancient Hebrew Poetry’, 157–160. A more recent study has been done regarding the narrative in Isaiah; see Robin L. Routledge, ‘Is There a Narrative Substructure Underlying the Book of Isaiah?’, TynBul 55, no. 2 (2004): 183–204. 78 79

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

73

pose while the meter of four demonstrates the servant’s actions that convey that purpose. Now we turn to exegesis of the first four verses of Isa 42, focusing particularly on the keywords, which I suggest emphasize the servant and his calling.

THE SERVANT IN ISAIAH 42:1–4 Structure of Isaiah 42:1–4 Now, as I commence the exegesis of Isa 42:1–4, it is important to first analyze its structure. I suggest the following micro-structure of Isa 42:1–4 (see figure 1). Figure 1 suggests an integrated, well-designed structure that may assist in the exegesis that follows. First, v. 1 demonstrates two structures: one that includes verbs, the second involving meter. In the first structure, as demonstrated in figure 1 after the nominal clause, there is a chiastic structure of A, B, B’, A’, with imperfect (�‫)א ְת ָמ‬, ֶ perfect (‫)ר ְצ ָתה‬, ָ perfect (‫)נָ ַת ִתּי‬, imperfect (‫)יוֹציא‬ ִ verbs. The second structure consists of four clauses, each having a meter of three, 3:3:3:3, or a double parallel meter of three. The first clause/meter is ‫הן ַﬠ ְב ִדּי ֶא ְת ָמ�־בּוֹ‬,ֵ the second clause/meter is ‫ְבּ ִח ִירי‬ ‫ר ְצ ָתה נַ ְפ ִשׁי‬,ָ the third one is ‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‫נָ ַת ִתּי‬, and the last one is ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ‫יוֹציא‬ ִ ‫לגּוֹיִ ם‬.ַ Thus, because the first metrical pair parallels the second metrical pair, they help to explain each other. 81 241F

81

See below for more details.

74

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

75

Verse 2 has a metrical structure of 4:4, 82 which parallels the same metrical structure of 4:4 in v. 3a. The two clauses in v. 2 also both begin with the negation ‫ל ֹא‬. The first clause/meter includes two verbs, while the last clause/meter includes only one verb; however, again each explains and clarifies the other. Verse 3 has a metrical structure of 4:4:3, paralleling v. 4 with the same metrical structure of 4:4:3. Therefore, vv. 3 and 4 are interrelated, even though v. 2 and the first part of v. 3 are also connected. This causes vv. 2–4 to intertwine with each other. Furthermore, v. 3b and v. 4 form a chiastic meter of 3:4:4:3, which would parallel v. 1 and the chiasm of verbs A, B, B’, A’. Thus, the beginning and the end of the unit are similar in style in both meter (vv. 3b–4) and verbs (v. 1). Verse 1 ‫ֵהן ַﬠ ְב ִדּי ֶא ְת ָמ�־בּוֹ‬ ‫ְבּ ִח ִירי ָר ְצ ָתה נַ ְפ ִשׁי‬ ‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‫נָ ַת ִתּי‬ ‫יוֹציא‬ ִ ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט ַלגּוֹיִ ם‬ Behold! My servant whom I take hold/grasp, My chosen one in whom my soul delights/is pleased with. I have put my Spirit upon him; He will bring forth judgment/justice to the Gentiles.

Some scholars, such as John Watts, may argue for a meter of 4:3 instead of a meter of 4:4 because two words connected by a maqqef are often given a count of one. However, this is not always the case; at times, the two words joined by a maqqef can be given a count of two, one for each word. For example, in the Psalms Word Biblical Commentary, the authors have counted the two words joined by a maqqef as two (see Pss 22:7; 36:13; 37:24; 44:10, 19; 80:19; 89:34; 108:12). There appear to be no set rules among scholars regarding this issue of the maqqef. Thus, in figure 1, where the maqqef is used, I give each word a count for the metrical structure in v. 2 and v. 4. 82

76

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The Particle ‫‘ ֵהן‬Behold’

This section begins with an exploration of the grammatical and syntactical aspects of the first chiasm—42:1–4. 83 At the outset, the first verse emphatically makes a connection to two previous parallel passages that also contrast the idols and the servant. ‘Each passage ended with a dramatic summons (Heb. hēn), “Look!” or “Behold!”: [Isa 41] verse 24, “Look at this!—Meaningless idols!”; verse 29, “Look at this!—Pathetic idolaters!” Now, for the third time, the same word rings out (42:1, hēn): “Look at this!—My Servant!”’ 84 It seems that each of these verses intends to focus the reader’s attention on the message to be conveyed: a contrast between two subjects 85—the idols and my servant. The LXX does not include ‫ ֵהן‬in three crucial places—in Isa 41:24, 29 and 42:1—as most modern translations do today when the word ‫ ֵהן‬or ‫ ִהנֵּ ה‬is used. 86 However, 1QIsa, which is close to the MT, has ‫ הנה‬in all those verses. It is important to retain this particle in our context for several reasons: (1) Behold clearly connects Also, there has been some suggestion that ‘the style and structure of such an oracle are an imitation of the royal initiation oracle by which a king is called, as in Pss. ii and cx, and in the sequel to the present passage (xlii, 5–9), the oracle in which Cyrus is called’. Mowinckel, He That Cometh, 90. For further views on the Messiah and his role in these verses, pointing to him as King, see Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 109 n. 12. Ivan Engnell concludes that ‘Ebed Yahweh’ is none other than the Davidic Messiah, which is referring to his kingship; see Engnell, ‘The Ebed Yahweh Songs and the Suffering Messiah in “Deutero-Isaiah”’, 54–93. 84 Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 259. 85 Rignell appears to support this view that the word ‫ ֵהן‬suggests continuation and contrast between Isa 42:1 and 41:29. Lars G. Rignell, A Study of Isaiah, ch. 40–55 (Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1956), 31–32. See also John Goldingay and David F. Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55 (ICC; London: T&T Clark, 2006), 211. 86 See, for more information, Francis I. Andersen, ‘Lo and Behold! Taxonomy and Translation of Biblical Hebrew hinnēh’, in Hamlet on a Hill: Semitic and Greek Studies Presented to Professor T. Muraoka on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday (ed. M. F. J. Bassten and W. Th. van Peursen; Leuven: Peeters, 2003), 44–46. 83

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

77

what preceded Isa 42:1 (Isa 41:24, 29) with what follows, particularly v. 9; (2) Behold brackets this servant poem (v. 1 and v. 9); (3) The very word Behold points our attention to something, typically to a person or event, but here to a person; (4) Behold is an attentiongetter, and what follows is worthy of attention; (5) Behold is often found in nominal clauses such as this one; (6) Behold also introduces clauses involving predication (for example, Am 2:13; 4:2; 6:11, 14; 7:8; 8:11; 9:8, 9, 13). Thus, it leads to new information; (7) Behold also give a sense of surprise; (8) Behold assumes that the person or event is ready to act or that the action is taking place. 87 For these reasons, ‫ ֵהן‬should not be taken lightly but rather is significant in the Hebrew syntax of this passage. Although ‫ ֵהן‬in Isa 42:1 is exclamatory, 88 this is not its primary usage in this passage. Instead, it appears to encompass all of the reasons given above; while it is exclamatory, it also includes connection, bracketing, clauses involving predication, and attention grabbing. In their discussions of the word ‫ ֵהן‬in Isa 42:1, many scholars have explored some of the points above but none captures the totality of this word and how it performs in this pericope. For example, Westermann acknowledges that ‘the keynote of it all is given in the first two words, “Behold, my Servant”, or “This is my Servant”’. 89 He is correct that in these first words God points out and designates his servant. 90 Young emphasizes that the word behold indicates that we are at the edge of a great message. 91 Whybray gives the word a more formal function, noting that, ‘Yahweh is the 248F

249F

250F

251F

Note that there are a few studies on this word behold, lo from where I have taken my ideas and support. See Francis Brown, ‘Hinneh’, BDB 243–244; Louis O. Dorn, ‘“LO” and “BEHOLD”—Translating the Hebrew Word hinneh’, BT 52, no. 2 (2001): 222–229; Donald Slager, ‘The Use of “Behold” in the Old Testament’, OPTAT 3, no. 1 (1989): 50–79. 88 Some examples of the exclamatory use of this word elsewhere in Isaiah include Isa 5:7, 30; 8:22; 13:17; 17:1; 24:1; 28:16; 30:27; 32:1; 40:10; 41:27; 60:2. 89 Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 92. 90 Ibid. Reed Lessing has the same idea. Reed Lessing, Isaiah 40–55 (ed. Dean O. Wenthe; St. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 2011), 245. 91 Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 108. 87

78

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

speaker, and this is a formal presentation of the Servant which amounts to an act of appointment to, or confirmation in, an office’. 92 Oswalt sees behold as introductory to the words my servant. 93 Goldingay and Payne observe that because ‫‘ ֵהן‬introduce[s] a single noun rather than a clause[, it] gives that noun “my servant” great emphasis’. 94 The ‫ ֵהן‬also introduces a new scene, but not as completely different as Duhm believes it to be when he insists that Isa 42:1–4 has a totally new view and therefore is separated from its context. The LXX translates Isa 42:1 as follows: Ιακωβ ὁ παῖς μου, ἀντιλήμψομαι αὐτοῦ Ισραηλ ὁ ἐκλεκτός μου, προσεδέξατο αὐτὸν ἡ ψυχή μου ἔδωκα τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐπ᾿ αὐτόν, κρίσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἐξοίσει. 95 The translators include in the beginning of the verse, ‘Jacob is my servant and also my chosen Israel’, suggesting that the servant refers to corporate Israel rather than to one individual. The words ‘Jacob’ and ‘Israel’ have been added in translation and have taken the place of the word ‫הן‬.ֵ Thus, it appears that the LXX accepts the view that the servant in Isa 42 is the same one related to Jacob and Israel in ch. 41. However, the LXX misses the contextual and grammatical context of this passage. There is nothing in Isa 42 that would suggest that the servant is the same as Jacob or Israel. Childs points out: Hellenistic Judaism took its lead from the LXX and identified the servant with the people of Israel. However, Palestinian Judaism tended to interpret the passage messianically. It comes as little surprise that the Targum inserts the title Messiah in apposition to the servant in 42:1. 96

Whybray, Isaiah 40–66, 71. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 109. 94 Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 211. 95 Joseph Ziegler, ed., Isaiah (Septuaginta: VTG 14; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1939), 276. 96 Childs, Isaiah, 327. 92 93

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

79

The Noun ‫‘ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬Servant’

The term ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬97 has a wide range of meanings. It is attributed to the relationship between God and God’s people (see Ps 19:11) or to individuals such as Abraham (Ex 32:13), Moses (Ex 4:10; 14:31), Joshua (Ex 5:14), and David (2 Sam 7:19; 1 Kings 8:24). The title ‘servant of the Lord’ is used twenty-one times about Moses and twice about Joshua. The term ‘my servant’ is also associated with the people of Israel (Lev 25:42) and is also found in Isa 40–55. In the HB, ‘My servant’ is used for Moses six times, David twenty-one times, the prophets nine times, Job seven times, and Nebuchadnezzar two times. 98 Prophets were also called servants of the Lord (for example, Ahijah of Shiloh in 1 Kings 14:18; 15:29; Isaiah in Isa 20:3). The term ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬can refer to a slave, subject, official, vassal, or a follower of a particular god. 99 Therefore, only by closely reading the text to determine its function, action, and relation with the other traditional servant poems can one begin to determine what is meant by the servant. The term ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬occurs twenty-one times in Isa 40–50 (41:8, 9; 42:1; 42:19 (2x); 43:10; 44:1, 2, 21 (2x), 26; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3, 5, 6, 7; 50:10; 52:13; 53:11; 54:17), and twelve of those times it has the first person suffix, as found in Isa 41:8, 9; 42:1, 19; 43:10; 44:1, 2, 21; 45:4; 49:3; 52:13; 53:11. In Isa 40–50, ‘my servant’ occurs most commonly with the apposition Jacob, four times (Isa 41:8; 44:1, 2; 45:4), although Isa 41:9 could be included since ‘my servant’ refers back to v. 8. It occurs twice with Israel (Isa 44:21; 49:3), which could be considered an apposition as well. The only passage in the servant poems that has an apposition with ‘Israel’ and ‘my servant’ 259F

The term ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬in Isa 40–55 has been seen to refer to a new or second exodus. For example, Hans Eberhard von Waldow, ‘Message of Deutero-Isaiah’, Int 22, no. 3 (1968): 259–287; Rikki E. Watts, ‘Consolation or Confrontation: Isaiah 40–55 and the Delay of the New Exodus’, TynBul 41, no. 1 (1990): 31–59. 98 See Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 319 n. 1; Whybray, Isaiah 40–66, 71. Also, for more details, see Ringgren, ‘‫’ﬠ ֶבד‬, ֶ TDOT 10:376–405. 99 Ringgren, ‘‫’ﬠ ֶבד‬, ֶ TDOT 10:376–405. 97

80

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

is Isa 49:3. 100 If the word Israel is taken, in this particular case, as a description of the individual servant instead of the corporate servant because of its context (Isa 49:5–6), it would resolve the challenge often raised by scholars that the servant in this poem is Israel. 101 Yet, the servant poems as a whole do not contain a descriptor that clearly identifies the servant. Moreover, five occurrences of the twelve use ‘my servant’ without any description (Isa 42:1, 19; 43:10; 52:13; 53:11). The author appears to be intentional when he uses ‘my servant’ with an apposition and when he does not. 102 The hypothesis, suggested by some scholars, that Isa 42 refers to Israel seems to be based on the assumption of other passages, such as Isa 41:8. This assumption appears to have been made for the last thousand years, but is it a sound one? Because ‘My servant’ is found in a nominal clause (v. 1a), scholars may be linking it to a previous use of the word ‘servant’ by translating the clause as ‘this is my servant’; the subject ‘this’ is demonstrative and is understood to be used in an earlier reference in Isa 41:8–9. However, in fact, in v. 1b the construction changes to a verbal clause, which pushes the reader not to connect it to the servant passage in 41:8–16. 103 There are two possible reasons for this change in construction: First, Isa 42:1 is a contrast to 41:29. Some scholars have suggested that Israel is an interpolation; see Johann David Michaelis, Deutsche Uebersetzung des Alten Testaments, mit Anmerkungen für Ungelehrte (Göttingen: Dieterich, 1769–1785), 249; North, The Suffering Servant, 118–119. 101 The same approach is used in the book of Numbers with Balaam’s oracles. The first three oracles refer to Israel, but in the fourth oracle, Balaam moves from the plural pronoun used in the first three oracles to a single pronoun, pointing to a prophetic aspect of the one who would fulfill Israel’s role. This also appears to be the case with Isa 49:3–6. 102 It is interesting to note that the Targum refers to Israel in Isa 41:8, 9; 44:1, 2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3, and only three passages are messianically interpreted in the Targum of Isaiah: 42:1; 43:10; 52:13. Zimmerli and Jeremias, The Servant of God, 67. 103 See Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 213–214. 100

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

81

Pagan gods are a false image, reality, and action, while God is the true Creator and reality, and his reported action actually takes place. This parallel also occurs between 40:31 and 41:1, where it states‫‘ יַ ֲח ִליפוּ כ ַֹחח‬they will receive a new strength’. Second, in 41:6– 7, the verb ‫ ָחזַ ק‬is contrasted also with 41:8–10, demonstrating that other gods are powerless and preparing the way for what is to come through the powerful God in 42:1–9. The book of Isaiah specifically uses this word (‫)ﬠ ֶבד‬ ֶ in contexts where the servant is related to God and also the ‘Elect One’ but does not use the word ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬in the previous two ‘beholds’ in Isa 41:24, 29. Isaiah appears to contrast Israel’s nature of pride to the ‫’ﬠ ֶבד‬s ֶ nature of submission to God. Also, the word ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬is in the context (Isa 42:1–9) of the realm of God, while the word ‘Israel’ is found in the context of other gods. The term servant, as used in Isa 42:1, suggests the idea of servanthood, portraying a humble servant complying with God’s commands. The Verb ‫‘ תמך‬Take Hold’

After the nominal clause, the first verb is used in the first singular person as the subject, referring to God, who is speaking in this unit. The verb is in the imperfect without the waw consecutive, which would imply a present or future tense or time. From this verb to the end of the verse, the four verbs form a chiastic structure. The first and last verbs are imperfect, while the second and the third verbs are perfect, forming a chiastic structure of A, B, B’, A’. 104 The perfect verbs would appear to refer back to an event in the past. More particularly, these verbs do not have a waw consecutive. Yet, if these verbs are connected in a chiastic structure, it would mean that they are related to the imperfect verb ‫תמך‬, making the first imperfect verb the governor verb for the following verbs in v. 1. This could suggest that the perfect verbs do not necessarily refer back to an idea in the past but rather to either the present or the future. The verb ‫ תמך‬can mean to ‘uphold/hold, grasp and support’. This word is used twenty-one times in the OT and three times in 104

Goldingay and Payne also have made this observation; ibid., 213.

82

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Isa 33:15; 41:10; 42:1. Two times in Isaiah this verb is used with a key word ‘hand, palm of hand, and the right hand’ (Isa 33:15; 41:10), but this is not the case in Isa 42:1. The Qal imperfect of ‫ תמך‬with the preposition ‫ ְבּ‬has a meaning of ‘grasp’. 105 The word ‘hand’ is used in v. 6, but with a different verb, ‫חזַ ק‬, a Hiph’il imperfect, which means to ‘grasp, seize’. In Isa 42:1, the object of the verb ‫ תמך‬is the pronoun ‘him’ instead of ‘hand’, which would refer, not to a part of the body that is being ‘held’, but rather to the entire being, the servant. In Ps 63:9, the language is similar to Isa 42:1, where the right hand of God supports the Psalmist. The context of this psalm is that the Psalmist acknowledges in praise that God is the Creator and his sustainer. 106 The fact that the subject, God, is upholding the servant implies that God has the ability and power to work through him. This is further revealed in vv. 2–4 that follow. Thus, the primary meaning of this term in Isa 42:1 suggests a confirmation of the servant’s call, and ‘it validates the appointment of the servant and brings it to an affirmative conclusion’. 107 In ‫ ֶא ְת ָמ�־בּו‬the preposition ‫ ְבּ‬works as a relative particle, 108 ֶ Literally, and the indirect object influences the translation of �‫א ְת ָמ‬. it would read ‘Behold my servant, I uphold him’, but in this case, the ‫ ְבּ‬acts as a relative particle ‘which’, turned into a relative pronoun that agrees with both ‘servant’ and ‘him’, and put into the objective case ‘whom’. Therefore, the translation is ‘Behold my servant whom I uphold’, 109 emphasizing clearly who is being upheld: the servant. This selective emphasis suggests that this servant is different from previous servant(s), since the selective emphasis is not used with Isa 41:8–9. 26F

267F

269F

105

4:1751.

See Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner, ‘‫’תמך‬, HALOT

Although many scholars believe that Ps 63 would be a Lament, I do not accept this as the appropriate genre here. 107 L. Ruppert, ‘‫’תמך‬, TDOT 15:694–699. 108 J. Washington Watts, A Survey of Syntax in the Hebrew Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 124. 109 See ibid. 106

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

83

The Noun ‫‘ ָבּ ִחיר‬Chosen’

The noun ‫ ָבּ ִחיר‬in the present form is found thirteen times in the OT (2 Sam 21:6; 1 Chr 16:13; Ps 105:6, 43; 106:5, 23; 89:4; Isa 42:1; 43:20; 45:4; 65:9, 15, 22). It derives from the verb ‫‘ בחר‬to choose’. ‘My chosen’ ‫ ְבּ ִח ִירי‬refers back to the servant and is a descriptive noun that explains that the servant is not just any servant, but a chosen one, specifically selected from among others. This noun is not only used of the (individual) servant of God; God’s people are also called my chosen (Isa 43:20), as is Israel (Isa 45:4) and the pious ones (Isa 65:9, 15, 22). The term ‘chosen’ is not unique to a biblical view; the Akkadian cuneiform on a royal inscription refers to a king whose ‘“name has been called or designated” by the gods’. 110 This Akkadian term itût (kūn libbi) ili, ‘the chosen, selected, of the god’ corresponds to the Hebrew ‫‘ ָר ְצ ָתה נַ ְפ ִשׁי ְבּ ִח ִירי‬my chosen one whom I desire’ (Isa 42:1). 111 A similar idea can be found in Nathan’s prophecy, where the term ‘servant’ is used to describe the king’s relationship to God (2 Sam 7:5; Ps 78:70; 89:4; 132:10). 112 Additionally, a comparable concept is found in the parallel between ‘servant’ and ‘chosen’ when referring to royal ideology with ‘servant of the Lord’; this example is clearly emphasized in Ps 105:6. 113 Many people or objects are chosen in the OT: Moses chooses men to judge the people (Ex 18:25), Joshua chooses warriors that are capable of fighting the Amalekites (Ex 17:9), David chooses stones for his sling when facing Goliath (1 Sam 17:40), and wood is carefully chosen for making images (Isa 40:20). Often when God is the subject of the verb ‘to choose’, it is in the choice of someone being appointed to something, such as choosing a king. 114 Saul and David are depicted as being chosen for the role of king. In 1 Sam 11:15, Saul is chosen by God to be king. Also, 2 Sam 6:21 describes 271F

27F

273F

Shalom M. Paul, Devrei Shalom: Collected Studies of Shalom M. Paul on the Bible and the Ancient Near East 1967–2005 (CHANE 23; Leiden: Brill, 2005), 12. 111 Ibid., 12–13. 112 See H. Wildberger, ‘‫’בחר‬, TLOT 1:209–226. 113 Ibid., 220. 114 See Horst Seebass, ‘‫’בּ ַחר‬, ָ TDOT 2:74–87. 110

84

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

David as being chosen by God above all his house as a ‘prince’ over Israel. Furthermore, priests were also chosen for a particular role. Again, as God chose kings, the same observations can be made with the priesthood. God chose a family to perform a specific task (see 1 Sam 2:27–30). The Levitical priests were chosen for the role of ministering to God (Deut 21:5). These examples underscore the notion that in Isa 42:1, the ‘servant’ is ‘chosen’ by God for a particular role or appointed for a specific responsibility. The verb ‘choose’ is also related to the choice of a people in the OT, particularly when God chooses Israel to be his people. The connotation of ‫ בחר‬occurs in relation to persons who are chosen out of a group. Thus, for example, Israel is chosen from the Canaanites (Deut 7:6; 14:2; also see 1 Kings 3:8), the context, specifically of Deut 7:6, being related to the covenant renewal in Ex 34:10-16 and Ex 19:5-6 as an allusion. Therefore, the term ‫בחר‬ includes the idea of separate or selection. 115 In Isa 42:1, ‘my chosen’ clearly refers to the servant. Verse 1b parallels v. 1a, repeating what we already know but also adding new thoughts, namely that God is not only holding this servant but God’s soul is also pleased with him. 116 This poetry style is often used in Hebrew poetry for the purpose of emphasis and brevity and to convey completion and terseness of thought. 117 Furthermore, both these stanzas have a meter of three, making them consistent with each other for the first half of v. 1. 275F

The Verb ‫‘ רצה‬Pleased With’

The Qal perfect verb ‫ ָר ְצ ָתה‬can mean to ‘be pleased with, find good or pleasant, love, like, wish for, accept with pleasure’, but often is translated as ‘delight’ (NJPS Hebrew Bible) or ‘accept’. 118 With such a wide range of possible meanings, how are we to decide 278F

Ibid. See below regarding ‫ר ְצ ָתה נַ ְפ ִשׁי‬.ָ 117 See Adele Berlin, The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985), 6–7. 118 Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 211. 115 116

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

85

which meaning this word has in Isa 42:1? Perhaps interpreters are trying to capture the best nuances of the word ‫ ָר ְצ ָתה‬and, in trying to do just that, have leaned toward one aspect or another. But might it be possible for this word to have both meanings at the same time, in fact for the author to have deliberately chosen this word in order to convey a broader meaning? I suggest that scholars on both sides interpret the word correctly but that they do so only partially. The word could mean both ‘delight’ and ‘accept’ at the same time. 119 The word ‫ ָר ָצה‬with the subject as God definitely reveals God’s pleasure toward a particular individual that he has set aside. 120 In 1 Chr 28:4 when David was chosen by God to be king, he (God) took delight [‫ ָ]ר ָצה‬in him. This is a direct correlation with Isa 42:1; God delights in his servant. Therefore, these passages demonstrate a connection between God’s election (‫)בּ ִחיר‬ ָ and ‫ר ָצה‬.ָ 121 On the other hand, through the Qal verb, Isaiah portrays that God is delighted in the servant, takes pleasure in him, and looks favorably upon him. 122 Yet precisely what is it about the servant that God takes pleasure in or looks favorably upon? In Am 5:22, the same Qal verb is used where God says, ‘Even if you offered me your burnt-offering and your meal offering, I will not accept [‫ָ]ר ָצה‬ [them].’ In Malachi we find this same meaning in the verse, ‘I will not accept [‫ ָ]ר ָצה‬an offering from your hand’ (Mal 1:10, and see v. 13). And in Psalms the acceptance (or non-acceptance) of an offer281F

Hudyard Muskita studied the synonym of ‫ ָר ָצה‬which is ‫‘ חפץ‬delight, delight, take pleasure, be willing’, and he concluded that the word ‫ חפץ‬which is found in Isa 58:13 can have a possible polysemy in meaning. The term ‫ ָר ָצה‬can also have a similar approach in Isa 42:1. See Hudyard Muskita, ‘The Meaning of “ḥāpeṣ” in Isaiah 58:13: A Study of the Concept of Sabbath Observance’ (unpubl. thesis, Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies, 1995). 120 H. M. Barstad, ‘‫’ר ָצה‬, ָ TDOT 13:618–630. 121 Ibid. 122 The Semitic inscriptions of the verb rqy in Qal are compared to ‫ר ָצה‬,ָ which is translated as ‘to take pleasure in, to look favourably upon’. Jacob Hoftijzer and Karel Jongeling, Dictionary of the North-West Semitic Inscriptions (New York: Brill, 1995), 1083. 119

86

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

ing includes the verb ‫( ָר ָצה‬Ps 51:18 [Eng. 51:16]; 119:108), whereas in Leviticus, the expression ‫‘ ִל ְרצֹנוֹ‬to favor it’ as a noun (see Lev 1:3) ‘serves as a technical term denoting God’s favorable acceptance of the sacrificial offering’. 123 With these parallels in mind, we can conclude that the author of Isaiah expresses how God takes pleasure in the servant as being a sacrifice for Israel and the nations (see Isa 53). God’s delight encompasses both how God chose the servant, who is a delight to him, and how God takes pleasure in the servant because he is willing to be a sacrifice. While this Qal verb appears only in Isa 42:1, a secondary lexeme of the same verb ‫ ָר ָצה‬also appears once in chs 40–55, and this occurrence is found in Isa 40:2. However, this verb is not in a Qal stem but rather in a Niph’al stem. This particular verb in the secondary lexeme is only found in Isa 40:2 and nowhere else in the OT. 124 The suggested meaning given to this verb in the context of Isa 40:2 is ‘to be carried off, away (guilt), expiate’. If this is the correct interpretation of ‫ ָר ָצה‬in the Niph’al, there will be a close correlation with the primary lexeme of the same verb in the Niph’al, mainly used in the book of Leviticus. 125 The primary lexeme verb ‫ ָר ָצה‬is attributed the meaning of ‘to be regarded as pleasing’ with a sacrifice (Lev 7:18; 19:7; 22:23-27), and when used with ‫ ְל‬it is for someone’s benefit (Lev 1:4; 22:25). 126 Therefore, Isa 40:2, in light of the attestation in Leviticus, would refer to someone who would carry sin away in terms of a sacrificial act. While in Isa 42:1 the same verb is not in a Niph’al stem, there may be some interconnection to the idea of carrying sin away by a sacrificial action, which can be contextually supported, particularly with Isa 42:6. 127 As with the Niph’al verb, the noun ‫‘ ָרצוֹן‬pleasure, will, intention, favor’, in the religious context, is found in the setting of what God’s pleasure is toward the cultic realm. For example, ‫ ָרצוֹן‬is 283F

286F

287F

Barstad, ‘‫’ר ָצה‬, ָ TDOT 13:618–630. Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’ר ָצה‬, ָ HALOT 3:1282. 125 It is important to note that whether the term ‫ ָר ָצה‬has one or two lexemes has been controversial among scholars. See Barstad, ‘‫’ר ָצה‬, ָ TDOT 13:618–630. 126 Ibid., 1281. 127 See my discussion regarding Isa 42:6 in this chapter. 123 124

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

87

found in the context of ‫( ָר ָצה‬Lev 1:3; 19:5; 22:19-21, 29; 23:11), which is suggested by the technical term related to the sacrificial offerings. 128 Additionally, the noun is also found in Isa 56:7; 58:5; 60:7; 61:2 in relation to the cultic realm where God is pleased with a type of sacrificial offering. Thus, Isa 42:1 may suggest that God is pleased with the servant for what he (the servant) is about to do. That may be reflected in the action of the servant in the coming verses of Isa 42. God carefully chose not only the one who could do his work well, but that servant, that one whom he loved more than anyone else. The third feminine perfect verb ‫ ָר ְצ ָתה‬is often not translated with a third feminine subject; for example, NJPS reads ‘in whom I delight’, 129 Goldingay and Payne translate it as ‘whom I myself accepted’. 130 The closest subject that is feminine would be ‫נַ ְפ ִשׁי‬, which would make the most sense translated as ‘my soul delights/pleases’. 131 It refers back to God’s soul, who remains the subject of the verb. The soul here may refer to the innermost part of God, or the most precious part of God, akin to how we use the word ‘heart’ nowadays. 28F

291F

G. Gerleman, ‘‫’ר ָצה‬, ָ TLOT 3:1259–1261; see also Barstad, ‘‫’ר ָצה‬, ָ TDOT 13:618–630. 129 A similar translation is made by Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40–55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, 208; McKenzie, Second Isaiah, 36. 130 Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 211. 131 A number of scholars have seen the appropriateness of translating this clause by using ‘my soul’ as the subject; see Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, 175; Antti Laato, The Servant of YHWH and Cyrus: A Reinterpretation of the Exilic Messianic Programme in Isaiah 40–55 (ConBOT 35; Stockholm, Sweden: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1992), 74; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 319; Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 111; Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 110. 128

88

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The Clause ‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‫‘ נָ ַת ִתּי‬I Place My Spirit on Him’

The expression ‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‫‘ נָ ַת ִתּי‬I will place/put my spirit upon him’ is an expression used in other parts of the HB to refer to setting someone apart, meaning by extension to set someone apart for a particular work 132 and also to equip someone for a particular task (see Ex 35:31–36:1; Num 11:16–30). Kings, priests, and prophets were anointed for their designated work. Here the servant receives the spirit of God for a particular work, perhaps for revealing the servant as being the king, the priest, and the prophet (see 1 Sam 16:13; 1 Kings 2:15; 1 Chr 29:22, anointed both Solomon as king and Zadok as priest; Isa 11:2; Jer 33:14–22; Zech 6:9–13; Mt 3:16– 17; Heb 3:1–6). The Targum employs ‘my holy spirit’ for ‫רוּחי‬, ִ 133 while the MT, Syriac Peshiṭta, and the LXX have it only as ‘my spirit’, although all make this noun a construct. This leads to an important question: Does the text mean to refer to the ‘spirit’ or the ‘Spirit’? I suggest that this reference to ‘my spirit’ refers back to God, the one who is speaking, making this noun possessive: the spirit of God. Since this is the Spirit of God, and not the spirit of the author, one can conclude that this spirit means the ‘Spirit’ of the Godhead. Yet Isaiah uses both God’s Spirit and the human spirit in the passages in table 7. As table 7 shows, the phrase ‫רוּחי‬ ִ is used four times in Isaiah (30:1; 42:1; 44:3; 59:21), while the construct‫רוּחח‬ ַ ‫ יְ הוָ ה‬occurs five times (11:2; 40:7, 13; 59:19; 63:14). The possessive ‘my spirit’ is also used for humans on two occasions (26:9; 38:16) and once with the plural suffix (33:11). Hence, Isaiah uses the possessive on a number of occasions. Ezekiel does the same thing, for example, in Ezek 36:27, ‫ת־רוּחי ֶא ֵתּן ְבּ ִק ְר ְבּ ֶכם‬ ִ ‫‘ וְ ֶא‬And I will put my 29F

293F

There are no other places in the Hebrew Bible (HB) where this exact clause is found with the verb ‫ נָ ַת ִתּי‬immediately followed by ‫;רוּחי‬ ִ the closest one is Ezek 37:14 ‫יתם‬ ֶ ִ‫רוּחי ָב ֶכם וִ ְחי‬ ִ ‫נָ ַת ִתּי‬. However, there are other places in the HB where the ‘spirit’ is placed on someone or removed and placed on someone else; for example, Num 11:17, 25, 29; Isa 37:7; 59:21; Ezek 36:27; 37:14. 133 See Chilton, The Isaiah Targum, 81. 132

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

89

Spirit within you’, where, ‘according to Ezekiel 36:27, the Spirit of God has power to enable the people to obey the laws of God’. 134 Table 7. The Spirit of God and Human Spirit in Isaiah God’s Spirit

Human Spirit

‫רוּחחיְ הוָ ה‬ ַ ‘the Spirit of YHWH’ Isa 11:2; 40:7, 13; 59:19; 63:14

‫רוּח ֶכם‬ ֲ ‘your spirit’ Isa 33:11

‫רוּחי‬ ִ ‘my Spirit’ Isa 30:1; 42:1; 44:3; 59:21

‫רוּחי‬ ִ ‘my spirit’ Isa 26:9; 38:16

The verb ‫ נָ ַתן‬occurs mostly in Qal (forty-nine times) and seven times in Niph’al in Isaiah. The meaning of this word is normally broad: ‘to give, to place, to establish, to lay and to make’. ‫ נָ ַתן‬is used here with the preposition ‫ﬠל‬,ַ which gives the meaning ‘to place, lay, and give’, describing the location of the object, in this In his study of Ezek 36:27, James Mutua has come up with several worthy points regarding the correlation between the Spirit and God. Isaiah uses these words in the same way. James Mutua, ‘The Spirit of the Lord and Obedience to God’s Law: An Exegetical, Intertextual, and Theological Study of Ezekiel 36:27’ (unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 2014), 24. Here is his observation on Ezek 36:27: ‘(1) ‫“ רוחי‬my Spirit” refers to the Spirit of God, whereby the noun ‫ רוח‬is modified by a possessive adjective ‫“ י‬my” in the context of a direct discourse of God. (2) Elsewhere in Ezekiel, the noun ‫ רוח‬is in construct with the name of God, meaning the Spirit of God. (3) Outside Ezekiel, ‫ רוח‬is qualified as holy and as good Spirit of God in the second and third possessive adjective masculine singular, implying that ‫ רוחי‬in Ezekiel is holy and good. (4) The Spirit of God renews and ‫ רוח‬is qualified as ‫“ חדשׁה‬new” in Ezekiel. (5) The Spirit of God has power or ability to independently do things and empower people to do things. (6) The Spirit of God and ‫ רוח‬share common action verbs, suggesting that ‫“ רוחי‬my Spirit”, the Spirit of God and ‫ רוח‬are closely related in that they are described with the same verbs as performing certain actions.’ Ibid., 27–28. 134

90

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

case the‫רוּחח‬ ַ . 135 Furthermore, ‫ נָ ַתן‬is used with ‘the accusative assumed in the major meaning under discussion–to give someone something or to present someone with something’. 136 When the verb ‫ נָ ַתן‬is used with abstract words, such as ‘spirit’ in this case, the meaning can be related to ‘bring upon’. The idea of the verb in Isa 42:1 is, therefore, ‘to bring upon’ the servant the Spirit of God, or ‘to place’ the Spirit of God upon the servant, since the preposition is used here with the location of the object or person. In either scenario, the verb ‫ נָ ַתן‬functions as a directional movement from God to the servant. In the case of ‘to place’, the verb signals the location of the object: the Spirit is to be placed on the servant. In other cases, the verb signals the motion of the object: the Spirit is to be brought upon the servant. Thus, the verb may denote both the location of the Spirit and the motion of the Spirit on the servant, specifying that the servant is the one receiving the Spirit. The verb suggests that the ‘Spirit’ is given for the purpose of equipping and empowering the servant for the special or divine tasks at hand. 137 Furthermore, the verb ‫ נָ ַת ִתּי‬in the same clause is either a perfect of determination or a past perfect, meaning that the servant is already in place. 138 If this is a perfect of determination, it would imply a present action. Because the first verb in v. 1 is imperfect, the sequential perfect verbs could be translated as ‘I will place/put’, suggesting a determination. On the other hand, the previous clause suggests that the servant has already been ‘chosen’, and the ‘behold’ functions as though God is pointing to the servant already in place, as in ‘look here’. Thus, this particular verb appears to convey a double entendre by suggesting that the servant has been already chosen and stands before our eyes, while the perfect of determina298F

C. J. Labuschagne, ‘‫’נתן‬, TLOT, 2:774–791. Ludwig Köhler and Walter Baumgartner, Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti libros (2d ed.; Leiden: Brill; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958), 642. 137 See Anthony C. Thiselton, The Holy Spirit–In Biblical Teaching, through the Centuries, and Today (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013), 9–12; Wonsuk Ma, ‘Isaiah’, in A Biblical Theology of the Holy Spirit (eds. Trevor J. Burke and Keith Warrington; Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade, 2014), 34–45. 138 Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 320. 135 136

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

91

tion gives the impression that the servant is yet to be chosen in the future. 139 Throughout the book of Isaiah, the author makes deliberate use of type and antitype, signifying that the servant is a servant now as well as in and for the future (see Isa 7–12). The Clause ‫יוֹציא‬ ִ ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט ַלגּוֹיִ ם‬He Will Bring Judgment to the Nations’

The verb ‫ יצא‬with ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬140 is found a total of eight times in the HB: twice in Isa 42:1, 3, as well as six more times in the Old Testament, in Ps 17:2; 37:6; Hos 6:4; Hab 1:4 (2x), 7. The primary meaning of ‫ יצא‬is ‘to come out’, ‘go out’, ‘appear’, ‘bring forth’, and ‘produce’, which here is a Hiph’il imperfect to mean ‘he will bring’. Anna May Say Pa’s observation that, ‘in Psalm 17, which is a lament or a prayer of deliverance from enemies, the phrase is a cry for vindication against false accusations’, 141 opens up the possibility that in Isaiah this meaning could be attributed to God. Mitchell Dahood explains that the term ‫ יצא‬in Ps 17:2 means ‘“to shine”, “to be bright”, like the Arabic waḍu’a, which means “to be clear”, This double entendre of the verb ‘give’ would suggest that the servant in the first servant poem is a type in the form of Cyrus, as we will see in chs 3 and 4 of this work, while the perfect of determination gives the allusion that the servant also will be the antitype in the form of the Messiah. 140 See also, for further details on research done on the word mišpāṭ in Isa 40–66, Hemchand Gossai, Social Critique by Israel’s Eighth-Century Prophets: Justice and Righteousness in Context (Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf & Stock, 2006), 154–156; J. van der Ploeg, ‘SĀPAT et MIŠPĀT’, OtSt 2 (1943): 144–155. Note that Begrich, Sidney Smith, Lindblom, and Muilenburg prefer to understand this word in the judicial sense. For McKenzie, this is inadequate considering the context, but yet the term ‘judgment’ is also too broad of a word. Thus, for McKenzie, it appears to be both judgment and law, which convey the idea of revelation, who the servant is—the mediator of the revelation of Yahweh, and this is the mission of the servant. McKenzie is not looking at the word exegetically but rather philosophically. McKenzie, Second Isaiah, 37. 141 Anna May Say Pa, ‘The Concept of Israel's Role Regarding the Nations in Isaiah 40–55’ (unpubl. diss., Princeton Theological Seminary, 1989), 83. 139

92

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

“to be fair”, and da’a, “to shine”’. 142 So Anna May Say Pa translates Ps 17:2 as: ‘“Let my justice shine before you/may your eyes gaze upon my integrity.”’ 143 Thus, Ps 17 may shed light on what was declared in Isa 42:1, 3. The servant is going to let his justice shine so that his name may be vindicated against the accusations toward God in the previous chapter (Isa 41). 144 Moreover, the preposition ‫ ל‬employed here can be either a terminative lamed or a disadvantage lamed. 145 Therefore, the judgment would be either the subject, judgment ‘to’ or ‘for’ the nations, or the judgment would be the object, judgment ‘against’ the nations. Thus, the judgment can be a positive decision ‘for’ the nations or it can be a negative event, depending upon the response of the nations. The word ‫מ ְשׁ ָפּט‬, ִ used in vv. 1 and 3 of Isa 42, is repeated in v. 4, and its meaning is variously ‘judgment, decision, justice, establish, and brought forth justice’. The noun ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬derives from the verb ‫שׁפט‬, which means ‘judgment and justice’. Hence, the basic meaning of ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬should not be separated from the verb’s meaning. 146 In Isaiah there is a wide range of usage of this word; for example, in Isa 51:4; 59:9, the ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬serves as a light (see Zeph 3:5; Mic 7:9; Ps 37:6), the ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬can be spoken (Isa 32:7), or sought (1:17; 16:5). It also has a sense of legal case with the word ‫‘ ִריב‬who will contend (‫ )יָּ ִריב‬with me’, which is paralleled with the next clause ‘who is my adversary ‫( ’ ַב ַﬠל ִמ ְשׁ ָפּ ִטי‬Isa 50:8). 147 In Isa 42:1 ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ can mean both ‘judgment’ and ‘justice’, judgment because God, in 305F

Mitchell Dahood, Proverbs and Northwest Semitic Philology (ScrPIB 113; Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1963), 52. See also Mitchell Dahood, Psalms I, 1–50 (AB 16; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1965), 94; H. D. Preuss, ‘‫’יצא‬, TDOT 6:225–250. 143 Say Pa, ‘The Concept of Israel’s Role Regarding the Nations in Isaiah 40–55’, 85; Dahood, Psalms I, 1–50, 93–94. 144 For more studies on the word ‫יצא‬, see Godfrey Rolles Driver, ‘The Hebrew Text of Sirach: A Text-Critical and Historical Study’, JTS 20, no. 2 (1969): 568; Shaul Esh, ‘Note on ‫’יצא‬, VT 4, no. 3 (1954): 305–307. 145 See Bruce K. Waltke and M. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990), 206–208. 146 See B. Johnson, ‘‫שׁ ָפּט‬ ְ ‫’מ‬, ִ TDOT 9:86–98. 147 Ibid. 142

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

93

the previous passages, calls on the Israelites to reflect together, suggesting the idea of ‘contend’ as in Isa 50:8, and justice because it raises the question about who is right: God or the Israelites (see Mic 6:1–16)? God will demonstrate through the servant’s work that he is just, perfect, and correct, and what the servant does is properly done, in the sense of being holy and according to God’s will. The servant is also revealing how God is just and fair in his approach with the Israelites. The effect of the repetition of this word ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬in vv. 1–4 is that of a crescendo: Verse 1 describes the servant bringing forth judgment/justice; v. 3 describes him as bringing it forth in truth; and finally in v. 4 we are told he will establish it. With each repetition, the event becomes more certain, culminating in its establishment; it is ‘establish[ed], put in place’ (see Mal 2:17). 148 308F

Verse 2 ‫לֹא יִ ְצ ַﬠק וְ לֹא יִ ָשּׂא‬ ‫וְ לֹא־יַ ְשׁ ִמ ַי� ַבּחוּץ קוֹלוֹ‬ He will not cry out nor lift up his voice Nor his voice will be heard in the street

Three Verbs ‫צעק‬, ‫נשׂא‬, ‫‘ שׁמע‬Cry Out, Lift up, Hear’

Isaiah moves to v. 2 by demonstrating the servant’s humility. The first clause of v. 2 includes a meter of four, and the second clause also has a meter of four. Thus, the structure of these clauses is parallel with each other. The first clause is awkward to translate since the verb ‫ נשׂא‬has no direct object. 149 The reason for this is that the poetry, by making both clauses parallel in length, leaves the first clause less clear by itself. Literally, the first clause is ‫לֹא יִ ְצ ַﬠק וְ לֹא‬ ‫‘ יִ ָשּׂא‬he will not cry out nor lift’. The second clause is �‫וְ לֹא־יַ ְשׁ ִמ ַי‬ ‫‘ ַבּחוּץ קוֹלוֹ‬and he will not cause his voice to be heard out of the See Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 112. A. B. Davidson says that certain verbs omit their object; see Andrew B. Davidson, Hebrew Syntax (3d ed.; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1901), 106–107. 148 149

94

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

door’. The second clause completes the thought of the first clause; thus, one can conclude that the ‫ קוֹלוֹ‬refers to what was missing in the first clause, ‘he will not cry out nor raise his voice’. The three verbs ‫צעק‬, ‫נשׂא‬, ‫ שׁמע‬appear to suggest that there is a crescendo or a rapid sequence of noise. However, that these verbs are preceded by the negation ‫ לֹא‬suggests, instead, that ‘the intention is to create a cumulative emphasis on a quiet, unaggressive, unthreatening ministry’. 150 The author is quite explicit with his choice of the first verb ‫צעק‬, though he could have used the synonym ‫קרא‬, which is more common to Isaiah and often translated as ‘cry out’ or ‘call out’ (the primary meaning; see Isa 40:6). So we have to ask, why would the author specifically use ‫ צעק‬for ‘cry out’? Of these three aforementioned verbs, ‫ צעק‬appears only twice in Isa 40–55, the second occurrence being Isa 46:7, where the term refers to Israel ‘crying out’ to its idols. The verb ‫ צעק‬in the Pentateuch is used mainly in relation to someone or something crying to God in anguish, such as Pharaoh and Moses (for example, Gen 4:10; 27:34; Ex 5:8, 15; Num 11:2). In most instances, it is a cry of desperation and help, of not being able to remove oneself from a situation (see Isa 19:20). In Isa 42:2, the servant does not cry for help or in desperation, for he himself is the helper, the rescuer from oppression (Isa 41:14; 43:3; 49:7). Instead, what the writer seems to be trying to portray here is that the servant is whispering words to his God. The words even convey a sense of a broken voice or of no sound at all coming forth, for the repetitive ‘not’ with the verbs that follow signal rapid transitions, using the short Hebrew word ‫לֹא‬. Therefore, the sense of the text is that though the servant in Isa 42:2 does not cry out nor raise his voice nor cause his voice to be heard at the door, yet Israel who does not accept God as their Creator and Redeemer will cry for sorrow of heart and will wail with a broken spirit (Isa 65:14). For the two other verbs, the verb ‫ נשׂא‬is found in Isa 46:3, 4, 7, but it is used for a different purpose (and is found a total of twenty times in Isa 40–55). The verb ‫שׁמע‬, a very common verb that appears forty-three times in these chapters, is also found in Isa 150

Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 320.

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

95

46:3, 12—there used in the imperative. The context of ch. 46 is that Israel is worshiping other deities and forgetting how God has taken care of them. Thus, the appearance of crying out to the deities or making their voice heard to the deities suggests a loud commotion of victory. 151 In contrast, Isa 42:2 describes the unpretentious and inconspicuous work of the servant. Furthermore, the description of the servant’s ‘not crying out or lifting up his voice, and his voice not heard in the street’, in light of v. 3, indicates that the servant is not seeking attention for himself in the mission he is accomplishing. As Delitzsch states, the servant ‘does not seek His own, and therefore denies Himself’. 152 His character of gentleness, meekness, and humility is the opposite of Israel’s, who exalts itself with a display of noise (see 1 Kings 18:20–40; Zech 9:9). 153 If v. 2 is taken in light of v. 1, when the servant received the Spirit of God, then the outcome would be different. In that case, v. 2 could imply that the servant is merely being quiet; however, v. 2 works better with vv. 3–4, since these verses describe his call. Scholars who designate this servant as Moses may have overlooked the irony implicit in the word ‫קוֹל‬. As mentioned above, this word is placed at the end of the second clause for emphasis. But what is the reason for mentioning ‘his voice’? The author contrasts this idea with what would have been familiar to the audience, the story of Moses in Ex 2:23–7:7, who could not speak clearly or with great ability and was very humble (Ex 4:10–12; 6:12, 30; Num 12:3). But this servant whom God announces does speak with clarity and with authority.

Young provides more details regarding ‘cry out’; see Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 109–110. 152 Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, 175. 153 See Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah: The Servant Songs, 46; Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, 175. 151

96

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The Particle ‫‘ לֹא‬Not’

The word ‫ לֹא‬appears three times in v. 2 and then two times in the following two verses. This repetition alerts the reader to what the servant is ‘not’ going to do, whether physically or mentally. The repetition also contrasts Israel’s negative deed with the servant’s positive deed. This repetition of ‫ לֹא‬is not negative but positive, thanks to the outlook of the servant, and is an example of litotes. 154 The word ‫ לֹא‬is used seven times in these three verses, a number signifying completion. The reality is that the negativity of ‫ לֹא‬is a positive outcome; more particularly, ‫ לֹא‬in vv. 2–3 contrasts with the ‫ לֹא‬in v. 4. Verse 3 ‫ָקנֶ ה ָרצוּץ לֹא יִ ְשׁבּוֹר‬ ‫וּפ ְשׁ ָתּה ֵכ ָהה לֹא יְ ַכ ֶבּנָּ ה‬ ִ ‫יוֹציא ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ִ ‫ֶל ֱא ֶמת‬ A crushed reed he will not break, And dim wick he will not quench/extinguish, He will bring justice in truth

Introduction of Verse 3 Meter The first two clauses of v. 3 consist of a meter of 4:4. Verses 2 and 3 together also form a double parallel in structure, thanks to their meter 4:4:4:4 (see figure 1) and the position of their verbs—the first clause in each verse has two verbs (v. 2 ‫יִ ְצ ַﬠק‬, ‫יִ ָשּׂא‬, v. 3 ‫רצוּץ‬,ָ ‫)יִ ְשׁבּוֹר‬, although the word ‫ ָרצוּץ‬is a verbal noun (Qal passive participle), and the second clause, one verb (v. 2 �‫יַ ְשׁ ִמ ַי‬, v. 3 ‫—)יְ ַכ ֶבּנָּ ה‬ thus making the clauses, arranged according to their verbs, form an A, B, A’, B’ pattern. Finally, the last clause of v. 3 has a metrical count of three, and thus, the entire verse meter is 4:4:3. As pointed out in figure 1, v. 3’s meter structure is parallel to v. 4’s meter of North, The Suffering Servant, 142. Litotes is an understatement in which an affirmative is expressed by the negative of its contrary. 154

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

97

4:4:3. Verses 3 and 4 also have the same number of verbs in each clause, thus forming a A, B, C, A’, B’, C’ structure. The Verb ‫‘ רצץ‬Crush’

The first verb ‫ רצץ‬is a passive Qal participle, meaning to ‘crush, oppress, and suppress’. The term ‫‘ רצץ‬describes the subj. [‫ ָ]קנֶ ה‬as having the action continuously exercised upon him, or at least differs from the adj. in presenting the state of the subj. as the result of an action’. 155 Thus, the translation is ‘a crushed reed’, which describes an action continuously exercised on the reed, the ‘reed’ being another noun describing Israel. The symbolism of the ‘reed’ is vital to exhibit the servant’s identity and Israel’s role here as God continues the description of his ministry. Both words ‫ ָקנֶ ה ָרצוּץ‬together with a passive Qal participle appear only three times in the HB, two of which are found in Isaiah (36:6; 42:3), and Isa 36:6 repeats the third occurrence that appears in 2 Kings 18:21. In both 2 Kings 18:21 and Isa 36:6, the context is about Rabshakeh, the Assyrian captain, sending someone to speak to Hezekiah the words of King Sennacherib: ‘Look! You are trusting in the staff of this broken reed, Egypt, on which if a man leans, it will go into his hand and pierce it. So is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all who trust in him.’ The ‘broken reed’ here is an unreliable ally in the most crucial time of need. However, in Isa 42:3, this crushed reed will not be broken. Lamberty-Zielinski states that ‫‘ ָקנֶ ה ָרצוּץ‬symbolize the sinfulness of the people of Israel’. 156 Under the same sub-title, he also points out that ‫ ָקנֶ ה‬in ‘the OT uses this phenomenon frequently and variously as metaphor for vulnerability and fragility’. 157 Furthermore, the ‘Akkadian word qanû(m) is found with the meanings “(pieces of) wood”, “reed”, and “sacrificial offering”’. 158 The context of these words in Isa 42:3 appears to suggest that the servant will not abuse 317F

318F

Davidson, Hebrew Syntax, 130. Lamberty-Zielinski’s statement is dependent on the survey of interpretation of K. Elliger. H. Lamberty-Zielinski, ‘‫’קנֶ ה‬, ָ TDOT 13:65–72. 157 Ibid. 158 Ibid. 155 156

98

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

the oppressed, particularly given that the same word ‫ יָ רוּץ‬is used in v. 4. By examining the context of 2 Kings 18 and Isa 36, it can be determined that the ‘broken reed’ there is the oppressor of Israel (Judah), which is an enemy oppressing God’s people. In Isa 42, the context is that Israel cannot trust other nations, but they can trust the servant. If the words in Isa 42:3 are connected structurally with v. 4 by meter and verbs, as demonstrated above, the same can also be said about several words that make an even stronger tie. Such words include ‫ יָ רוּץ‬and ‫( ֵכ ָהה‬although an adjective here) in v. 3 and ‫כהה‬ and ‫ יָ רוּץ‬in v. 4 in the reverse order, which would make an A, B, B’, A’ structure. Because of the word play between vv. 3 and 4, it can be concluded that the Israelites will not be crushed by justice ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ nor by the law ‫תּוֹרה‬ ָ that the Israelites disobeyed as described in Isa 41:25–29. But, in v. 4, instead of Israel being crushed, the servant takes Israel’s situation upon himself. In addition to these shifts in meaning of common words, the words ‫ ָרצוּץ‬and ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬in Isa 42:3 are strongly related to Hos 5:11, where ‘Ephraim is oppressed and broken ‫ ָרצוּץ‬in judgment ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ because he willingly walked by human precept’. These words would suggest that even though the reed could be crushed because of the justice and truth that the servant brings, he will still deal with them with mercy. Instead, as Isa 53 recounts, the servant is crushed and judged for the sin of the people (Isa 53:4–5, 8). The Verb ‫‘ שׁבר‬Break’

The verb ‫ שׁבר‬is a third per. sing. Qal imperfect ‘break’. The entire clause would be translated ‘a crushed reed, he will not break’. This verb brings a different dimension to this clause, since normally the action of breaking is negative, but in this case the addition of the negative ‘not’ makes it a positive thing, to ‘not break’. This verb is found many times in the HB, but its use is often in connection with breaking something, such as pillars, idols, tables of the law, or vessels. In the Pentateuch, this verb is first used in Gen 19:9 to describe the evil when the people of Sodom and Gomorrah tried to break down the door of Lot’s house. It is also found in Ex 23:24 where a law is given to Moses about not worshipping idols and thus the instruction to break (‫ )שׁבר‬in pieces their pillars. The event

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9

99

that follows this command is Moses coming down from Mt. Sinai and breaking the tablets at the foot of the mount (Ex 32:19). In Ex 34:13, God tells Moses to break down the surrounding nations’ pillars. In 2 Kings 11:18, the verb describes the house of Baal being broken down, along with his altars and his images (see 2 Kings 18:4; 23:14). This verb is often (23 times), although not always, associated with breaking altars, images, and pillars related to false worship. Could it have any such significance in Isa 42:3? If the crushed reed does not break, the natural question is why not? The context suggests that the idols Israel worshipped are breakable because they are not real but fictitious. The author demonstrates that the subject, the servant, will not break the reed. The servant’s purpose is not to get rid of people like breakable material. In Isaiah, the word ‫ שׁבר‬is used in the context of judgment; for example, ‘I will break ‫ שׁבר‬the Assyrian in My land, and on My mountains tread him underfoot’ (Isa 14:25); and, ‘He answered and said, Babylon is fallen, is fallen! And all the carved images of her gods he has broken ‫ שׁבר‬to the ground’ (21:9). The text likewise speaks of Cyrus as bringing judgment: ‘I will break ‫ שׁבר‬in pieces the gates of bronze and cut the bars of iron’ (45:2). These examples reveal that Israel will not be broken by the servant’s judgment (see Isa 41:21–23). The Clause ‫וּפ ְשׁ ָתּה ֵכ ָהה לֹא יְ ַכ ֶבּנָּ ה‬ ִ ‘And a Dim Wick, He Will Not Extinguish’ The next clause ‫וּפ ְשׁ ָתּה ֵכ ָהה לֹא יְ ַכ ֶבּנָּ ה‬ ִ ‘and a dim wick, he will not extinguish’ is parallel with the previous clause, both completing the idea and including additional characteristics. The ‘dim wick’ is characterized by the adjective ‫כ ָהה‬,ֵ which appears only seven times in the HB: four times as ‘colorless, dull skin’ in Lev 13:21, 26, 28, 39, and once in reference to Eli and his ‘dim eyes’ (1 Sam 3:2). This word is also used once metaphorically in Isa 61:3 where it is translated ‘disheartened’. The last occurrence is Isa 42:3, where it is not used metaphorically but rather as a second category of meanings. Thus, this adjective appears to give a negative turn to a noun, something that is unhealthy but yet not completely dead. For example, ‘dim eyes’ does not mean blind; neither does ‘colorless or

100

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

dull skin’ mean that there is no color at all but that it is just not a beautiful color. So what could ‘dim wick’ mean? The wick is not extinguished, neither is it shining brightly or giving off a bright light. The ‘bruised reed’ of the previous clause was not destroyed or totally severed but neither was it completely intact. The ‘dim wick’ appears to connote something weak, something that is running out of strength, but, as the rest of the clause concludes, not fully quenched either. Why would the image of a ‘wick’ be used? To get at the meaning, we need to know how wicks were made, that is, out of flax (Isa 42:3; 43:17). 159 While the word ‫ ִפ ְשׁ ָתּה‬is used only four times in the HB—twice in Exodus and twice in Isaiah—the word ‫פּ ֶשׁת‬,ֵ from which the word ‫ ִפ ְשׁ ָתּה‬is derived, is used sixteen times. It is interesting to note that in Ex 9:31, Moses specifies that all the flax was destroyed as a judgment on Egypt and the house of Pharaoh. Again, in Isa 43:16–17, the Lord recalls the past event of Exodus: ‘… who makes a way in the sea and a path through the mighty waters, who brings forth the chariot and horse, the army and the power (they shall lie down together, they shall not rise; they are extinguished, they are quenched like a wick)’. Pharaoh and his army were likened to a quenched wick. The context of Isa 43 is a paradox of salvation and judgment, very much like the one in Exodus. In Isa 41–42, there is also this paradox of salvation and judgment. While the glowing wick is dim because of the spiritual darkness in which Israel finds itself (see 2 Sam 22:29), it is not extinguished like the Pharaoh. By the same token, although Israel will feel the consequences of the judgment or punishment, because of the servant’s mission Israel will nonetheless receive salvation. The same concept can be observed in Isa 53. The expression ‫‘ לֹא יְ ַכ ֶבּנָּ ה‬he will not extinguish’ is a positive outcome in the form of a negation. This verb is Pi’el imperfect, translated as ‘extinguish’. 160 The Pi’el stem does not occur many 320F

See K. Nielsen, ‘‫’פּ ֶשׁת‬, ֵ TDOT 12:158–160. The Qal imperfect ‫ כבה‬can be associated with the word ‫ ֵאשׁ‬but never in the Pi’el stem. When it is used in Qal stem plus the term ‫אשׁ‬, ֵ it 159 160

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 101 times in the HB, but there are a few instances where similar language may shed light on our passage in Isa 42:3. In 2 Sam 21:17, the word ‫ כבה‬is used in relation to David’s men encouraging him to not go out anymore to battle ‘lest you [extinguish] ‫ כבה‬the lamp of Israel’. Here is a negative connotation about hope remaining in Israel, represented by the word ‘lamp’. The verb ‘extinguish’ is also in relationship to the object that gives light, representing hope. In this instance, David, as king of Israel, was the person of vital importance for hope, security, and continuity of existence, and therefore the people did not want David to be killed. The promise of a messianic family line was given to David and this could be in danger if David would go to war (see 2 Sam 7). We read the next passage, 2 Sam 14:7, in the context of the woman of Tekoa pleading with the king to save her son ‘so they would [not] extinguish ‫ כבה‬my ember that is left, and leave to my husband neither name nor remnant on the earth’. Two concepts are introduced here: First, the woman’s son has killed someone and thus according to Moses’ law there is a need for blood vengeance (see Gen 9:6; Ex 21:12–14; Num 35:29–34; Deut 19:11–12). Second, the woman’s son is the only heir left to her, and without an heir she will have no support in her old age and will not be able to pass down the family name to the next generation (Deut 25:6; Ruth 4:10). Thus, when the woman asks the king to save her son, this situation reveals that there is a judgment against the son and that the son is the only heir who can perpetuate the family name. The Pi’el of ‫ כבה‬can also be used metaphorically to mean killing off the family line (2 Sam 14:7; also Gen 3:15; 12:1–3). 161 Furthermore, the king as judge makes the decision that the sentence of punishment on the son can be lifted. The woman’s request not to have her son extinguished is a positive one, while the people’s request to extinguish him is negative. These ideas may have been in the mind of the author when he used the word ‘extinguish’. The ‘dim wick’ of Israel finds itself under judgment or condemnation (see Isa 1:31; 34:10) for sinning, but 321F

means ‘to go out’; such biblical texts are found in Lev 6:5; Isa 66:24; Jer 17:27; Ezek 21:4; Prov 26:20. 161 See Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 247.

102

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

God as King will allow his servant the judge to remove this penalty. Moreover, God remembers his covenant that he made with his people, and therefore God promised to David a lineage, an heir, from whom the Messiah would come. Thus, the promise is that while Israel may appear to be a dim wick, it will not be extinguished from God’s sight. Yet Israel is at a critical point, for, as A. Baumann notes: ‘The “glowing wick” (Isa. 42:3; 43:17) of a lamp that has run out of oil and will go out entirely if not refilled reflects the very point of death.’ 162 What a great salvation, then, that the servant who brings justice in truth is the one who judges Israel. The Prepositional Phrase ‫‘ ֶל ֱא ֶמת‬To Truth’

The last clause of Isa 42:3 has a metrical count of three, shorter than the previous two clauses. The clause begins with a prepositional phrase ‫ ֶל ֱא ֶמת‬followed by a verb and a noun. Many different ways of translating this clause have been suggested over the years in an effort to capture its meaning. Literally, the Hebrew is rendered as ‘in truth, he will bring forth justice/judgment’. However, when translated into English, does the prepositional phrase belong before or after the verb and noun? Translation often changes the order of wording, thus obscuring the effect of the Hebrew order. How should one translate the ‫ ל‬and what is truly the meaning of ‫?א ֶמת‬ ֱ The normal Hebrew prose structure is verb, noun, and object; however, in poetry there are no concrete rules. So does the meaning change depending on whether the prepositional phrase is placed before or after the verb and noun here? A literal Hebrew translation would read, ‘in truth, he will bring forth justice’ or ‘he will bring forth justice in truth’; so it does not appear to make much difference where the phrase is placed. But if it does not make any difference where it is placed, why was it placed first in the clause? I would suggest that emphasis is placed on the word ‫ ֶל ֱא ֶמת‬to stress the importance of this word in this clause. 163 The ‫ ל‬can be translated as ‘for’, ‘to’, ‘as’, or ‘in’. I suggest that this is an allative 162 163

A. Baumann, ‘‫’כבה‬, TDOT 7:38–39. See Waltke and O’Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 211–212.

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 103 spatial lamed based on connections with regard to. 164 Thus, I would translate it as ‘in’. 165 The meaning of ‫ ֱא ֶמת‬with a lamed can be rendered as ‘in faithfulness’, 166 instead of the regular meaning ‘in truth’. Thus, it can be translated as ‘in truth’ or simply as ‘in faithfulness’. The question remains: Which one would best reveal the author’s intention here? Now, which meaning would fit best in this verse? ‘In truth’ emphasizes correctness, rightness, and accuracy, whereas the word ‘faithfully’ implies fidelity, loyalty, and dependability. I propose that the word ‫ ֱא ֶמת‬as used here encapsulates both meanings in this context. The servant will bring justice in rightness and in fidelity. ‘In faithfulness’ also implies an element of relationship. As he applies judgment to Israel, the servant will bring correctness of judgment and accurate justice while also being faithful and loyal to his duty. 326F

The Clause ‫יוֹציא ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ִ ‘He Will Bring Forth Justice’

The next two words ‫יוֹציא ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ִ bring the reader back to v. 1, but this time there is a twist, since here the meaning is not that justice is brought to the nations, but rather that something is done properly or justly, in the sense that what the servant is going to do about justice is done rightly, perfectly, and correctly. 167 Thus, this clause ties together v. 1 to 3b, making v. 3c the summary. Yet, v. 3c is not the conclusion but is also a transitional verse between the previous three verses and v. 4 where similar words and ideas are repeated. The verb ‫יוֹציא‬, ִ as in v. 1, is used as a Hiph’il imperfect, meaning that it is causal in nature: ‘to bring forth’. This Hiph’il verb occurs only in Isa 40–66 and not at all in the first part of the book, which makes the use of this verb here even more extraordinary. Furthermore, the Hiph’il third person masculine singular imperfect verb occurs only in two places in Isaiah (42:1, 3; also Mic 7:9). Perhaps by using a term that is so rarely used elsewhere, the author is trying to draw the reader’s attention to the importance of this verb 327F

Ibid., 206d. See Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’א ֶמת‬, ֱ HALOT 1:68–69. 166 See ibid. 167 See pp. 91–93. 164 165

104

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

and to emphasize the subject of this verb. The justice is brought only by the servant and appears to be an act that can be done only by him and nobody else, since he brings that justice in perfect order, without failing as the Israelites had done. These same verbs, although now in the form of a participle, are found in Isa 40:26 and 43:17, where God is also the subject of the verb; in these passages, the verbs refer to him as the Creator or the ultimate deity. Verse 4 ‫לֹא יִ ְכ ֶהה וְ ל ֹא יָ רוּץ‬ ‫אָרץ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ֶ ‫ַﬠד־יָ ִשׂים ָבּ‬ ‫תוֹרתוֹ ִאיִּ ים יְ יַ ֵחילוּ‬ ָ ‫וּל‬ ְ He will not be weak nor be crushed, Until he will establish justice in the earth, And the coastlands will wait for his torah/law

Introduction to Verse 4 Meter The metrical count in v. 4 is 4:4:3 in parallel with the meter of v. 3. As pointed out earlier, the first colon has two verbs, the second colon has one verb, and the last colon has one verb, which correlates with the structure of v. 3. The Verb ‫‘ כהה‬Dim’

The first clause ‫‘ לֹא יִ ְכ ֶהה וְ לֹא יָ רוּץ‬he will not be dim nor be bruised’ begins with the last two of the seven-negation ‫ לֹא‬clauses, bringing about the completion of the positive outcome. The term ‫לֹא‬ appears to emphasize the verbs as seen in v. 2. The verb ‫ כהה‬normally means ‘to be dim’; however, this is not its only meaning. Other meanings include ‘to become inexpressive’, 168 or ‘to grow weak’. 169 The lexeme, according to Schunck, normally expresses physical weakening, such as of the entire body (Isa 42:4), the eyes (Gen 27:1; Deut 34:7; 1 Sam 3:2; Zech 11:17; 328F

168 169

329F

Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’כהה‬, HALOT 2:461. K. D. Schunck, ‘‫’כהה‬, TDOT 7:58–59.

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 105 Job 17:7), and of skin disease (Lev 13:6, 21, 26, 28, 39), but also can be used for an object as seen in Isa 42:3. 170 Koehler and Schunck appear to have different perspectives on this particular word. If the word is translated as ‘he will not grow weak’, this would imply that the servant’s body remains strong and healthy. However, if the words ‘grow weak’ are kept in mind as a better meaning of ‫כהה‬, perhaps it implies that while the servant is under the pressure of the judgment of God, he stands strong and is not affected physically. However, the problem with this view is that this approach would imply only a physical analysis and it would not reflect any stages of the servant’s moral consequences nor the spiritual distress. But, if the word ‫ כהה‬is taken to mean ‘he will not become inexpressive’, it would suggest that the servant’s mental and spiritual health could potentially be affected; however, this particular translation lacks any reference to the physical aspect. Furthermore, ‘he will not become inexpressive’ breaks the flow of thought from the previous verse. Could this word mean ‘be disheartened’? After all, the same word is used in Ezek 21:12 with that meaning, but this verb has a different stem from the one found in Isa 42:4. In Ezek 21:12, ‫כהה‬ is Pi’el, while in Isa 42:4 it is Qal. The meaning ‘be disheartened’ is found only in Pi’el. 171 Could it be that this word is used so little in the HB that we do not have a good understanding of its meaning? The LXX translates this word differently from the MT or the DSS. The LXX renders the word ‫ כהה‬with the word ἀναλάμπω, which normally would be translated as ‘to shine brightly, clearly’. This particular Greek word appears to be found only in the OT and a few nonbiblical Greek texts. If the word is taken as a metaphor, its meaning would be ‘to break out’, as in a war; if taken to refer to a person, it would mean ‘come to oneself again, revive’; otherwise, its basic meaning is ‘to flame up, take fire’. 172 The LXX also omits the first negation particle, which would make the first part of the clause 31F

32F

Ibid. See Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’כהה‬, HALOT 2:461. 172 Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, ‘ναλάμπω’, A GreekEnglish Lexicon, 110. 170 171

106

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

positive and the second part negative, with the translation rendered as such: ‘he will shine brightly and he will not be broken in pieces’. There are some challenges with this translation, such as having a different word in the LXX in v. 4 (ἀναλάμψει) from v. 3 (καπνιζόμενον), whereas the MT has the same lexeme. In addition, the LXX omits the first negative particle while both the MT and DSS include it. The LXX’s translation appears to describe a more positive experience for the servant than does the MT, even though the MT also has a positive tone. Thus, perhaps the simplest meaning of ‫ כהה‬is ‘dim, weak and faint’, related back to v. 3. If we keep the basic meaning of ‫ כהה‬as ‘he will not be weak/faint nor be bruised’, the thought communicated here is perhaps to be feeble or to fail in strength or to be cast down in mind, 173 affecting the physical, mental, and spiritual. Thus, even though the servant is under the wrath of God, he will not be weakened to the point of absolute destruction; the mind of the servant will remain focused upon his mission; it will remain strong. 174 Therefore, Isa 42:4 contrasts with Ezek 21:12, where the verb ‫כהה‬ is found with �‫רוּ‬, ַ expressing discouragement on the part of the people. 175 A similar outcome is also seen in Isa 61:3, but this is not the case in Isa 42:4. Isaiah uses the term ‫ כהה‬twice, once in v. 4, where it is used as a verb, and then in v. 3 as an adjective. In v. 3 it defines the noun ‫‘ ִפ ְשׁ ָתּה‬wick’, describing the type of wick. We saw in v. 3 that the wick represents Israel. Yet in v. 4, ‫ כהה‬is a stative verb, describing the servant, not Israel. Thus, Israel is portrayed as being dim, as having almost no light, while the servant is portrayed as the opposite, not as weak or dim but as though he is a bright light. The author uses wordplay between who is without light or weak and who is with light and strong in order to make the opposition between Israel and the servant clear to his audience. He leaves no doubt about who the servant is and who Israel is, emphasizing that they are not the same. 35F

H. William F. Gesenius, ‘‫’כהה‬, GHCOTS 384–385. See Schunck, ‘‫’כהה‬, TDOT 7:58–59. 175 Ibid. 173 174

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 107 The Verb ‫‘ רצץ‬Crush’

The second verb ‫ רצץ‬in v. 4 is the same verb that was seen in v. 3; however, it is not a passive participle but rather a Qal imperfect, which might aptly be translated as ‘crush, or oppress’. Lessing points out that this Qal form normally has a transitive meaning, ‘to crush [something]’, but in Isa 42:4 and Eccl 12:6, it has an intransitive meaning, ‘be crushed, be broken’. 176 Brown, Driver, and Briggs also suggest that Isa 42:4 should be rendered as ‘he shall not grow dim or be crushed out’. 177 Thus, if this verb is taken as Qal, the meaning would be more like ‘oppress or suppress’. But the context suggests more than a mere concept of abstract discouragement; it is more like a Niph’al stem with a stronger outcome of what is happening to the subject, such as ‘snap, broken, bend and crush’. 178 With the negative particle, this phrase becomes ‘he will not be crushed out’. Why will he not be crushed out? Ezekiel 29:7 helps to answer this question, suggesting that the Israelites were broken/crushed by the Egyptians. The context suggests that the source of the crushing appears to be the wrath of God in the form of the judgment that Israel was to receive because of its false worship. Again, Isaiah is playing on the term ‫ רצץ‬in this present verse and the previous verse. In v. 3 the Qal passive participle acts as an adjective to the noun ‫קנֶ ה‬,ָ with the reed referring to Israel, while in v. 4 ‫ רצץ‬is an active verb whose subject is the servant. In v. 3 the Israelites will be broken, which is also true of the servant in v. 4. The servant will not break Israel nor will he be crushed; first, because he is merciful toward Israel, and second, because of his relationship with his God. The next clause then clarifies and completes the idea, telling why the servant is neither weak nor crushed through the use of the particle ‫‘ ַﬠד‬until’. 36F

37F

38F

Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 248. Francis Brown, ‘‫’רצץ‬, BDB 954. 178 Some scholars have suggested that the translation of the verb ‫רצץ‬ should reflect more a Niph’al stem than the Qal stem; see Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’רצץ‬, HALOT 3:1285–1286. 176 177

108

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The Clause ‫אָרץ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ֶ ‫‘ ַﬠד־יָ ִשׂים ָבּ‬Until He Will Establish Justice in the Earth’ The following clause ‫אָרץ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ֶ ‫‘ ַﬠד־יָ ִשׂים ָבּ‬until he will establish justice on the earth’ once again has a meter of four, a parallel to the previous clause. The conjunction ‫ ַﬠד‬ties the previous thought with this thought, making this clause dependent and suggesting a temporal sentence. According to Joüon and Muraoka, ‘with the conjunction ‫ ַﬠד‬the yiqtol is very occasionally used for a past action’. 179 However, in this case, the verb yiqtol could mean ‘put, set, and give’ and also could mean ‘establish’. If, in this context, ‫ שׂים‬means ‘to establish’, there would be a correlation with the meaning of constitution, pertaining to a king (Deut 17:15), a prince (Hos 2:2), and a judge (1 Sam 8:1), or an even greater correlation with the concept of to found (as in foundation), pertaining to the world (Job 34:13), a people (Isa 44:7), and a divine right (Isa 42:4). 180 Gesenius observed that ‘to this [Isa 42:4] belongs the phrase in which God is said ‫ שׂוּם ְשׁמוֹ‬to place his name [there], i.e. to set his seat anywhere (to occupy the temple or holy place), Deut 12:5, 21; 14:24; 1 Kgs 9:3; 11:36; 2 Kgs 21:4’. 181 The authority of the servant is like that of any of the kings or judges in Israel. The fact that the name of God is being placed there reveals that the servant is on the same level as God, therefore placing the servant in the right position to establish justice on the earth. The name of God also portrays a covenant between his people and what he has done (see Gen 2:2–3; Ex 31:12–18). Again, the establishment in this passage demonstrates that the servant is different from the idols in Isa 41; no seat belongs to the idols, rather it belongs to God alone (see Deut 12:5). Commenting on Deut 12:5, J. G. McConville states, ‘Yahweh’s choice is therefore set over against any claim on Israel’s part to as341F

See Paul Joüon and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (SubBi 27; Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2006), 342. 180 H. William F. Gesenius, ‘‫’שׂים‬, GHCOTS 786–787. 181 Ibid. 179

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 109 sert its own rights in fundamental matters concerning its life. Yahweh’s choosing is akin to his “giving” of land, blessing and life.’ 182 Furthermore, the verb ‫ שׂים‬is followed by two prepositions. The first one is a ‫ ב‬of location, describing that the servant will establish justice in the earth. This specificity clarifies that the establishment of justice is not done in heaven but on this earth. The implication of specifying this location is that the Israelites, as well as the other nations on the earth, will receive a fair verdict. The Prepositional Phrase ‫תוֹרתוֹ‬ ָ ‫‘ ְל‬To His Torah’

The second preposition is a ‫ ל‬of specification in the first word of the last clause regarding the ‘law’. The servant will not only establish justice on the earth but also the law, which is the instruction from God. The last clause has a meter of three stresses separated by a conjunctive waw from the preceding clause; however, the lamed presupposes that this clause is also related to the previous two clauses. As in v. 3, the last clause summarizes v. 4 and brings a conclusion to vv. 1–4. Scholars have placed much emphasis on the pervasiveness of the word ‫מ ְשׁ ָפּט‬, ִ since it appears so often in Isa 42:1–4, without adequately considering its relationship with the first word of the last clause of v. 4—‫תּוֹרה‬. ָ Yet, in doing so, they may have taken for granted the meaning of the word ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬outside of its context. Analyzing the term ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬in connection with the term ‫תּוֹרה‬ ָ may uncover an additional meaning for the word ‫מ ְשׁ ָפּט‬. ִ First, the word (‫)תּוֹרה‬ ָ can simply refer to the teaching itself. However, the ‘Torah’ is the criterion on which the judgment is based. 183 The fact that this word ‫תּוֹרה‬ ָ begins the clause, which ends with the verb ‫‘ יחל‬wait’, demonstrates the emphasis on the ‫תּוֹרה‬, ָ which is the reason why justice ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬has been used often in these verses. Without the ‫תּוֹרה‬ ָ there is no need for justice. Thus, as we come to a conclusion, IsaiJ. Gordon McConville, Deuteronomy (AOTC 5; Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2002), 220. 183 The ‘Torah’ also reveals the will of God since ‘he is the fountainhead of the law’. Shalom M. Paul, Studies in the Book of the Covenant in the Light of Cuneiform and Biblical Law (VTSup 18; Leiden: Brill, 1970), 37. 182

110

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

ah demonstrates the importance of justice being dependent upon the ‫תּוֹרה‬. ָ The ‫תּוֹרה‬ ָ may refer to the five books of Moses, 184 or the law of God, or God’s instruction or teaching found throughout the Pentateuch. Now, since there is a possessive pronoun at the end of ‫תוֹרתוֹ‬ ָ that is third pers. masc., this would refer back to the one who is being spoken of, the main subject—my servant. 185 There is no doubt that the Torah was important to the author, because he portrays how the Torah had been forgotten, abused, and its tenets broken by Israel. Indeed, this emphasis is clear from the outset. For the book begins by pointing to the Torah and how Israel had sinned against it, comparing Israel to Sodom and Gomorrah: ‘Hear the word of the Lord, you rulers of Sodom; give ear to the law (‫)תּוֹרה‬ ָ of our God, you people of Gomorrah’ (Isa 1:10). Again, judgment is upon God’s people ‘because they have rejected the law of the Lord of hosts’ (Isa 5:24). 186 What Israel could not do (‫)תּוֹרה‬ ָ then, it would not be able to do later either. However, the servant in Isa 42:4 is able to instruct the world, since the law belongs to the servant. The servant is the giver of the law, just as he is the giver of life. 187 Moreover, the servant is the creator who will demonstrate by his mission his faithfulness in living by the law (see Isa 42:6; 43:1– 12). The nations cannot act until they receive the instruction of the servant; the servant tells people what to do and how to do it. Furthermore, in Isa 51:4 the same thing is said, but this time not of the 346F

347F

There may be a connection between the term ‘law’ here in reference to the new exodus and the giving of the law at Mount Sinai after the exodus. 185 The Torah in Isa 40–55 recurs in 42:21, 24; 51:4, 7, which often indicates ‘the whole of the revelation of the will of Jahweh to Israel’. Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology (trans. D. M. G. Stalker; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 222. 186 Exploring all the occurrences of the word ‫תּוֹרה‬ ָ in Isaiah, one can see that, up to Isa 42, Israel had failed to keep the Torah: Isa 1:10; 5:24; 8:16–20; 24:5; 30:9. 187 Shalom Paul makes this observation: ‘The will of God expressed through the law is the basis of the covenant relationship between God and Israel.’ Paul, Studies in the Book of the Covenant, 41. 184

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 111 servant but of God, placing the servant and God at the same level and contrasting them with Israel. Thus, already at this juncture of the text, it seems apparent that the servant cannot be Israel, because Israel does not keep the law. The Verb ‫‘ יחל‬Wait’

The word ‫ ִאיִּ ים‬is the subject of the verb, which refers to people of islands (in short, those who are not from Israel). The verb ‫יחל‬ ‘wait’ appears only twice in Isaiah and in both instances as Pi’el imperfect and saying the same thing (Isa 42:4; 51:4). When this verb is found with a lamed as preposition, the meaning is ‘to wait’. This wait is not just any type of waiting but specifically a hopeful waiting in faith. 188 The coastlands will wait upon the servant for his law. This has some level of irony: while Israel does not wait for the law and yet professes itself to follow God, the Gentiles, who normally follow other gods, are willing to wait for the servant’s law. Again, the servant appears to be someone other than Israel 189 and seems to refer to the messianic figure. This I will further clarify in ch. 3 when I examine the intratextual parallels. It is important to note that the LXX reads: καὶ ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν, ‘and in his name nations will hope’. In its interpretation of ‘his name’, the LXX refers to the name of Israel. Could it be that the LXX exchanged the term ‘his law’ for ‘his name’? Perhaps the LXX used a different vorlage, or the MT and 348F

349F

Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 249. Those scholars (for example, Shalom Paul) who believe that the servant may refer to a faithful remnant (for example, Isa 53) must ask how faithful Israelites can atone for the sin of unfaithful Israelites. There is no text in the HB supporting the idea of human atonement for other human beings. The priests in Leviticus are representatives of God who minister atonement for the Israelites (see Lev 5; 22), but the priest does not himself atone for the sins of the people (see Isa 53:10–12; Acts 8). See Richard E. Averbeck, ‘Christian Interpretations of Isaiah 53’, in The Gospel According to Isaiah 53: Encountering the Suffering Servant in Jewish and Christian Theology (ed. Darrell L. Bock and Mitch Glaser; Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2012), 45–60. 188 189

112

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

the LXX interpreted the same vorlage? The latter view seems most likely, since both the ‘law’ and the ‘name’ express God’s character; however, the Syriac Peshiṭta text 190 supports the MT. If the MT is correct, then the ‘law’ of the servant could represent the ‘name’ by which the servant would be given to the nations. While the LXX may have captured the idea that the ‘law’ refers to the ‘name’ as character, there is still a challenge, since ‘his name’ refers back to Israel instead of to God; the LXX added the words ‘Israel’ and ‘Jacob’ in v. 1 but the MT did not. Perhaps, Israel was supposed to reveal God’s character, but this is not clear from the LXX perspective. The law would also reveal the will of God, which is his character. Thus, the law demonstrates the name of God and of the servant. Royal Court Imagery in Isaiah 42:1–4 An alternate interpretation of vv. 1–4 has some scholars suggesting that this pericope has to do with the royal court. 191 While references to the royal court may not seem strong at first glance, some of the language does indeed suggest a royal court. First, we have the words ‫קוֹל‬, ‫שׁ ַמע‬, ָ which are also found in Isa 6 whose context is the heavenly royal court. The fact that the three occurrences of ‫ ֵהן‬connect the legal language of Isa 41:21–29 with Isa 42 suggests a continuity of a court case 192 that is revealed in the life of the servant given that the 352F

See Kiraz and Bali, The Syriac Peshiṭta Bible with English Translation: Isaiah, 202–203. 191 Dumbrell, ‘The Purpose of the Book of Isaiah’, 124–125; Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 114. Baltzer suggests that the place should be the council of the heavenly household; see Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 124. 192 The court case here refers to a legal case. Kings in the HB served not only as rulers or administrators but also as judges; for example, Solomon (see 1 Kings 3). The kings were representatives of God (see Deut 17:14–20), and since God is also represented as a Judge, the kings in turn were allowed to judge (see 1 Sam 8). However, the kings needed to accurately represent God with the justice entrusted to them by having a good character (Lev 19:15; Deut 1:16, 17), loving the law (Deut 17:19; Ps 119), 190

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 113 term ‫ ָר ָצה‬can be related to taking pleasure in a sacrifice (see Am 5:22; Mal 1:10, 13; Pss 51:18; 119:108), which would be linked to a type of court (see Lev 26:34, 43). Isaiah 41:21–29 describes God’s people sinning with idols, and in Isa 42:1–4 there is a judgment applied to the nations (v. 1) and the land (v. 4) by the verdict ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ (see 1 Kings 3:28). Furthermore, Isa 41:1 introduces a legal arraignment, which continues in Isa 41:21–29, and all the while, in Isa 42:1–4 the servant is proclaiming the result of that verdict to the world. 193 This continuing act is implied by the threefold use of the word ‫( ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬Isa 42:1, 3–4), meaning ‘verdict’ of God, 194 which again suggests a court setting in which God pronounces his verdict of Isa 41 in response to their worship of idols. 195 These examples reveal a court, perhaps even a heavenly court, from where God would be pronouncing the verdict. If the previous verse (v. 1) refers to ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment or verdict’, this would make the servant a judge (see Isa 9:5–6 [ET 9:6– 7]). A judge has no need to raise his voice to be heard. If Moses was the mediator between God and Pharaoh while Aaron became the spokesman, in Isa 42 the servant is now the mediator but is also the perfect spokesman. Thus, this servant is better than Moses in his ability to judge and speak. 354F

35F

and being anointed by the Spirit of God (1 Sam and 1 Kings). Witnesses were needed in tough cases (Deut 17:8, 9). 193 Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 262. 194 The Pharaoh, the ruler of ancient Egypt, was perceived as the king, a divine king, who perfectly ruled his country as an ‘administrator of justice’. This Egyptian king ruled equally as the high god of Egypt. See Ivan Engnell, Studies in Divine Kingship in the Ancient Near East (Oxford: Blackwell, 1967), 12. ‘In this quality he is to his country the good shepherd, a roof, mountain, fortress; to the widow and the orphan a father— which is also a royal title—and to the homeless a refuge. His duty is to administer equal justice to all, to protect the feeble, to abhor iniquity, to be a father to his children.’ Ibid. 195 Thomas L. Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice: Solidarity and Conflict in Isaiah (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 107–108; Lessing, Isaiah 40– 55, 254–255.

114

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Moreover, there is also a contrast with Cyrus, a deliverer of Israel, as Goldingay points out, through ‘the verbal links between the trial scenes concerning the man of war on the one hand, and the installation/salvation passages concerning the servant on the other’. 196 The contrast between the servant and Cyrus is seen in their mission. The servant pericope includes multiple uses of ‫ ֵהן‬whereas no such distinction is made in connection with Cyrus except for the mention of his name. The work of the servant is quiet, ‘he will not cry’, whereas Cyrus’s work involves much noise, suggest the verbs ‫‘ ָשׁ ַבר‬break’ and ‫‘ גָּ ַדע‬cut to pieces’. The servant simply receives the �‫רוּ‬ ַ ‘Spirit’ of God, while Cyrus is actively‫יחח‬ ַ ‫ְמ ִשׁ‬ ‘anointed’ or set apart for the task of war against nations. Yet, there are also some similarities between the two cases, such as the pronoun ‘my’, ‘my servant, my chosen’ (Isa 42), and ‘my shepherd, my delight/pleasure’ (Isa 44–45). Also the word ‫‘ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in righteousness’ (Isa 42:6) is comparable with ‫ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in Isa 45:13. In both instances, God brings a verdict to the nations of Israel and Babylon for their false worship and sin, and entreats them to return to the salvation of the true God (Isa 42:5; 45:22).

SUMMARY

The literary structure of Isa 42:1–4 demonstrates that the pericope includes a contrast between Isa 41 and 42. The development of Isa 42:1–4 also suggests a well-written poem that even structurally communicates the mission of the servant. God chooses the servant for his purpose with the mission of revealing that salvation cannot come from Israel because of its failure to worship him. The servant in Isa 42:1–4 is a special servant and different from the servant revealed previously in Isa 41. He has been chosen and the Spirit of God is placed on him to bring judgment to the nations. Isaiah also uses wordplay in vv. 3–4 with ‫ֵכ ָהה‬ and ‫ רצץ‬to differentiate between Israel and the servant, hence demonstrating that the servant cannot be Israel. This servant is John Goldingay, ‘The Arrangement of Isaiah XLI–XLV’, VT 29, no. 3 (1979): 293. See also Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 112. 196

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 115 given characteristics different from predecessors who were also called servants. The servant is revealed as ‘not’ ‘crying’, ‘lifting up’, and ‘hearing,’ but all the while he is prepared to save people from their sin. This will be done in truth and by bringing justice. The justice comes about because of the law that the servant establishes for the sake of revealing the name of his father. Thus, the servant judges, reveals truth, exemplifies the law as part of his life, is chosen, and has the Spirit upon him. In the next section, I will elaborate on the second part of Isa 42:1–9 by examining vv. 5–9.

THE SERVANT IN ISAIAH 42:5–9 Its Relationship to Isaiah 42:1–4 Scholars initially suggested that Isa 42:5–9 was not part of the first servant poem. Then, some scholars proposed that vv. 5–7 should be included with the servant corpus. Though dissension remains regarding which verses should be included in the first servant poem, some scholars have now accepted expanding the first servant poem to v. 9. 197 I suggested earlier for a literary reason that the first servant poem include Isa 42:1–9, and gave as evidence not just that the first word ‫‘ ֵהן‬behold’ (vv. 1, 9) forms an inclusio, but also that there is a connection between the two sections found between vv. 4 and 5. In v. 4, the word ‘Torah’, I proposed, could refer to the Pentateuch; here (v. 5), Torah would refer to the prerogative of God in relation to the creation events outlined in Gen 1 and 2. 198 Furthermore, the Masoretic text suggests a hard pause (petucha) in 358F

Baltzer proclaims, ‘As far as the genre is concerned, the distinction between vocation oracle (vv. 1–4) and act of installation (vv. 5–9) is not unusual’; it therefore appears that he accepts that these verses are related, even though there is a break at v. 4. Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 130–131; Lessing, Isaiah 40– 55, 253; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 318. 198 See Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 131. 197

116

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

both vv. 4 and 9, indicating the separation of ideas. 199 In addition, each servant poem contains a confirmatory statement as found in vv. 5–9 (see 49:7–13; 50:10–11; 54:1–55:13). Literary Meter The literary meter of vv. 5–9 is not as sophisticated as that of vv. 1–4; however, there is a rhythm that flows through these verses, as illustrated in table 8. Table 8. Literary Meter of Isaiah 42:5–9 Meter 4 3 3 4 3 4 2 2 4 3 3 4 4 4 199

Verse

Verses ‫ֹה־אָמר ָה ֵאל יְ הוָ ה‬ ַ ‫כּ‬

5

‫יהם‬ ֶ ‫נוֹט‬ ֵ ְ‫בּוֹרא ַה ָשּׁ ַמיִ ם ו‬ ֵ ‫יה‬ ָ ‫אָרץ וְ ֶצ ֱא ָצ ֶא‬ ֶ ‫ר ַֹקע ָה‬ ‫יה‬ ָ ‫נ ֵֹתן נְ ָשׁ ָמה ָל ָﬠם ָﬠ ֶל‬ ‫רוּחח ַלה ְֹל ִכים ָבּהּ‬ ַ ְ‫ו‬ ‫אתי� ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬ ִ ‫ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה ְק ָר‬

6

�‫אַחזֵ ק ְבּיָ ֶד‬ ְ ְ‫ו‬ � ְ‫וְ ֶא ָצּ ְר� וְ ֶא ֶתּנ‬ ‫ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִ ם‬ ‫ִל ְפק ַֹ� ֵﬠינַ יִ ם ִﬠוְ רוֹת‬

7

‫אַסּיר‬ ִ ‫הוֹציא ִמ ַמּ ְסגֵּ ר‬ ִ ‫ְל‬ �‫ִמ ֵבּית ֶכּ ֶלא י ְֹשׁ ֵבי ח ֶֹשׁ‬ ‫ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה הוּא ְשׁ ִמי‬

8

‫א־א ֵתּן‬ ֶ ֹ ‫אַחר ל‬ ֵ ‫בוֹדי ְל‬ ִ ‫וּכ‬ ְ The Masoretic only suggests a petucha; it is not an absolute rule.

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 117 2 3 3 4

‫וּת ִה ָלּ ִתי ַל ְפּ ִס ִילים‬ ְ ‫ה־באוּ‬ ָ ֵ‫ָה ִראשׁ ֹנוֹת ִהנּ‬

9

‫וַ ֲח ָדשׁוֹת ֲאנִ י ַמגִּ יד‬ ‫אַשׁ ִמיע ֶא ְת ֶכם‬ ְ ‫ְבּ ֶט ֶרם ִתּ ְצ ַמ ְחנָ ה‬

Verse 5 ‫ֹה־אָמר ָה ֵאל יְ הוָ ה‬ ַ ‫כּ‬ ‫יה‬ ָ ‫אָרץ וְ ֶצ ֱא ָצ ֶא‬ ֶ ‫יהם ר ַֹקע ָה‬ ֶ ‫נוֹט‬ ֵ ְ‫בּוֹרא ַה ָשּׁ ַמיִ ם ו‬ ֵ ‫יה‬ ָ ‫יְ הוָ ה נ ֵֹתן נְ ָשׁ ָמה ָל ָﬠם ָﬠ ֶל‬ ‫רוּחח ַלה ְֹל ִכים ָבּהּ‬ ַ ְ‫ו‬ Thus says God, YHWH, who created the heavens and stretched them out who stretched out the earth and all that comes out of it who gives breath to its people and life to those who walk on it

Introduction To this point, I have analyzed Isa 42:1–4 clause by clause. Beginning with v. 5, in addition to analyzing clauses I will also examine key terms. The methodology differs from the previous four verses in that I scrutinize the repetitive participles or verbs, although I still examine words surrounding these key terms. This approach does not change the meaning of this exercise but rather helps to clarify the Hebrew passage. Examining four participles and three nouns in this way will, I propose, demonstrate the repetition and strength of succinct acts of God.

118

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The Clause ‫ֹה־אָמר ָה ֵאל יְ הוָ ה‬ ַ ‫‘ כּ‬Thus Says God, YHWH’

This clause 200 is the first one in Isa 40–55 in which a prophecy is introduced by a messenger formula. 201 While this may mean that a new prophecy is introduced, it could also be a reaffirmation, with a different formula, of v. 1 when God spoke regarding the servant. This time, the prophet may be reassuring the people by emphasizing that what God speaks will happen. Supporting such an interpretation is the use of the particle of manner ‫‘ כֹּה‬thus’, which reaffirms what has been said in the four previous verses, proceeding with a confirmation of the servant’s task, and pledging what will happen in the next five verses. This revelation from God demonstrates that the prophecy about the servant is trustworthy, certain, and of divine origin. Therefore, the servant is a special revelation, enveloped by the spoken word of God (see Jn 1:1–3). The author is very specific about the identity of the deity, as the definite article is not necessary for a proper noun in Hebrew. The word ‫ ֵאל‬is the singular form for god/God, which also appears in Ugaritic texts as a proper name: the chief god El. 202 While ‫ ֵאל‬can refer to any gods, not only the God of Israel or the Creator God, in this instance the definite article places ‫ ֵאל‬in a different category from the other gods Israel was worshiping. Singled out is ‘the god’, not just any gods that were worshiped already. Moreover, the god who is specified is not ‫ ֵאל‬alone, but ‫‘ ָה ֵאל יְ הוָ ה‬the God YHWH’. This apposition specifies the deity by his personal name—‫יְ הוָ ה‬, YHWH, the first of the three usages of the divine name ‫ יְ הוָ ה‬in vv. 5–9. The combination of these two nouns plus the definite article is not common in the HB; it appears only two times (Ps 85:9;

Samuel A. Meier points out that, in Isaiah, God’s speech dominates extensive sections, such as this one in Isa 41:8–42:9. Samuel A. Meier, Speaking of Speaking: Marking Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Bible (VTSup 46; New York: Brill, 1992), 255. 201 Also called a ‘Citation Formula’. 202 See Marvin H. Pope, El in the Ugaritic Texts (VTSup 2; Leiden: Brill, 1955). 200

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 119 Isa 42:5). ‘The title indeed suggests absoluteness and mightiness.’ 203 ‘The appellation is an acknowledgement of Yahweh’s uniqueness.’ 204 The word ‫ ֵאל‬occurs mainly in poetic and archaic texts, but it is also analogous with two other forms of the Hebrew name for God, 205 although ‫ ֵאל‬without the apposition ‫ יְ הוָ ה‬appears about twenty-four times in Isaiah. 206 Both the context of creation and the etymology of ‫ ֵאל‬relate to the Creator God in Isa 40–55 (see Isa 40:12–26). The God who is the Creator is the one who will ‘hold the hand’ of the servant (v. 6; also vv. 8, 9). Since this is the first time this clause is used in Isa 40–55, it introduces the loving nature of God in establishing his servant for the sake of his people (see 42:6); this God is not just any type of god who asks the servant to accomplish the work of salvation that follows in v. 6. The next time this clause is used—in Isa 43:1, 14, 16 with the same creation theme—God is the subject of the verb, mentioned by name, as saving Jacob/Israel. In Isa 42:1–9, the servant is not specifically named because here the servant is the subject of saving nations and people (Isa 42:6). The next clause reveals the author’s intention for using ‘thus says God, YHWH’, for the phrases ‫בּוֹרא ַה ָשּׁ ַמיִ ם‬ ֵ ‘created the heavens’ and ‫אָרץ‬ ֶ ‫‘ ר ַֹקע ָה‬stretched out the earth’ express attributes of

Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 224. 204 Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40– 55, 131. 205 See Helmer Ringgren, ‘‫�הים‬ ִ ‫’א‬, ֱ TDOT 1:267–284. It is important to note that ‫ ֵאל‬and ‫�הים‬ ִ ‫ ֱא‬are related words. For that reason, the author is using the shorter singular form in the poetic context, yet it can be seen how these two names refer back to creation. 206 The word ‫ ֵאל‬appears with or without the definite article in the beginning of Isaiah and between chs 40 to 55 (see Isa 40:18; 43:12; 45:22; 46:9). In Isaiah, this word appears to give weight to who God is as the Creator (see 43:10) as opposed to the false gods (see 44:10, 15, 17). It appears with ‫ יְ הוָ ה‬and with ‫בּית‬,ֵ ‫ ֲאנִ י‬. 203

120

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

the Creator. 207 He uses the language of Genesis to reveal the importance of the God to whom he refers. It is unmistakable, for hearers and narrator alike, that this God is the God Omnipresent, Omnipotent, and Omniscient. As if this were not convincing enough, Isaiah adds words also found in Gen 1 and 2, ‫‘ נְ ָשׁ ָמה‬breath’ and‫רוּחח‬ ַ ‘spirit, wind’, revealing that this God not only creates tangible material, he also gives breath and life to people. Idols that are worshiped 208 cannot create or give life, nor even sustain life, but God is worthy to be worshiped because he is the author of the heavens and earth and of all life. He sustains everything. Therefore, this God can be trusted; when he proclaims the servant’s call and commissions him, it will happen. In this verse, there is one verb and five participles. Goldingay and Payne argue that the verb in this verse, qatal, ‘draws attention to the real past moment of the great king’s giving the message. The usage thus corresponds to the clearly past significance where an experience of Yhwh’s past speaking to the prophet is being reported (e.g. 8.11; 18.4; 31.4).’ 209 However, A. J. Bjørndalen presents an opposing argument that the translation of the verb should be based on the fact that what the Lord is saying to the hearers is in the present. 210 Although Goldingay, Payne, and Bjørndalen employ acceptable arguments regarding this particular verb in v. 5, I suggest instead that this verb is a perfect of certainty, where the context re368F

See Wann M. Fanwar, ‘Creation in Isaiah’ (unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 2001). 208 It is important to note the comparison between Isaiah and Paul: ‘Paul on Mars Hill quotes from a section of Is 42:5 when he says of God, “He himself gives to all life and breath” (Acts 17:25). Both Isaiah and Paul extol the one true and triune God against the backdrop of idol worship (Is 42:7; Acts 17:23).’ Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 260. 209 Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 223. The ‘great king’ here alludes to the ‘“messenger formula” with its background in a king’s briefing of a subordinate’. 210 Anders J. Bjørndalen, ‘Zu den Zeitstufen der Zitatformel … ‫אמר‬ ‫ כה‬im Botenverkehr’, ZAW 86, no. 4 (1974): 393–403. 207

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 121 veals that the actions are confidently expected. The same perfect of certainty was found in v. 1 ‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‫‘ נָ ַת ִתּי‬I will put/place my spirit on him’. 211 In v. 5, the same expectation is revealed by looking at what God did in the past when creating the heavens and the earth. As surely as the cosmos and all its hosts were created, as surely will God now speak of how he will save his people through his servant. I am not suggesting that the translation should literally read ‘thus God, YHWH will say’, for what God is saying has to be in the present tense to the present audience of that time, and thus the perfect clearly states what has been done in the past. Furthermore, it (the verb) can be found in other passages in Isaiah where God spoke and the event foretold happened (see Isa 7:14; 8:5–16; 9:1– 20; 37:22–38), in this case related to deliverance. Here God will deliver his people and other nations (Isa 42:4, 6) through his servant (v. 6). Lessing, by contrast, suggests that the saving power comes not only from God through the servant, but that ‘Yahweh employs his creative power to redeem his people (41:19–20; 45:8), using even darkness and evil to serve his salvific purposes (45:7; 54:16)’. 212 However, I prefer to categorize Lessing’s suggestion under the concept of judgment rather than ‘darkness and evil’, since Lessing has not defined what he means by ‘darkness and evil’. 371F

Four Participles: ‫בּוֹרא‬, ֵ ‫יהם‬ ֶ ‫נוֹט‬, ֵ ‫ר ַֹקע‬, ‫‘ נ ֵֹתן‬Create, Stretch Out, Stretch Out, Give’ The first four participles in v. 5 can be translated as verbs with God as the subject, defining his role over creation. These four participles have the same order as those in Gen 1, which makes this theme even more striking when it is now developed in Isa 40–55. Each of these participles specifies ‫בּוֹרא‬ ֵ ‘the one creating’, portraying the Creator ‫יהם‬ ֶ ‫נוֹט‬ ֵ as ‘the one stretching them out’, ‫‘ ר ַֹקע‬the one See Davidson, Hebrew Syntax, 61. Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 260. Page Kelley comments on v. 5 that ‘the emphasis upon the creation motif is designed to awaken faith in God. One who has revealed his power in creation is surely able to redeem his people and deliver them from their enemies.’ Page H. Kelley, Judgment and Redemption in Isaiah (Nashville: Broadman, 1968), 63. 211 212

122

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

stretching or spreading out’, 213 and ‫‘ נ ֵֹתן‬the one giving’. Because of the connection between the creation concept in 42:5 and the one found in Isa 41:21–29, vv. 5–9 should not be separated from Isa 42:1–4. Those scholars who believe that Isa 42:1–4 was added at a later time would argue that it divides the flow of thought between Isa 41:21–29 and Isa 42:5–9. However, Isa 42:1–4 is also full of contrasts between God and idols (see above regarding Isa 42:1–4). Therefore, I propose that there is no break of thought, theme, or theological ties between Isa 42:1–4 and Isa 42:5–9; rather, Isa 42:5– 9 strengthens Isa 42:1–4’s position. The parallelisms found in each verse are now found in the unit between Isa 42:1–4 and Isa 42:5–9, making these two units parallel. Thus, v. 5 functions to link together the verses before and after, while amplifying that God is the Creator who called his servant for the particular task of redeeming people. Isaiah 42:1–4 speaks about his servant’s task, and in 42:5–9, God speaks to his servant, confirming what he is doing through his servant by empowering him for his righteous purpose. 214 According to Duane Lindsey, ‘Yahweh’s creative power is evidence that He can empower the servant to perform His mission, which is described in verses 1–4 and partially repeated and clarified in verses 6–7.’ 215 ַ ‘Life’ The Nouns ‫‘ ֶצ ֱא ָצא‬Produce’, ‫‘ נְ ָשׁ ָמה‬Breath’,‫רוּחח‬

A rare plural word, used seven times in Isaiah 216 and four times in Job, 217 is worth exploring here. ‫ ֶצ ֱא ָצ ִאים‬occurs only as pluralia tantum and is derived from the verb ‫יָ ָצא‬, meaning to ‘go out, come out, go forth or away’. 218 As in English, the literal meaning can also 378F

See Randall K. Younker and Richard M. Davidson, ‘The Myth of the Solid Heavenly Dome: Another Look at the Hebrew �‫( ָר ִק ַי‬Rāqîa‘)’, AUSS 49, no. 1 (2011): 125–147. 214 F. Duane Lindsey, ‘Isaiah’s Songs of the Servant: Part 1’, BSac 139, no. 553 (1982): 22; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 321. 215 Lindsey, ‘Isaiah’s Songs of the Servant: Part 1’, 22. 216 Isa 22:24; 34:1; 42:5; 44:3; 48:19; 61:9; 65:23. 217 Job 5:25; 21:8; 27:14; 31:8. 218 D. Kellermann, ‘‫’ ֶצ ֱא ָצ ִאים‬, TDOT 12:208–210. 213

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 123 mean to ‘come forth’ in the sense of ‘offspring’ for humans and ‘young shoots of a plant’ or ‘buds’. 219 D. Kellermann observes that ‘in three passages (Isa. 34:1; 42:5; Job 31:8), [‫ ] ֶצ ֱא ָצ ִאים‬refers to “offspring” in the literal sense as young plant offshoots’. 220 The latter part of v. 5 contains a parallel between v. 5d and v. 5e with the words ‫‘ נְ ָשׁ ָמה‬breath’ and‫רוּחח‬ ַ ‘breeze, air, wind, spirit, and breath’. 221 While they could mean something different, the words can also convey the same imagery or meaning. The giver of breath ‫ נְ ָשׁ ָמה‬and breath‫רוּחח‬ ַ (in the sense of life, see Gen 2:7; Ezek 37:5, 8, 10) is God, and twice it is mentioned that God ‘gives breath to people upon [the earth], and breath/life to those who walk on it’ (Isa 42:5). The repetition of thought emphasizes that God is the giver and without him there would be no existence. The word‫רוּחח‬ ַ was used in v. 1 when the ‘Spirit’ of God was placed on the servant. Now the same ‘spirit, breath’ is used to give life to the existing material of this world. God’s‫רוּחח‬ ַ is therefore not only a promise or blessing that the servant receives, but it is also the life of God given to humanity. Thus, if the‫רוּחח‬ ַ of God gives life to humanity and the servant is receiving the‫רוּחח‬ ַ of God in the same manner, the servant will exhibit life—salvation—in his task, as opposed to death. Furthermore, if God is being revealed as the Creator because he gives life, might that mean that the servant who receives the‫רוּחח‬ ַ of God would exhibit the power of God as demonstrated at creation, but now for his (the servant’s) mission? If so, the servant would be able to do equally well the task God asked of him (see Isa 11:1–3; 61:1– 3; Lk 4:17–21). 380F

See ibid. Ibid. Could it be possible, even though a different word is used, that the author deliberately may be using similar imagery here (Isa 42:5) as in Isa 11:1, where God reveals the redemptive plant from outside of Israel as a nation? If such intentionality is possible, then even if the primary meaning of the noun refers to life on the earth, the play on the imagery might have suggested to the audience that this ‫ ֶצ ֱא ָצא‬may be related to God’s promise of a deliverer outside of Israel itself (see Isa 11:1–10). 221 See Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’רוּ ַח‬, HALOT 3:1197–1201. 219 220

124

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Verse 6 ‫אתי� ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬ ִ ‫ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה ְק ָר‬ �‫אַחזֵ ק ְבּיָ ֶד‬ ְ ְ‫ו‬ � ְ‫וְ ֶא ָצּ ְר� וְ ֶא ֶתּנ‬ ‫ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִם‬ I, YHWH, have called you in righteousness And let me grasp you by the hand And I will keep you, and will give you For a covenant of the people, for a light of the nations

Introduction Verse 6 begins with an emphatic pronoun ‫‘ ֲאנִ י‬I’, revealing the subject as YHWH, God, not the prophet. This is the second time ‫יְ הוָ ה‬ is used in this section. It appears clear that first person singular is used in v. 6 to remind the audience of v. 1, where first person singular was also used, to demonstrate that these sections are related to each other. Isaiah also reveals that just as ‘I uphold’ and ‘I place my Spirit’ (v. 1), now also �‫אתי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְק ָר‬I have called you’, �‫אַחזֵ ק ְבּיָ ֶד‬ ְ ‘let me grasp you by the hand’, �‫‘ ֶא ָצּ ְר‬I will keep you’, and � ְ‫‘ ֶא ֶתּנ‬I will give you’ (v. 6). God does the work through the servant; it is not the initiative of the servant or his own work or his own power, but God through the servant brings the covenant to people, a light to the nations. These four consecutive verbs unveil a progression in how God places the servant in appointment of his service for the people and nations. The Clause ‫אתי� ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬ ִ ‫‘ ְק ָר‬I Have Called You in Righteousness’

First, God calls the servant. The servant would not be able to do God’s bidding without the confirmation that God is calling him. In Isa 41:26, apparently Israel had been calling on other gods to be at their service and accomplish Israel’s desires, as seen by God’s objection: ‫ין־מגִּ יד‬ ַ ‫‘ אַף ֵא‬indeed none has declared’ �‫‘ אַף ֵאין ַמ ְשׁ ִמ ַי‬indeed none has proclaimed’. Here, however, it is God who does the calling. The verb ‫ קרא‬is used many times throughout the HB and is

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 125 found mainly in Qal. When God is the subject of this verb (‫)קרא‬, it has the sense of ‘choose someone for a specific purpose’. 222 For example, Cyrus is called by God (Isa 45:3, 4; 48:12, 15). In Isa 42:6, God calls his servant for a specific purpose, which is outlined in the remainder of this verse as well as in the next verse. The fact that God does the calling exhibits the view of certitude. The divine selection of a king in Mesopotamia can be seen by the Akkadian adverb kiniš, suggesting favor and legitimization. 223 Second, the call to the servant is in relation to God’s character—righteousness (see 41:2; 45:13; 59:4). Finally, God gives help to the servant for the task to which he is called—God holds his hand (42:6). 224 The prepositional phrase ‫‘ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in righteousness’ occurs after the first verb. What does ‘in righteousness’ mean? The preposition ‫ ב‬can have different meanings, such as ‘in, at, on, within, among, through’. Then what is the correct meaning in Isa 42:6? Is it interpreted as an instrument ‘with righteousness’ or a beth of norm ‘in the manner of righteousness’ or as agents ‘by righteousness’? I suggest that this preposition ‫ ב‬is used here as a ‘beth of specification in qualifying the realm with regard to which the verbal action obtains’. 225 Therefore, the translation can be ‘with regard to righteousness’ or simply ‘in righteousness’. The servant is called for a specific action, that of righteousness. Usually, the word ‫ ֶצ ֶדק‬means ‘righteousness, right, and accurate’; however, this word is not limited to just these meanings. The context often changes its meaning, as is the case in Isa 42:6. This word appears often in Isaiah, but in examining the occurrences in chs 40–55, one can clearly see how the author uses this word. This 382F

38F

384F

385F

135.

222

F. L. Hossfeld and H. Lamberty-Zielinski, ‘‫’קרא‬, TDOT 13:109–

See ‘Kiniš’, CAD 8-K:385–386; Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 188. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 117. 225 Waltke and O’Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 198. Shalom M. Paul has observed: ‘In Hebrew, the interdialectal functional equivalent of Akk. kīnu/kīniš is ‫צדק‬/‫בצדק‬, and this is precisely the word employed in the selection and call of the designated servant in 42:6, ‫בצדק אני קראתיך‬, “I, YHWH, have duly called you”, an expression which verifies and legitimizes the divine call of this individual alone.’ Paul, Devrei Shalom, 13. 223 224

126

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

noun appears ten times in Isa 40–55 (Isa 41:2, 10; 42:6, 21; 45:8, 13, 19; 51:1, 5, 7), and all of them convey the meaning of salvation coming from God. 226 Thus, I conclude that the ‫ ֶצ ֶדק‬in the sense of ‘salvation’ is brought by God through the servant. When God calls the servant ‘in righteousness’, it can just as well be said that God calls the servant ‘with regard to salvation [‫’]צ ֶדק‬. ֶ 227 The servant’s mission is clearly defined as saving the people/Israel and the nations/Gentiles. The servant that can bring righteousness cannot be Israel, since in the same verse, the people, ‫ﬠם‬,ָ are in need of the one who has been called to save them from the condition of sin. The Clause �‫אַחזֵ ק ְבּיָ ֶד‬ ְ ְ‫‘ ו‬And Let Me Grasp You by the Hand’

Second, God strengthens the hand of the servant. This word ‫חזק‬ ‘be strong’ is different from ‫‘ תמך‬uphold’ in v. 1. Furthermore, this verb ‫ חזק‬is a Hiph’il imperfect, but besides being causative, this verb is also a jussive in the first person singular, which is very rare, although two instances of it are found in Isaiah (41:28; 42:6). 228 For 38F

See Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’צ ֶדק‬, ֶ HALOT 3:1004–1005. Also see, Karl Elliger, Deuterojesaja (BKANT 11; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1978), 120, 232, 286; Charles Francis Whitley, ‘DeuteroIsaiah's Interpretation of Sedeq’, VT 22, no. 4 (1972): 469–475. 227 See my conclusion on the preposition ‫ ב‬just above. Also, the LXX has the preposition ἐν referring to the dative of reference or perhaps used as a dative of purpose (although not a category suggested by scholars). See Daniel B. Wallace, The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 372. Other translations have recognized this possible interpretation, including the New Jerusalem Bible, ‘I, Yahweh, have called you in saving justice’, and Jewish Publication Society (JPS 1985), ‘I the LORD, in My grace’ (Isa 42:6). 228 Both Joüon and Muraoka and Waltke and O’Connor acknowledge that this type of jussive form looks suspicious and may have arisen from textual corruptions or confusion between the groups or may represent traces of an earlier verbal system. Joüon and Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, 347–348; Waltke and O’Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 567. However, Emil Kautzsch sees the jussive of Isa 42:6 on rhythmical grounds, because at times the jussive comes immediately be226

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 127 the simple Hiph’il, the meaning would be ‘seize, grasp’, but if it is taken as a jussive, the meaning is not only causative but would also indicate a type of command or request or wish. Waltke and O’Connor comment that the jussive would refer ‘to absolute expressions of will’. 229 Therefore, God is taking the hand of the servant as an expression of will. The translation would then be something along the lines of ‘and I so will/wish to grasp you by the hand’ or ‘and let me grasp you by the hand’. Furthermore, Max Rogland has observed that in other parts of the HB and in the ANE, ‘striking a hand’ reveals a handshake that seals an agreement between two parties, such as in Prov 6:1. 230 Julye Bidmead, in her book The Akītu Festival, demonstrates the Babylonian interrelationship of akītu in both religion and politics. The akītu festival involved the monarchy and the priesthood of Marduk. The most important ritual of this festivity was indicated by ‘the use of the traditional formula “qātē Bēl ṣabātum” (the grasping of Bēl’s hand), and the overall importance of “hand-grasping” throughout the akītu’. 231 The hand-holding, Bidmead asserts, acted ‘as a legal and binding contractual agreement between the king, as representative of the people, and the patron deity’. 232 The handshake referred to a ‘mutual action between two parties’, 233 and it was ‘a form of oath or contract between the king and Marduk’. 234 The idea of the king and fore the principal pause. Wilhelm Gesenius, Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar (ed. Emil Kautzsch; trans. Arthur E. Cowley; Oxford: Clarendon, 1910), 323. See also W. L. Moran, ‘Early Canaanite yaqtula’, Or 29 (1960): 1–19. 229 Waltke and O’Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 565. 230 Max Rogland, ‘“Striking a Hand” (TQ’ KP) in the Biblical Hebrew’, VT 51, no. 1 (2001): 107–109. 231 Julye Bidmead, The Akītu Festival: Religious Continuity and Royal Legitimation in Mesopotamia (GDNES 2; Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, 2002), 2. 232 Ibid., 2, 162. 233 Ibid., 156. 234 Ibid., 160. See also Enrico Ascalone and Luca Peyronel, ‘Two Weights from Temple N at Tell Mardikh-Ebla, Syria: A Link between Metrology and Cultic Activities in the Second Millennium BC?’, JCS 53 (2001): 1–12.

128

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

god entering into a legal contract during the Babylon akītu demonstrated to the people that the king promised to honor Marduk and his ritual, and in exchange, Marduk promised to protect Babylon and its citizens. 235 Further ideology is also found in the Cyrus Cylinder, where Marduk’s hand took Cyrus and set him as king of the city of Anshan. 236 This text portrays the image that Marduk made Cyrus king by the action of his hand. While it is not clear what the hand may fully represent here, it is important to note that the idea of a hand between gods and human beings was a well-established notion in biblical times, which suggests that it was not a foreign concept for the author. 237 Based on these observations, God’s grasping of the hand of the servant could very well be a gesture that reflects a handshake between two parties—divine and human—for the establishment of royalty and power. This would also work in conjunction with the covenant imagery in the same verse. As we observe in Isa 41:28, God is intentionally looking for someone who can predict the future, but no one can be found. Then in ch. 42:6, God reveals, through the action of grasping the hand of the servant, that he has found someone who will fulfill the future that is predicted by God. The action of grasping the hand demonstrates that God leads his servant in doing his bidding in the Bidmead, The Akītu Festival, 162. See the Cyrus Cylinder where the full text is found: ‘He took under his hand Cyrus, king of the city of Anshan, and called him by his name, proclaiming him aloud for the kingship over all of everything. He made the land of the Qutu and all the Medean troops prostrate themselves at his feet, while he looked out in justice and righteousness for the black-headed people whom he had put under his care.’ ‘A New Translation of the Cyrus Cylinder by the British Museum’. Cited 6 December 2012. Online: http://kavehfarrokh.com/iranica/achaemenid-era/a-newtranslation-of-the-cyrus-cylinder-by-the-british-museum/. Also, see Shalom Paul for the Cyrus Cylinder text; Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 15–17. 237 This also can be observed in Egyptian history when two gods led a newly consecrated king by the hand. See Othmar Keel, The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms (trans. Timothy J. Hallett; New York: Seabury, 1978), figs. 272–273, 346, 414. 235 236

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 129 present time as well as in the future. Furthermore, the fact that a jussive is used in Isa 42:6 may isolate the reason why God is imposing his will on the servant, unlike Isa 41:9, 13 (Hiph’il, ‫ )חזק‬where God also grasps the hand of the servant (the corporate one), 238 yet there the verb does not have the same force as in Isa 42:6 because there is no jussive. If this observation is correct, the author is purposely turning the reader’s attention from the corporate servant of Isa 41 to the individual servant of Isa 42. In Isa 41 the servant’s hand is held for comfort and reassurance, while in Isa 42 the servant’s hand is held for the purpose of bringing salvation to people and to nations—that is the will/wish of God or purpose of God during the time of Isaiah as well as a future time. As Johann P. Lange points out, ‘the Prophet lets the LORD announce Himself as the one who will give the world a redeemer in His Servant’. 239 398F

39F

The Clauses � ְ‫‘ וְ ֶא ָצּ ְר� וְ ֶא ֶתּנ‬And I Will Keep You, and Will Give You’

The third clause continues to describe how God relates to the servant. ‫ נצר‬has the basic meaning of ‘watch over, keep from’, although it is not restricted to those meanings. The verb in Akkadian, naṣāru (to keep watch, protect, guard), reflects the Hebrew meaning; 240 the Arabic nẓr has a similar and yet more elaborate meaning: ‘to perceive with the eye, to care for’. 241 In the prophetic books, this word occurs fourteen times, and nine times it is found in Isaiah. 242 In Isa 49:6 the servant of the LORD comes to restore the ‫נְ ִצ ֵירי יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל‬ God wanted to have this direct relationship with his people, but because of their failure, he had to do it with his individual servant; see Judg 14–16 (Samson as individual deliverer because of the failure of the nation) and Dan 9:24–27 (where the Messiah brings righteousness, which the nation was supposed to do). 239 Johann Peter Lange, The Prophet Isaiah (New York: C. Scribner's Sons, 1906), 451. 240 ‘Naṣāru’, CAD 11-N:33–47. 241 Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’נצר‬, HALOT 2:718. 242 Isa 1:8; 26:3; 27:3 (2x); 42:6; 48:6; 49:6, 8; 65:8. Regarding Isa 65:8, see the discussion from S. Wagner, ‘‫’נצר‬, TDOT 9:541–549. 238

130

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

‘survivors of Israel’. 243 In v. 8, a close similarity in wording to Isa 42:6 occurs in two places: the servant is being watched ‫ נצר‬and ‘give you for a covenant of the people’ ‫וְ ֶא ֶתּנְ � ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬. ‘In both passages [Isa 42:6; 49:8], it appears to be important that Yahweh himself speaks of his protective activity.’ 244 Thus, the verb ‫ נצר‬implies more than just watching someone; it also implies protective care on the part of God toward the servant. The verb ‫ נצר‬reveals that God is watching over and protecting the servant. Specifically, this not only portrays God expressing his will or requesting that the servant carry out his plans, it also demonstrates how God will be at the servant’s side. The servant does not have to worry about being alone in saving the world; God is with him every step of the way. The same verb is found in Isa 49:8, where the previous clause uses the word ‫שׁוּﬠה‬ ָ ְ‫‘ י‬salvation’ and also the word ‘covenant’, leading the reader to see a close parallel between these two servant poems. God reveals his tenderness by watching over his servant, a God who protects his servant like a mother eagle that hovers over her baby chicks (see Deut 32:10–11). Through such care, God will not allow any failure to happen; the servant will indeed succeed with God’s help. In the Pentateuch, this verb is used only three times (Ex 34:7; Deut 32:10; 33:9), and the first two passages notably reveal the character of God toward his people as well as his redemptive ways of saving the people. Thus, Isaiah may in fact be using the same imagery of God’s redemptive actions as is found in the Pentateuch. Moreover, in Deut 33:9, the word ‫ נצר‬is found in connection with the ‫ ְב ִרית‬of God, a resemblance to Isa 42:6. In the praise song of salvation of Isa 26, Isaiah shows that God is the Redeemer: ‘You will keep him [righteous nation] … because he [righteous nation] trusted in You [God]’ (26:3). Isaiah 27:3 reveals a similar picture. God is the subject of redeeming the people of the world. In Isa 42:6 the concept has not changed, but this time the author adds a comment on how God If this concept is taken with the Hebrew word ‫נְ ִצ ֵירי‬, it is also pointed out by the qerê that this word could be misspelled and should be a participle ‫צוּרי‬ ֵ ְ‫נ‬. In that case the interpretation would be ‘to restore the preserved ones of Israel’, which the servant would be doing. 244 Wagner, ‘‫’נצר‬, TDOT 9:541–549. 243

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 131 will go about redeeming the people—by working through his servant. Since Israel has been pursuing idolatry in Isa 41, Israel cannot be the tool in the hand of God to redeem people; thus, the servant must represent someone else other than Israel. The servant must be someone who is walking in harmony with God’s character and plan. Isaiah has already pointed out that the one ‘called’ is righteous (Isa 42:6). The final clause, God ‫‘ נתן‬will appoint/ordain you’, contains the last verb, bringing all the other verbs in v. 6 to a climax of the servant’s actions. This is the third of four times that the verb ‫נתן‬ occurs (vv. 1, 5, 6, 8). In vv. 1 and 5, the verb implies ‘to set, put, and place’, but in v. 6 the meaning is different; instead of the traditional translation of ‘appoints’, it implies ‘to give’. The word ‫נתן‬ should be rendered as ‘give’ here, first, because it is followed by a ‫ְל‬ (for example, Gen 3:6), and, second, because it is followed by an accusative, suggesting ‘to give, pass on, transfer’ (for example, Gen 18:7). 245 What type of giving does it describe? What is God giving? The accusative of the verb is ‘you’, a masculine singular pronoun. God will give you—the servant—a special role. The verb ‫ נתן‬is used numerous times in the HB, and it has a wide range of meanings. The meaning of this particular ‫ נתן‬is not just any type of giving, such as money or an allowance or compensation or remuneration for work, nor does it describe a sale or loan or wedding contract or gifts. 246 Instead, in this instance, God as the subject gives the servant as a covenant to people and nations. Here Isaiah uses language rich with sacrificial or cultic usage. 247 This idea is very similar to the one found in Dan 9:24–27, where the Messiah confirms a strong covenant with the many (‫ )וְ ִהגְ ִבּיר ְבּ ִרית ָל ַר ִבּים‬as a sacrifice (‫וּמנְ ָחה‬ ִ ‫( )יַ ְשׁ ִבּית זֶ ַבח‬v. 27). So the Messiah is the instrument by which the covenant is confirmed, and he is killed ( ‫יִ ָכּ ֵרת‬ E. Lipiński, ‘‫’נתן‬, TDOT 10:90–108. See the many meanings of ‫ נתן‬in ibid. 247 In the Sumero-Akkadian worldview, the king also atoned for the sin of his whole people, whose sin he carried and for which he was responsible. Engnell, Studies in Divine Kingship in the Ancient Near East, 35. See also René Labat, Le caractère religieux de la royauté Assyro-Babylonienne (Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1939), 323, 325, 328. 245 246

132

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

‫( ) ָמ ִשׁי ַח‬v. 26). This kind of giving approaches the imagery of the firstborn son being given on behalf of humanity (see Isa 53:5–7; Rom 8:29; Col 1:15, 18; Rev 1:5). The sacrificial or cultic language found in Isa 42:6, with the words ‫צ ֶדק‬,ֶ ‫נתן‬, and ‫ב ִרית‬,ְ leads back to the Pentateuch. The sacrificial system given to Israel, as outlined in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, was to deepen their understanding of the relationship between God and humanity, and thus between the holy and unholy. This concept of the holy and unholy may be captured in the word ‫( ֶצ ֶדק‬Isa 42:6), where at Mount Sinai God called Israel to be a ‫‘ גוֹי ָקדוֹשׁ‬holy nation’ (Ex 19:6) and to ‫‘ ִק ַדּ ְשׁ ָתּם‬sanctify them’ (v. 10). Moreover, in Ex 19 there is the concept that God is holy and will appear on the top of the mountain while the people are unholy and for this reason need to be ‘sanctified’ (see Ex 19:1– 25). While God ‘holds the hand’ (�‫)אַחזֵ ק ְבּיָ ֶד‬ ְ of his servant in Isa 42:6, in Ex 19 the people are admonished to not touch the mountain with their ‘hand’ (‫( )יָ ד‬vv. 12–13). The idea of holiness in Ex 19 leads to the sealing of this covenant in Ex 24. In Ex 24:3–11, the sealing of the covenant introduced in Ex 19 is ratified by what is called the ‫ם־ה ְבּ ִרית‬ ַ ‫‘ ַד‬blood of the covenant’ 248 (v. 8). In Isa 42:6, the servant is given for a covenant to the people. The term ‘covenant’ is also used in Ex 24:8, but here the covenant is in relation to blood instead of a servant. In this ceremony, half of the blood is tossed against the altar and the other half on the people (vv. 6, 8). The significance of this ‘blood of the covenant’ reveals two aspects: first, the blood tossed on the altar takes the place of a sacrifice and reveals God’s gracious forgiveness in accepting this offering. On the other hand, the blood tossed on the people signifies that the people are bound in a blood oath. 249 ‘The blood not only became a bond of union between Jehovah and His people, but as the blood of the covenant, it became a vital power, holy and divine, uniting Israel and its God.’ 250 408F

409F

410F

See Brevard S. Childs, Exodus (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1974), 505–507. 249 Ibid., 506. 250 Carl F. Keil and Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament: The Pentateuch (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952), 158. 248

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 133 A similar festival is found in Lev 24:5–9 with the concept of ‫עוֹלם‬ ָ ‫‘ ְבּ ִרית‬everlasting covenant’ and with what is called the ‘bread of presence’ (‫)ל ֶחם ָפּנִ ים‬ ֶ (see Ex 25:30; 35:13; 39:36). 251 Also, the verb ‫‘ נתן‬place’ (Lev 24:7) and the two other verbs (‫שׂים‬, �‫)ﬠ ַר‬ ָ (vv. 6, 8) ‘are precisely those describing the making of a covenant (2 Sam 23:5; Gen 17:2; Num 25:12)’; 252 the terms ‫ נתן‬and ‫ ְב ִרית‬are found in Isa 42:6. What is the significance between the ‘bread of presence’ and the ‘everlasting covenant’ in Lev 24:5–9? The ‘bread of presence’ was set on the table 253 all week and changed every Sabbath (v. 8). 254 There were twelve ‘loaves’, one for each of Israel’s tribes. The ‘bread of presence’ was an offering as a ‘pledge of the covenant between the twelve tribes and the Lord’. 255 Milgrom also points out that the twelve loaves on the table ‘are a constant reminder to YHWH of his bĕrît ‘ôlām, his “eternal covenant” with his people’. 256 This passage may suggest the idea of ‘give and covenant’ in Isa 42:6, where God gives the servant for a covenant of the people. The servant may well represent, like the ‘bread of presence’, an offering given as a covenant between God and his people. We now return to discussion of the term ‫נתן‬. In many places, the combination of ‫ נתן‬with two accusatives would render the 413F

41F

415F

416F

See Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 23–27: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 3B; New York: Doubleday, 2001), 2091. See also Roy Gane, ‘“Bread of the Presence” and Creator-in-Residence’, VT 42, no. 2 (1992): 179–203. 252 Milgrom, Leviticus 23–27, 2094. 253 ‘According to an ancient interpretation, the table is an instrument not of sacrifice, but of nourishment—not for God but for persons. As God destined the plant kingdom for human nourishment, so did he require a table for the Tabernacle.’ Ibid. 254 Milgrom suggests that the ‘bread of presence’ was changed daily. See ibid., 2098–2099. See Gane, ‘“Bread of the Presence” and Creator-inResidence’, 179–203. 255 Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions (trans. John McHugh; New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961), 422. 256 Milgrom, Leviticus 23–27, 2095. See also Gane, ‘“Bread of the Presence” and Creator-in-Residence’, 192–194. 251

134

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

meaning as ‘to appoint’ or ‘ordain’. 257 In Isa 42:6, ‫ נתן‬is followed by an accusative plus the preposition ‫ל‬, which ‘primarily presents a causative connotation’, 258 and as seen above appears to suggest a meaning of ‘to give’. In this verse there are two prepositions, but this does not change the combination, and thus the verb remains a causative that refers to a person appointed or ordained. God is most often the subject, affirming his intention to appoint a person(s) for a specific function or position. 259 While this type of combination has been demonstrated in other places in the OT where God appointed someone for a particular function or position—Abraham (Gen 17:6, 20) and Moses (Ex 7:1) were appointed in the past—the present verse (v. 6) reveals God giving his servant to be a covenant for the people and a light for the nations (see Isa 49:6). A similar construction of the verb ‫ נתן‬followed by the preposition ‫ ְל‬occurs earlier in Isa 40–55, which, at first sight, one may think is related to Israel. This construction in Isa 41:2, ‘And He will give the nations before his face/before him’ (‫)יִ ֵתּן ְל ָפנָ יו גּוֹיִ ם‬, suggests that God will send someone to save Israel, since the context suggests a judgment scene. 260 Furthermore, a contrast is introduced in Isa 41:8—where Israel and Jacob are connected with the word ‘my servant’—through the use of a disjunctive waw in the word ‫אַתּה‬ ָ ְ‫ו‬, which can be translated as ‘and or but’, suggesting a change between who was referred to in the previous seven verses and Israel in v. 8. 261 Apparently, the author is now using the same construct 418F

419F

421F

Michael A. Grisanti, ‘‫’נתן‬, NIDOTTE 3:205–211. Ibid. 259 Ibid. 260 Salvation and judgment scenes are often found together in the HB. Judgment reveals the bad character or sin of people, and it comes as a result of a broken relationship between God and his people. When people recognize their sins and that they cannot save themselves, salvation is the solution. God does not want to destroy people, and thus he always strives to save people (see Gen 6–8; 2 Pet 3:9). For this reason, salvation is always mixed with judgment (see Isa 37–39). 261 See Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 207; Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 80. 257 258

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 135 in Isa 42:6 (verb ‫ נתן‬plus preposition ‫ ְל‬with a disjunctive waw that is attached to the verb ‫ )נתן‬to express a contrast between the servant in Isa 42:1–9 and the servant Israel in Isa 41:21–29, again differentiating the servant of the Lord, as the Redeemer, from the servant Israel. Two Prepositional Phrases: ‫‘ ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִ ם ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬For a Covenant of People, For a Light of Nations’ The following two prepositional phrases are noted for their Hebrew poetry parallel: ‫ ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬and ‫לאוֹר גּוֹיִם‬.ְ These prepositional phrases are central to the act of installing a person with the servant’s call, yet they are ‘difficult to grasp in [their] precise significance’, 262 more particularly ‫ל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬.ִ 263 North lists four ways that this clause has been rendered by scholars: (1) Covenant-people, (2) Covenant (-bond) of the people (that is, of Israel), (3) Covenant (bond) of the peoples (that is, of the nations), and (4) Splendor of the people(s). 264 However, as North demonstrates, all these attempts have some problems, perhaps not so much with how to reconcile the word ‘people’ 265 as with the understanding of the word ‘covenant’. J. Fischer insightfully analyzes the servant’s role: 423F

42F

425F

The ’or goyim is the touchstone for the correctness of the interpretation of the berit ‘am. … Berit ‘am and ’or goyim are the Ebed’s professional titles; on the one hand the Ebed has received from God the assignment to mediate the covenant with Israel, to restore the covenant relationship; on the other hand he has been given the task of illuminating the gentile world— of passing on the light to them. 266

Elliger, Deuterojesaja, 120, 232, 286; Whitley, ‘Deutero-Isaiah's Interpretation of Sedeq’, 469–475. 263 See Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 131. 264 North, The Suffering Servant, 132. 265 See ibid. 266 Johann Fischer, Isaias 40–55 und die Perikopen vom Gottesknecht: ein Krtisch-Exegetisch Studie (ATA 6; Munich: Aschendorff, 1916), 86–87. 262

136

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

While Fischer does not go far enough in explaining what type of covenant the servant is making, the second clause certainly helps to clarify the nature of the first clause. If the second clause is taken as an objective genitive, the sense of ‘light to (of) the nations’ would be ‘in order to bring light to the nations’, in turn changing the interpretation of the first clause from ‘covenant to (of) the people’ to ‘the one who bring[s] the covenant to the people’. 267 A question remains about the meaning of the words ‫ְב ִרית‬ ‘covenant’ and ‫‘ אוֹר‬light’: Why would the servant bring a covenant to one group of people and light to another group of people? Is the servant accomplishing a different type of work with each group? The word ‫ ְב ִרית‬appears many times in the OT and its basic meaning refers to a covenant between people or between a deity and people. However, a more sophisticated meaning could refer to ‘bond of obligation’ 268 or a ‘legally binding relationship between two parties’. 269 Roy Gane offers a similar definition: ‘a legally binding relationship contracted between two parties’. 270 The covenant suggested in Isa 42:6 is that I (God) ‘make you [servant] the covenant of the people’, as the servant would be the covenant for the people. Thus, as I have shown above, the servant is the sacrifice for the covenant in binding a relationship contracted between God and the people. The word ‫ אוֹר‬with the preposition ‫ ל‬occurs nine times in Isaiah (Isa 5:20; 42:6, 16; 49:6; 51:4; 59:9; 60:3, 19, 20). In both Isa 49:6 and 51:4, the light is used metaphorically to refer to salvation for the nations. In Isa 60:1, the same word is used but without the preposition ‫ל‬, again giving the sense of the salvation for you [peo428F

429F

430F

See ibid. Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40– 55, 131–132. 269 Moshe Weinfeld, ‘Berit—Covenant vs Obligation’, Bib 56, no. 1 (1975): 120–128. 270 Roy Gane, ‘Covenant, Law, Sabbath’ (Class syllabus; Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University, 1997), 15. There is again a correlation of this word ‘covenant’ between Isaiah and Exodus, suggesting a new exodus. 267 268

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 137 ple], and v. 3 describes the nations coming to the light as a source of salvation. Thus, there is a common denominator in how the words ‫ְב ִרית‬ and ‫ אוֹר‬are used in Isa 42:6. The word ‫ ְב ִרית‬signifies a legally binding relationship contracted between God and his people. This relationship is sealed by the blood of the servant, since the servant is given as a sacrificial lamb (see Isa 53), 271 a contract between God and his people. The covenant implies a salvific aspect of a relationship that was broken (see Isa 41:21–29) and restored by the doings of the servant. In turn, ‫ אוֹר‬reveals more than merely daylight; in Isaiah, the word refers to salvation extended beyond the covenantal group of people to nations other than the seed of Abraham (see Gen 12:1–3; Rom 4:16–18; Gal 3:23–29). Therefore, the use of both these terms provides a complete understanding of the servant’s salvific message to the world. Beuken has identified a grammatical problem related to the parallelism of these two clauses: Are ‫‘ ָﬠם‬people’ and ‫‘ גּוֹיִ ם‬Gentiles’ a synonymous or an antithetical parallelism? 272 Syntactically, the second clause helps with understanding the first one, but the morphology of the two nouns ‫ ָﬠם‬and ‫ גּוֹיִ ם‬refers to two different people groups that the servant is reaching, particularly because Isa 49:6 is clear that the ‫‘ גּוֹיִ ם‬nations’ are at the ends of the earth. The ‫ָﬠם‬ refers not to nationality but to people of consanguinity, while the ‫ גּוֹיִ ם‬denotes a political nation or ‘the status and stability of nationhood in a land designated for that purpose’. 273 It also refers to Gentiles in general. Isaiah 42:6 appears to refer to the servant’s role as 43F

But interestingly, the servant is also given as an ’asham, ‘reparation offering’, an expiatory sacrifice that was especially for sacrilege in Lev 5:14–6:7 (in contrast with Ex 24, which has burnt and well-being offerings). This agrees with Jer 31:34, where the ‘new covenant’ is based on forgiveness for having already failed. I am indebted to Roy Gane for suggesting these concepts. 272 See Beuken as referred to in Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 132. 273 John H. Walton, Covenant: God's Purpose, God’s Plan (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 14. See also, Ephraim A. Speiser, ‘“People” and “Nation” of Israel’, JBL 79, no. 2 (1960): 157–163. 271

138

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

reaching both Israel and the Gentiles, particularly when Isa 49 is taken into consideration, even though linguistically these terms may not provide a certain definition. 274 Verse 7 ‫ִל ְפק ַֹ� ֵﬠינַ יִ ם ִﬠוְ רוֹת‬ ‫אַסּיר‬ ִ ‫הוֹציא ִמ ַמּ ְסגֵּ ר‬ ִ ‫ְל‬ �‫ִמ ֵבּית ֶכּ ֶלא י ְֹשׁ ֵבי ח ֶֹשׁ‬ So that he opens the blind eyes, So that he brings out the prisoner from the dungeon, [Also] those that sit in the dark from the prison-house.

Introduction Verse 7 continues from v. 6 with a series of two infinitives and one participle related back to the last verb ‫ ;נתן‬in v. 7, the servant is given a list of what he will be doing. Thus, the servant is not only a covenant to the people and a light to the nations; a descriptive message continues to unfold about how he is also bringing the salvific plan to fruition. Verse 7 is the result of v. 6. It is important to note that this verse has a chiastic structure of A, B, B’, A’: Oswalt makes the following argument regarding the ‫ ָﬠם‬and ‫גּוֹיִם‬. ‘In general, three matters raise doubts about the identification with Israel: (1) the same word in v. 5 is shown by the context there to refer to humanity; (2) when this word refers to Israel, it almost always has the article, but it is anarthrous here; (3) the structure of the sentence is synonymous parallelism; therefore the meaning of ‘am should be synonymous with its parallel member, goyim, nations. But these matters are hardly insuperable: the context of v. 5 is different from the context of v. 6; the presence or absence of the article in poetry is highly unpredictable; recent studies of parallelism have shown that even in so-called synonymous parallelism it is normal to have a progression from the first to the second member. Thus the grammatical and literary questions cannot be answered conclusively.’ Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 118. 274

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 139 A. ‫ִל ְפק ַֹ� ֵﬠינַ יִ ם ִﬠוְ רוֹת‬ B. ‫אַסּיר‬ ִ ‫הוֹציא ִמ ַמּ ְסגֵּ ר‬ ִ ‫ְל‬ B’. ‫ִמ ֵבּית ֶכּ ֶלא‬ A’. �‫י ְֹשׁ ֵבי ח ֶֹשׁ‬

A. So that he opens the blind eyes,

B. So that he brings out the prisoner from the dungeon, B’. From the prison-house

A’. Those that sit in the dark

The meter is 3:3:4, suggesting a stress on 4, which combines the thoughts of 3:3. In the case of the A classes, the concept is expressed with different words, but the idea remains the same: ‘open blind eyes’ and ‘sit in darkness’. Those sitting in darkness are equal in understanding to those who are blind. In the B classes, the concept presented is that of slavery or prisoners in a prison. Both A and B begin with an infinitive clause, and each has three meters, while A’ and B’ have a meter of two and no infinitive clause. Furthermore, A’ and B’ expand the notion of ‘blind eyes’ and ‘prisoner’ as conditions requiring salvation. The Prepositional Phrase ‫‘ ִל ְפק ַֹחח ֵﬠינַ יִ ם ִﬠוְ רוֹת‬To Open the Blind Eyes’

In v. 6, the servant brings covenant and light. In v. 7 the first word begins with Qal infinitive ‫ל ְפקֹח‬,ִ which complements the last verb in v. 6, ‫נתן‬. The preposition ‫ ִל‬reveals the purpose of the verb ‫ נתן‬of v. 6; the literal translation of ‫‘ ִל ְפק ַֹ� ֵﬠינַ יִ ם ִﬠוְ רוֹת‬to open the blind eyes’ should be translated as a purpose with the preposition ‫‘ ל‬in order that to open the blind eyes’, 275 emphasizing the two previous 435F

See Waltke and O’Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 606–607. See also, John C. L. Gibson, Davidson’s Introductory Hebrew Grammar: Syntax (Edinburgh, Scotland: T&T Clark, 1994), 129. 275

140

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

clauses in v. 6 and ‘the blind eyes’. Thus, the resulting clause expresses consequences and can be translated with ‘and so, so that’, which would render this phrase as ‘so that he opens the blind eyes’. The verb ‫ פקח‬appears only twenty-one times in the OT in eighteen passages. 276 In Isaiah this verb occurs four times: three in the Qal (Isa 37:17; 42:7, 20) and once in Niph’al (Isa 35:5). Often this lexeme is associated with the noun ‫‘ ַﬠיִ ן‬eye’, except in Isa 42:20 where it is connected with the noun ‫‘ אֹזֶ ן‬ear’. In Isa 42:7, the one who does the opening of the eyes is God through the working of his servant. In both Isa 35:5 and 42:7, God is the subject of opening the eyes, and in Isa 37:17 Hezekiah pleads with God to have his eyes open and see what Sennacherib is doing (see 2 Kings 19:16). In all these instances, the opening of eyes reveals deliverance from something. In the case of Isa 37:17, Hezekiah wants the people to see that God is the deliverer of Jerusalem from physical war, while in Isa 35:5 and 42:7 the deliverance comes in the form of the salvific phase—spiritual war. 277 In Gen 3:5, 7, the serpent first mentions that having open eyes would make Adam and Eve like God, knowing good and evil, but in v. 7 when their eyes were opened, they see themselves naked. The irony in Gen 3 is that when their eyes are opened, they become blind. Now in Isa 42:7, God wants to restore the state of human beings to the original plan of true openness of mind, in other words, to a true relationship with God. In Isa 41, the Israelites’ worship of pagan gods demonstrates their state of blindness (see Lev 19:14; Deut 27:18), but God, as the initiator, wants to restore the relationship once broken. Also, this restoration is not only with his people, but also with the nations at large, hence with the whole world. If the servant in Isa 42:7 is the tool of God’s salvific plan, it appears that Isa 41 and 42:20 would refer to different servants. In Isa 42:20, the servant is the one who refuses to have his ears open to hear. The servant does not comprehend correctly what the Lord 437F

Gen 3:5, 7; 21:19; 2 Kings 4:35; 6:17, 20; 19:16; Job 14:3; 27:19; Ps 146:8; Prov 20:13; Isa 35:5; 37:17; 42:7, 20; Jer 32:19; Dan 9:18; Zech 12:4. 277 Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, 180. 276

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 141 is communicating to him. Thus, Isa 42:7 is found between the blindness of Israel in ch. 41 and the hard of hearing in Isa 42:20. The concept of ‫‘ ֵﬠינַ יִ ם ִﬠוְ רוֹת‬blind eyes’ is significant, since it suggests that the people cannot see clearly, cannot see at all, or perhaps are spiritually blind. 278 The text does not disclose whether these people are blind from birth, accident, old age, or illness, but if one assumes that this blindness refers to a birth defect, it would make the opening of eyes even more miraculous. The fact that the servant will take their blindness away demonstrates something that is impossible for a human being to do; only a supernatural power or divine power could accomplish such a miracle. 279 In Lev 21:19, Moses was given instructions for the descendants of Aaron who might become priests, and one of the defects mentioned that would prevent them from being a priest is blindness. 280 In the same way, a sacrificial animal could not have any blemish, either lameness or blindness, if it was to be offered to the Lord (see Lev 22; Deut 15:21). Hence, blindness can be taken to imply lack of holiness. This imagery reveals that the priesthood, like Aaron and the unblemished lamb, needed to comply with the holiness specifications. Thus, the servant appears to be someone other than Israel itself, 281 for Israel needed help to deal with its own condition of ‘unholiness’. While the term ‘blindness’ can refer to a literal blindness (see Ex 4:11), it is also often used in a metaphorical sense, as found in 438F

439F

40F

41F

See a recent study done on blindness in the OT, particularly the section on Isa 42:7. Ray W. McAllister, ‘Theology of Blindness in the Hebrew Scriptures’ (unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 2010), 256–261. 279 See ibid., 257. 280 John E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC 4; Waco, Tex.: Word, 1992), 349– 350. See, Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger: An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo (London: ARK Paperbacks, 1984), 51–52. 281 Goldingay and Payne acknowledge that the Israelites are both spiritually and physically in darkness (Isa 42:18–20), and for that reason the Israelites ‘are in no position to fulfill this ministry, even if it is their calling’, referring to v. 7. Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 230. 278

142

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Isa 42:7. 282 The blindness is contrasted with the light that the servant brings in v. 6. 283 Thus, the blindness would refer to darkness; in this case, it would be spiritual blindness. Thus Isa 42:7 does not refer to literal blindness. The Prepositional Phrase ‫אַסּיר‬ ִ ‫הוֹציא ִמ ַמּ ְסגֵּ ר‬ ִ ‫‘ ְל‬To Bring Out a Prisoner From the Dungeon’ The next prepositional phrase ‫אַסּיר‬ ִ ‫הוֹציא ִמ ַמּ ְסגֵּ ר‬ ִ ‫‘ ְל‬to bring out a prisoner from the dungeon’ continues the list of the servant’s actions. This Hiph’il infinitive, like the previous infinitive, complements the last verb in v. 6, ‫נתן‬. 284 However, I would suggest that not only does this infinitive complement the verb, but the preposition also serves as a complement of type as seen with the previous infinitive. 285 In this particular instance, the preposition indicates the purpose of the action denoted by the main verb (‫ )נתן‬in v. 6. Thus, the purpose clause expresses a consequence and can be translated with ‘in order to, in order that’, rendering this phrase as ‘in order to bring out a prisoner from the dungeon’. The verb ‫ יצא‬was used two other times in Isa 42:1, 3 in conjunction with ‫מ ְשׁ ָפּט‬, ִ but in v. 7 the verb is used in relation to a person being brought out from a place, ‫ ִמן‬of location. Compare Gen 40:14, where Joseph revealed the interpretation of the dream to the butler and concluded with a supplication to the butler that he remember him and be kind to him by telling Pharaoh about him and ‫ן־ה ַבּיִ ת ַהזֶּ ה‬ ַ ‫אתנִ י ִמ‬ ַ ‫הוֹצ‬ ֵ ְ‫‘ ו‬bring me out from this house’. Joseph was in prison and wanted to be delivered from it. People are generally in prison ‫ ַמ ְסגֵּ ר‬because they have done something unjust and are reaping the results of their own actions. However, if they are brought out of prison, that means they are no longer confined 286 46F

R. K. Harrison and E. H. Merrill, ‘‫’עור‬, NIDOTTE, 3:356–357. See Philip Stern, ‘The “Blind Servant” Imagery of Deutero-Isaiah and Its Implications’, Biblica, vol. 75 no. 2 (1994): 224–232. 284 See Waltke and O’Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 606. 285 See ibid. 286 The word ‫ ַמ ְסגֵּ ר‬appears only a few times in the HB as prison or dungeon: Isa 24:22; 42:7; Ps 142:8. This word has a connection with the 282 283

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 143 and/or that their bad actions have been paid for (see Josh 6:22; Gen 19:12) by either judgment or mercy. This recalls God who led/brought ‫הוֹציא‬ ִ out the children of Israel from the land of Egypt ‫ ֵמ ֶא ֶרץ ִמ ְצ ַריִ ם‬as an act of mercy and to deliver them from the slave master, the king of Egypt, Pharaoh (Ex 12:51). The Israelites were prisoners in the house of Pharaoh; they were under the rulership of a different king, one other than God (see Ex 1). However, in Isa 42:7, the author proposes to Israel a better king who can give them freedom (see Ex 16:6; 1 Sam 8:7; Jer 15:20), who will fight for them (Ex 15:3; 23:28; Deut 7:20; Josh 24:12; 1 Sam 17:45–47), and who will conquer both the animate and inanimate beings of the world (see Gen 3:15; Isa 14:12–21; Ezek 28:11–19; Eph 6:10–20; Rev 12– 14). 287 The term ‫אַסּיר‬ ִ ‘prisoner’ in Isaiah, as suggested in the paragraph above, could mean literal bondage. In Isa 10:4, the same word is used in the context of Israel having mistreated the poor and the widows for its own pleasure. As a result, God will send the Assyrians as an agent of his wrath, as a day of judgment. When this occurs, Israel will become a prisoner. A similar scenario is found in the apocalyptic chapters of Isaiah (see Isa 24:22). The kings and leaders of the earth are gathered as prisoners into the pit. However, in Isa 42:7, as with the previous phrase ‘open the blind eyes’, ‘to bring out a prisoner from the dungeon’ is clearly a figurative statement about the servant who delivers people from bondage. 288 Those who completely and literally interpret the servant as Cyrus, who frees the captives and brings out those who were imprisoned during the Babylonian exile, have deduced too much from this 47F

48F

word ‫‘ סגר‬enclose, shut’, suggesting the idea of a prison where the individual is shut in or enclosed (see Isa 24:22). 287 Both Oswalt and Young see the ‘dungeon’ as being the darkness and bondage of sin, rather than the image of the exile. See Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 118; Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40– 66, 121–122. 288 These phrases have nothing to do with the literal meaning of Israel’s having been imprisoned in Babylon, as some scholars have suggested. Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 133; Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 119.

144

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

verse (see Jer 29:1-20; Dan 1:1-21; Ezra). Muilenburg has observed that ‘the release of the captives from prison is not to be taken as referring to liberation from exile but rather in a spiritual sense, a liberation of all the peoples from bondage’. 289 Most interpreters translate ‫אַסּיר‬ ִ ‘prisoner’ as a generic plural (for example, Gen 1:21, 28), which would derive more from a translation of the LXX, for in Hebrew it is masculine singular (referring to collective). However, it can be understood as a plural from the next clause, where the participle is plural, revealing that there is more than one person in prison. Why would ‫אַסּיר‬ ִ not be used in the plural form then? Perhaps the author is trying to suggest a connection between this word and the name Israel as both being corporate entities, and then in the next clause the plural ‘those who sit’ ‫ ישׁב‬reveals in more detail that this refers to each individual in Israel. Through the imagery of opening blind eyes and releasing prisoners in v. 7, the servant of the Lord is thus represented as not merely making a covenant with Israel and the Gentiles; he also brings spiritual healing to Israel and the nations. By contrast, Cyrus is not capable of bringing healing but simply destroys earthly power by throwing down the idolatrous nations and setting the exiles free. Delitzsch correctly states: The Servant of Jehovah opens blind eyes; and therefore the deliverance which He brings is not only redemption from bodily captivity, but from spiritual bondage also. He leads His people (cf. ch. xlix. 8, 9), and the Gentiles also, out of night into light; He is the Redeemer of all that need redemption and desire salvation. 290

James Muilenburg, The Book of Isaiah (IB 5; Nashville: Abingdon, 1980), 469. See also Gary V. Smith, Isaiah 40–66 (NAC 15b; Nashville: B & H, 2009), 168–169. 290 Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, 180. 289

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 145 Verse 8 ‫ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה הוּא ְשׁ ִמי‬ ‫א־א ֵתּן‬ ֶ ֹ ‫אַחר ל‬ ֵ ‫בוֹדי ְל‬ ִ ‫וּכ‬ ְ ‫וּת ִה ָלּ ִתי ַל ְפּ ִס ִילים‬ ְ I, YHWH is my name And my glory I will not give to another Nor my praise to graven images.

Introduction Baltzer helpfully states about v. 8: ‘The conclusion is the utmost intensification of the whole text. It contains the full proclamation of theophany, which is fundamental for the OT and its tradition.’ 291 Verse 8 is separated into two parts: the first part is the verbless clause that serves as the introduction of this verse— ‫ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה הוּא‬ ‫שׁ ִמי‬, ְ and the second part is the remainder of the verse in the form of a parallel structure where the only verb in the verse is at the center, with the last negative particle ‫ לֹא‬making it the eighth one in Isa 42:1–9. The structure consists of A, B, C, A’, B’, two words before and two words after the center. A. ‫בוֹדי‬ ִ ‫וּכ‬ ְ (And my glory)

B. ‫אַחר‬ ֵ ‫( ְל‬to another)

C. ‫א־א ֵתּן‬ ֶ ֹ ‫( ל‬I will not give)

A’. ‫וּת ִה ָלּ ִתי‬ ְ (nor my praise)

B’. ‫( ַל ְפּ ִס ִילים‬to graven images)

291

55, 133.

Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–

146

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The Clause ‫‘ ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה הוּא ְשׁ ִמי‬I, YHWH Is My Name’

The focus in v. 8 may appear to change direction from the servant of the Lord to God himself; however, is this really the intention? In v. 5 God is the speaker, and in v. 6 the pronoun ‫ ֲאנִ י‬is used, directing the reader to the first four verses. Now, in v. 8, Isaiah begins again with the first person pronoun in order to emphasize and remind the audience of who is talking. Notice that the LXX links Isa 42:8 and v. 4, with the word ὄνομα in both verses tying the two parts of the poem together. 292 The words ‫ ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה‬in vv. 6 and 8 form a bracket around vv. 6–7, 293 giving authority to what YHWH says and does, as well as pointing the audience back to an earlier call—that of Moses (Ex 3:1–17), whereas in Isa 42 that call is about the servant. The clause ‫ ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה הוּא ְשׁ ִמי‬is an introduction to the following clauses ‫וּת ִה ָלּ ִתי ַל ְפּ ִס ִילים‬ ְ ‫א־א ֵתּן‬ ֶ ֹ ‫אַחר ל‬ ֵ ‫בוֹדי ְל‬ ִ ‫וּכ‬ ְ in this verse. The author could have simply said ‘YHWH is my name’; instead, the ‫ ֲאנִ י‬reveals forcefully who YHWH is (see Ex 3:15). 294 The fact that this is a nominal clause means it could be rendered as ‘I am YHWH’; however, if the pronoun is used as an emphasis instead as a subject-predicate clause, I would suggest the translation of ‘I, YHWH is my name’ rather than ‘I am YHWH; that is my name’. This makes the ‫ יְ הוָ ה הוּא ְשׁ ִמי‬the subject-predicate of a nominal clause, which reveals the identification of YHWH by the

Eugene R. Ekblad, Jr., Isaiah’s Servant Poems According to the Septuagint: An Exegetical and Theological Study (CBET 23; Leuven: Peeters, 1999), 77. 293 Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 230. Also, Baltzer has seen the connection between v. 6 and v. 8; however, v. 8 brings out a fuller formula on the divine name: ‘I am Yahweh, that is my name’. He further states, ‘The echo—indeed the reception—of Exodus 3 is unmistakable. This is one of the most highly wrought creations of the author of the book of DtIsa.’ Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 133. 294 See Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, 181. 292

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 147 word ‫( ְשׁ ִמי‬see Ex 6:3). 295 This clause conveys a continuous covenant tone from v. 6 (see Ex 3; 20:1–3; Isa 48:9). Furthermore, God makes the claim that he is the only true God because he can fulfill his promises, which other gods cannot (Isa 41:21–24, 28–29). Richard Davidson points out that in Wisdom literature this is a ‘common rhetorical self-asseverating form of “self-praise” (see Prov 8:12)’. 296 The possessive ‫ ְשׁ ִמי‬reveals that God’s name is trustworthy and that he does not do anything that contradicts his name. The name of God is holy, pure, and unique. This predicate encompasses more than just the name of God; it also reveals his actions proclaimed in vv. 6–7 and what he will do in v. 9. The name of God ‫ יְ הוָ ה‬in this first clause is juxtaposed with two other possessives, ‫בוֹדי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְכ‬my glory’ and ‫‘ ְת ִה ָלּ ִתי‬my praise’, forming a crescendo that announces that the name of God reveals his glory and as a result he is praised, something that is impossible with idols. 45F

456F

Key Word ‫בוֹדי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְכ‬My Glory’

As seen above with the verb ‫( נתן‬Isa 42:1), which means ‘purposely given’, God is going to give his glory to one like him. The word ‫ ָכּבוֹד‬is common in the HB and has a variety of meanings, including ‘heaviness, riches, glory, and honor’. Since the context suggests that God is the subject of the verb, the ‫ ָכּבוֹד‬cannot refer to the physical heaviness of God being given to others. Instead it most likely refers to the glory or honor of God. Moreover, ‫בוֹדי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְכ‬my glory’ is possessive, pointing back to God. Furthermore, ‫בוֹדי‬ ִ ‫ ְכ‬begins the clause, which is abnormal in Hebrew structure. Again, the importance of this word ‘my glory I will not give to another’ is emphasized. What does the ‫ ָכּבוֹד‬of God entail? The noun ‫ ָכּבוֹד‬derives from the noun ‫כבד‬, which refers to ‘liver’ but also means ‘heavy’ 297 or ‘heavy or457F

See Fernando L. Canale, ‘Toward a Criticism of Theological Reason: Time and Timelessness as Primordial Presuppositions’ (unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 1983), 336–338. 296 Richard M. Davidson, ‘Proverbs 8 and the Place of Christ in the Trinity’, JATS 17, no. 1 (2006): 33–54. 297 Moshe Weinfeld, ‘‫’כָּבוֹד‬, TDOT 7:22–38. 295

148

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

gan’. In the ANE, the liver was the most important bodily organ along with the heart, and these terms were often interchangeable. 298 Physically speaking, no one can live without either of these two organs. Spiritually, the same concept is just as applicable. If God is not going to give his ‫ ָכּבוֹד‬to someone else ‫אַחר‬ ֵ ‫( ְל‬such as Israel or other gods), 299 that means that God can give his ‫ ָכּבוֹד‬only to one particular person—the servant of Isa 42, the only one who can live in the will of the other simultaneously. By living God’s will, the servant also gives honor ‫ ָכּבוֹד‬to God. In the book of Isaiah, ‫ ָכּבוֹד‬as a noun is used twenty-three times with a variety of meanings. In Isa 6:3 (see Num 14:21; Ps 72:19), God’s glory fills the whole earth and appears to relate to the holiness of God. Hence, the glory of God cannot be contained in this instance, but yet God can select to whom he is going to give his glory (see Isa 42:8). Another aspect of ‫ ָכּבוֹד‬is ‘honor and dignity’. God is the Creator (Isa 42:5, 9), demonstrating that he is the supreme God, as well as king of his creation, which places him in authority of high status in receiving ‫כּבוֹד‬.ָ Psalm 29:3 professes that God is the ‘God of ‫’כּבוֹד‬, ָ the ‘King of ‫( ָ’כּבוֹד‬Ps 24:7, 9, 10), and his kingdom is a ‘kingdom of ‫( ָ’כּבוֹד‬Ps 145:11, 12). For this reason, Isaiah can say that ‘my ‫ ָכּבוֹד‬I will not give to another’ (Isa 42:8; also 48:11). Already, Isaiah has stated that the people of God only profess ‘with their mouth and their lips to ‫ כבד‬me, but have removed their heart far from me’ (Isa 29:13). Jeremiah explains, with his word of lament, ‘Has a nation changed its gods, which are not gods? But my people have changed their ‫( ָ’כּבוֹד‬Jer 2:11; also Ps 106:20). Malachi reveals that God did not receive the glory that he deserved, ‘If then I am the Father, where is ‫בוֹדי‬ ִ ‫ ְכ‬my glory?’ (Mal 1:6). In Exodus, when Moses asked to see God’s glory (�‫)כּב ֶֹד‬, ְ God announced that he would show all his goodness and proclaim the name of God (Ex 33:18–19), which is related to God’s character (Ex 34:6–7). Israel in Isa 41 gave glory to idols and not to their God, their Creator (Isa 42:5), the one who made a covenant (Isa 42:6), their healer (Isa Ibid. God could keep the ‫ ָכּבוֹד‬for himself, but the context suggests that his glory is given to the servant. 298 299

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 149 42:7), who in turn is the servant of the LORD. 300 There is only one who is worthy to be honored and who has the right to dignity: God. Isaiah, however, goes further by demonstrating that the servant is also honored and has the right to dignity, because the servant exhibits God’s character in the way he is portrayed; this perhaps suggests equality with God or even being God himself, as shown in vv. 1–7. 301 As pointed out in the structure of vv. 5–9 above, v. 8 ‘B’’ ‘glory’ would equate in v. 6a ‘B’ with the term ‘righteousness’ which comes from God. This means that the passing of the glory of God to his servant would reveal also the giving of the authority that comes with the aspect of glory. Thus, the servant receives kingship and rulership, since he will also be honored like the father. This glory received by the servant would arouse within the people It is important to note that ‘to give ‫ ָ’כּבוֹד‬is related to a confession of sin, which is not the case in Isa 42:8. When Joshua called Achan after he transgressed by taking the ḥerem, Achan was encouraged by Joshua to confess his sins, ‘My son, I beg you, give glory (‫)כּבוֹד‬ ָ to the LORD God of Israel, and make confession to Him’ (Josh 7:19). Again, a similar scenario is found with the Philistines in returning the ark of covenant, which is called the ‘giving ‫( ָ’כּבוֹד‬1 Sam 6:5). However, Isa 42:8 does have a confession being made, not of sin or to earthly kings or to gods, but rather a confession of personality, confessing one particular individual—the servant of the LORD. Hence, it can be said that God will surround the servant with his glory, almost like crowning him as king. Weinfeld points out that ‘in the ancient Near East, gods and kings were described as being surrounded with glory; their headdress or crown in particular is adorned with glory and majesty. The Egyptian crown was endowed with power, and represented something like a gleaming fiery diadem (nsr.t [cf. Heb. nēzer] ȝḫt). It was deified as a goddess and considered a source of awe and of the terror that overthrows the enemy.’ Weinfeld, ‘‫’כּבוֹד‬, ָ TDOT 7:22–38. See also Henri Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods, A Study of Ancient Near Eastern Religion as the Integration of Society and Nature (OIE; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948), 107–108. 301 Also, Isaiah continues in 42:1–9 the relationship of plurality that was already pointed out in Isa 41:22 with the pronoun ‫‘ נוּ‬us’ and the first common plural verbs ‫ימה‬ ָ ‫נָ ִשׂ‬, ‫נֵ ְד ָﬠה‬, ‘we’ (vv. 22–23). This hint is now revealed clearly in Isa 42:1–9, that God and the servant are divinely equal. 300

150

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

reverence and fear for their king. 302 The author may be using the analogy from the Assyrians, where ‘similarly “awe” and “terrible splendor” (pulḫu melammu [Sum. ni-melam]) are associated with the tiara. Heb. kāḇôḏ and hôḏ wehāḏār are likewise connected with the crown.’ 303 Isaiah 42:8 demonstrates the opposite of Isa 41, namely that God himself, being God, does not give his glory and praises to false gods but rather to someone who is supreme and worthy of those praises. In Isa 41:22, God wants the people to ‘declare’ ‫נגד‬, while in Isa 42:8 God makes that declaration through his name (see Ex 34:6–7). In Isa 41:29, the works of the gods are ‘vanity/of sin’ ‫ אָוֶ ן‬and ‘nothingness’ ‫א ֶפס‬, ֶ and the ‘molten images [are] wind and empty’, while in Isa 42:8 the glory of God goes to the servant 304 and is the opposite of ‘vanity’ and ‘nothingness’. Furthermore, the praise of God is not ‘empty’, directed to ‘graven images’, but is directed to the servant. See table 9. 46F

The Phrase ‫וּת ִה ָלּ ִתי ַל ְפּ ִס ִילים‬ ְ ‘And My Praise to Graven Images’

The last clause in v. 8 concludes the parallel structure by emphasizing the first part of the structure A and B, all the while clarifying and expanding on the ideas presented above. The first word ‫ְת ִה ָלּ ִתי‬ ‘my praise’ begins by again emphasizing that God will not give his Weinfeld points out that ‘reverence and fear’ in conjunction with majestic glory is particularly clear in the Akkadian terminology. ‘The phrase pulḫu melammu (Sum. ni-melam) is an hendiadys; its components mean, literally, “fear, glory”, but in fact the phrase means “majesty”. The expression is used of deities, kings, and other awesome sacred objects, and is itself an object of reverence and fear.’ Weinfeld, ‘‫’כּבוֹד‬, ָ TDOT 7:22–38. 303 Ibid. 304 P. E. Bonnard states that ‘the salvation comes in fact and cannot come but from the LORD’. He may not have had the servant in mind, but rather God, when he made this statement, but nevertheless, he sees the importance that salvation cannot come from idols or Israel. Pierre E. Bonnard, Le Second Isaïe, son disciple et leurs éditeurs: Isaïe 40–66 (Paris: J. Gabalda, 1972), 127. 302

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 151 praise to graven images. ‫ ְתּ ִה ָלּה‬is commonly known by its meaning ‘praise’, although it can mean ‘glory, songs of praise, praiseworthy actions’. This word is also possessive, meaning that God would be doing the praising; however, the negation suggests that God refrains from praising idols and he would praise only one individual. Table 9. Comparison of False Gods and the True God False Gods

Isa 41:22–23, 29

Isa 42:8

‘their works are

and

Declare …

vanity and nothing;

their molten images [are] wind and empty’.

True God

‘I am YHWH, that is my name; my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise unto graven images.’

The word ‘praise’ is normally used in expressing grateful adoration to God. The Psalmist uses this word regularly as a word of adoration and reverence directed to God, acknowledging that the Psalmist is the creature and God is the Creator and therefore he is worthy of people’s fear. God’s actions are praised, whether delivering, creating, giving salvation, or sharing his love (see Ps 150). This word has its roots in ‫‘ הלל‬praise’, ‘associated with Ugarit hll, “shout”, Syriac hallel, “praise”, and Akkadian alālu, “a laborers’ shout or song”’. 305 In the case of Isa 42:8, God is doing the praising. But whom is he praising? The passage is clear that idols would not receive any praise, and God appears to be jealous. If this is correct, an appearance of jealousy plus the following word ‫‘ ָפּ ִסיל‬graven image’ 306 alludes to Ex 20:4–5, where God commanded the Israelites not to make a ‫פּ ֶסל‬,ֶ since God is a jealous ‫ ַקנָּ א‬God (see Deut 5:8–9). Isaiah 42:8 drives the point home that the Israelites had Helmer Ringgren, ‘‫’הלל‬, TDOT 3:404–410. The word ‫ ָפּ ִסיל‬appears 13 times in Isaiah out of the 60 occurrences in the HB, which reveals the important issue of idolatry that is being addressed; this word is used ten times in chs 40–55. 305 306

152

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

broken God’s command, which led to a breaking of a covenant (see Isa 42:17). God is explicit that praises should be given only to him. ‘The center of the message is the confession of the one God and the rejection of cultic images.’ 307 But because God is doing the praising, the question remains: Can anyone else receive praise, if not the idols? The parallel thought in this verse reveals that only one person is worthy to receive praise, and that is the servant of the LORD. 308 This would mean that again, as seen above, the servant would have to be at the level of God, would have to be a divine servant, for God to praise him. Israel could not be that servant since it is the one worshipping idols (Isa 40:19–20; 42:17; 44:15, 17; 45:20; 48:5). Verse 9 ‫ה־באוּ‬ ָ ֵ‫ָה ִראשׁ ֹנוֹת ִהנּ‬ ‫וַ ֲח ָדשׁוֹת ֲאנִ י ַמגִּ יד‬ ‫אַשׁ ִמיע ֶא ְת ֶכם‬ ְ ‫ְבּ ֶט ֶרם ִתּ ְצ ַמ ְחנָ ה‬ Behold, the former [things] have come about But new [things] I declare Before they spring up I let you hear [them]

Introduction Verse 9 has a metric structure of 3:3:4. The literary structure of the first two clauses begins with adjectives (‫ ָה ִראשׁ ֹנוֹת‬and ‫ )וַ ֲח ָדשׁוֹת‬and ends with verbs (‫ ָבאוּ‬and ‫)מגִּ יד‬. ַ In the center are the words ‫ ִהנֵּ ה‬and ‫אנִ י‬, ֲ where they provide emphasis. So the structure can be diagrammed as in table 10.

307

55, 133.

Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–

As pointed out in my structure of vv. 5–9, v. 8 as ‘B’’ would reflect its parallel found in v. 6a as ‘B’; the ‘righteousness’ attributed to the servant would normally belong only to God, but now in v. 8 God’s ‘glory’ also could be given to the servant. 308

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 153 Table 10. Block Parallel Structure of Isaiah 42:9a A. ‫ָה ִראשׁ ֹנוֹת‬

A’. ‫וַ ֲח ָדשׁוֹת‬

C. ‫ָבאוּ‬

C’. ‫ַמגִּ יד‬

B. ‫ִהנֵּ ה‬

B’. ‫ֲאנִ י‬

The last clause is tied together by the particle ‫ ְבּ ֶט ֶרם‬followed by the two verbs in the middle and concluding with a direct object. Thus, the last clause is the punch line of the first two clauses. The Particle ‫‘ ִהנֵּ ה‬Behold’

The last verse of this pericope ends the same way that it begins, with the word ‫הנֵּ ה‬,ִ thus forming an inclusio between vv. 1–4 and 5–9 and bringing them together. For the last time, Isaiah writes, ‘Look, behold, please note, pay attention to this’; his insistence directs attention to these last words and emphasizes the importance of God’s revelation in proclaiming the future and demonstrating God’s sovereignty and omnipotence. This ‘behold’ also connects with what has happened historically with Israel in how God’s revelations took place as foretold, showing that what will happen in the future with the servant (as revealed in the previous 8 verses) will also take place as God says it will. This particle is not found at the beginning of the clause in Hebrew. However, here the particle is before the verb, where one would expect it to be if the normal Hebrew order is followed. The fact that the particle ‘behold’ is before the verb emphasizes the subject [things]; the subject, being first, is also in the emphatic position. Furthermore, the usage here is in the form of poetry, which affects the order of Hebrew words. Here, ‫ ִהנֵּ ה‬emphasizes the whole of the first clause as well as the entire v. 9. 309 469F

309

See Gibson, Davidson’s Introductory Hebrew Grammar Syntax, 59.

154

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The Clause ‫‘ ָה ִראשׁ ֹנוֹת ָבאוּ‬The Former [Things] Have Come’

The adjective ‫ ִרישׁוֹן‬as noted above parallels the other adjective ‫שׁח ָד‬. ָ In this clause, the adjective is used as a substantive; thus, the adjective is the subject. The word ‘things’ is added for clarification. Those ‘things’ can be a wide range of events in the historical past. The primary meaning of the adjective ‫ ִרישׁוֹן‬is ‘first’, but it also has other meanings such as ‘earlier and former’. This word is connected etymologically with the noun ‫‘ רֹאשׁ‬head’. ‫ ִרישׁוֹן‬occurs numerous times in the HB in both masculine singular or plural and feminine singular, but the feminine plural occurs only in the latter part of Isaiah. 310 According to Preuss, ‫ ִרישׁוֹן‬appears to have had greater theological usage in Isa 40–55 whereas before then, it seems to have had less theological meaning. 311 The word ‫ ִרישׁוֹן‬is often used in connection with chronological dates. Its precise meaning challenges scholars; many scholars accept the approach that Isa 40–55 was written after the events happened—vaticinium ex eventu. 312 For example, North understands ‘former things’ in reference to the rise of Cyrus, although he also admits that the term’s meaning ‘may be more general’. 313 Whybray also relates the ‘former things’ ‘primarily to the events of Cyrus’s career which preceded the composition of this passage’. 314 On the other hand, Watts states, ‘The previous events are those portrayed in the Vision which were predicted before coming to pass: the coming and victory of the Assyrians, the fall of Merodach-Baladan’s Babylon, etc.’ 315 While this is more probable and the concept of prediction is correct, there remains a challenge with the word ‘former’, which appears to denote events already in the past. D. R. Jones understands the ‘former things’ to mean earli470F

472F

473F

47F

475F

H. D. Preuss, ‘‫’רישׁוֹן‬, ִ TDOT 13:264–268. Ibid. 312 However, John Oswalt has demonstrated the implications of taking the position of vaticinium ex eventu (prophecy written after an event). See Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 3–6. 313 North, The Second Isaiah, 113. 314 Whybray, Isaiah 40–66, 76. 315 Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 120. 310 311

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 155 er prophecies proclaimed by God in the book of Isaiah, prophecies that have already been fulfilled. 316 My position overlaps with those of Watts and Jones. Watts rightly portrays the concept of revelation and prediction before the events happened, but the exact events to which he may refer are doubtful. Jones’s idea of prophecies proclaimed in the book of Isaiah is weak, since he believes that Isa 42:8 may refer to events even before the time of Isaiah, perhaps even to events as long ago as the Creation. However, I do support Jones’s concept about events already past. 317 The word ‫ ִרישׁוֹן‬indicates events that have been revealed by God and that took place in the past. 318 In addition, A. Schoors points out that the terms ‫ ִרישׁוֹן‬and ‫שׁח ָד‬, ָ particularly in Isa 42:9 and 43:18, are binomial. 319 Carroll Stuhlmueller notes that the words ‫ ִרישׁוֹן‬and ‫שׁח ָד‬ ָ are most often found in the context of God the Creator (see Isa 41:21; 45:18–21; 48:1–16). 320 The author may even have had in mind the book of Exodus, comparing the ‘former’ times as when the Israelites were in Egypt and the ‘new’ times as when they came out of Egypt on the way to the promised land with what was going to take place in the new event: the Babylonian exile and the deliverance from Babylonia by Cyrus. 321 This would offer a type for the eschatological antitype of the Messiah 322 delivering the 480F

481F

482F

Douglas Jones, ‘Tradition of the Oracles of Isaiah of Jerusalem’, ZAW 67, no. 3–4 (1955): 226–246. 317 See Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 169–170. 318 Antoon Schoors, ‘Les choses antérieures et les choses nouvelles dans les oracles Deutéro-Isaïens’, ETL 40, no. 1 (1964): 19–47; Carroll Stuhlmueller, ‘“First and Last” and “Yahweh-Creator” in Deutero-Isaiah’, CBQ 29, no. 3 (1967): 495–511. 319 Schoors, ‘Les choses antérieures et les choses nouvelles dans les oracles Deutéro-Isaïens’, 19–47. 320 Stuhlmueller, ‘“First and Last” and “Yahweh-Creator” in Deutero-Isaiah’, 495–511. 321 See Aage Bentzen, ‘On the Ideas of “the Old” and “the New” in Deutero-Isaiah’, ST 1, no. 1–2 (1948): 183–187. 322 See ch. 4 of this work. 316

156

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

people from the exile of sin to a better world (see Isa 65–66; Rev 18:1–10; 19:1–3; 21:1–5). These suggestions may influence how the Qal perfect verb ‫בוא‬ is interpreted. The aspect of the perfect verb is not always clear when translated into English. I would suggest that this verb includes two things: an earlier situation and a resulting state. Faith is the matter of debate in this verse: whether the people will turn to idols or to God-Savior regarding their future. J. C. L. Gibson points out that ‘QATAL is used to denote states and actions regarded as states which are set by the context in the past’. 323 This verb and its context should therefore be taken as an indefinite perfective and therefore be translated with the auxiliary ‘has/have’. Thus, ‘Behold, the former things have come to pass or have taken place’. 483F

The Clause ‫‘ וַ ֲח ָדשׁוֹת ֲאנִ י ַמגִּ יד‬But the New [Things] I Declare’

The waw with the adjective is significant and could be translated not only as ‘and’ but also as ‘but’, in short as a contrastive sentence with the previous one. The ‘but’ here ‘is used in the sense of on the other hand rather than on the contrary’. 324 The ‘new things’ should be paid close attention; since the ‘former thing’ took place exactly as God said, it is likely that what he is now saying will also happen. ‫שׁח ָד‬ ָ implies something fresh and not old; something ‘new’ involves something that has not happened yet or has not yet existed (see Ex 1:8; Deut 22:8; Isa 41:22; 43:9, 18–19; 44:7; 45:11; 46:9; 48:3, 6).

Gibson, Davidson's Introductory Hebrew Grammar Syntax, 64. He further states: ‘In non-narrative discourse and poet[ry] this QATAL is variously represented in Engl. The priority of one state of having done to another may be rendered by a pluperf., the Engl. form which has that precise function; but just as often a present perf. is used, relating both states to the present, or a past tense, signifying the past action and ignoring the ensuing state.’ Ibid. 324 Ibid., 172. 323

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 157 Watts correctly observes that ‘the idea of the “new” is also closely identified with God’s abilities as creator’, 325 which would reveal that God alone is in control of history including the events that are still to come, the new events. What is/are the new event(s)? These may include Israel’s return from exile to the promised land (Isa 51:3; 55:12–13), Cyrus coming from the East to deliver the Israelites from the Babylonians (Isa 45:1), the Messiah bringing atonement for sin (Isa 53), and the Israelites experiencing the new exodus (Isa 43:16–21). Lessing believes that the ‘former things’ do not end with the creation act or the defeat of Babylon but include even the call of Abraham (Gen 12:1–3) and the deliverance of his people from Egypt (Ex 14); and that the ‘new’ encompasses all these in the form of salvific events for this generation. 326 Young articulates this most clearly: ‘If then in The former things there is reference to earlier prophecies, in the new things there is reference to the work of the servant.’ 327 The emphatic ‫ ֲאנִ י‬again demonstrates that God, not the idols, is the authority on the ‘new’ things that will be taking place. The verb ‫ ַמגִּ יד‬is a Hiph’il participle, which refers to more than just ‘tell, declare, announce’, but also ‘to predict’. 328 The verb ‫ נגד‬also connotes an image of what is in front or in sight, which is to be manifested. 329 This participle conveys the sense of ongoing prediction presented by God. In other words, God does not stop predicting 489F

Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 120. He also further states: ‘Emphasis on these words supports the Vision’s view that the creator of the world is creating a brand new situation for his restored temple-city and its worshipers. That God does a new creative thing is not simply a feature of the time which the Vision pictures, but is a characteristic of Yahweh God as the Vision understands and presents him.’ Ibid. See also John D. W. Watts, ‘The Heavenlies of Isaiah’ (unpubl. diss., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1948). 326 See Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 263. 327 Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 124. See, on the ‘new things’ referring to the work of the servant, Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 322. 328 Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’נגד‬, HALOT 2:665–666. 329 H. William F. Gesenius, ‘‫’נגד‬, GHCOTS 530. 325

158

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

because he predicted once. Thus, the prediction of the event(s) he has in mind does not have to stop with the first realization of the prediction, such as Cyrus, but can be repeated with its more complete and formal form of the true person God had in mind: the servant of the LORD. 330 The Final Clause ‫אַשׁ ִמיע ֶא ְת ֶכם‬ ְ ‫‘ ְבּ ֶט ֶרם ִתּ ְצ ַמ ְחנָ ה‬Before They Spring Up I Will Declare [of Them] to You’ The preposition ‫ ְבּ ֶט ֶרם‬ties this present clause to the previous clause ‫וַ ֲח ָדשׁוֹת ֲאנִ י ַמגִּ יד‬, suggesting that any events that take place are shared by God ‘before’ they happen. This preposition is a temporal preposition, and is often used with yiqtol verb suggesting a past action, although this is not always the case (for example, Gen 45:28). In Isa 42:9 there is a definite sense of future action in connection with the second verb ‫אַשׁ ִמיע‬ ְ ‘I cause you to hear’, in Hiph’il meaning ‘I announce or proclaim’. Thus, the first verb should be taken as present future, ‘they spring’. The verb following the preposition ‫ ְבּ ֶט ֶרם‬becomes a completed action, suggesting action in the past. The preposition also suggests a temporal clause. In this particular verse, the preposition enhances a subordinate clause that refers to a later situation. 331 The verb ‫צמח‬, a Qal imperfect third feminine singular, has as its subject ‘things’, which is used in the metaphorical sense, ‘sprout, spring and grow’ (Isa 42:9: 43:19; 44:4; 45:8). What does this verb mean by ‘springing’? It refers to ‘come about’ or to ‘take place’. It also suggests that something is ‘new’ and ‘alive’, and the concept of ‘sprouting, springing’ reveals a time period, historically developing (see Gen 2:5; 41:6–23; Ezek 17:9–14); it also suggests a salvific element in what God does (see Zech 6:12). The idea of ‘sprouting and springing’ prompts the audience to reflect again on the creation story where God commands and vegetation springs forth See Davidson, ‘Typological Structures in the Old and New Testaments’, 397–424; Goppelt, Typos; Friedbert Ninow, ‘Indicators of Typology within the Old Testament: The Exodus Motif’ (unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 1999), 10–109. 331 Waltke and O’Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 643. 330

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 159 (‫)תּ ְד ֵשׁא‬ ַ from the earth, and the earth brings forth all kinds of vegetation (Gen 1:11–12). In Isa 42, it also demonstrates how God is particular in not hiding any secret from humanity and his commands mean actions. He wants the people to know what will happen in the future (see Dan 2). God’s work is to save people and he does not want them to be left in ignorance. The noun ‫ ֶצ ַמח‬derives from the verb ‫צמח‬, where its meaning is ‘shoot, sprouting’; Isa 4:2 first uses this noun as the LORD’s ‫צ ַמח‬,ֶ with the meaning of ‘Shoot, Branch’, implying a messianic concept (see Isa 11:1; Jer 23:5; 33:15; Zech 3:8; Ps 132:17). 332 David also proclaims similar words in 2 Sam 23:5, from which Isa 4:2 is taken: ‘Is not my house right with God? Has he not made with me an everlasting covenant, arranged and secured in every part? Will he not bring to fruition‫יחח‬ ַ ‫ יַ ְצ ִמ‬my salvation and grant me my every desire?’ (NIV). Here, ‘bring to fruition’ and ‘my salvation’ are accomplished by God, who is described in Isa 4:2 as the ‘Shoot or Branch’. Isaiah had 4:2 in mind when he wrote Isa 42:9, and there is little doubt that the author also refers to 2 Sam 23:5, all of which suggest that the salvation would come not only from God but also from the ‘Shoot/Branch’, who is the servant. 333 Thus, the ‘springing forth’ that God declares is more than just a random event in the future, but it specifically refers to the servant’s mission: Cyrus in the near future and the Messiah in the distant future. 334 For this reason, God will ‫‘ שׁמע‬cause to hear’. As pointed out above, this Hiph’il verb denotes more than just hearing on the part of people; it is also a ‘proclamation’ from God. 335 Literally, God ‘causes you to hear’. It is important to note that this particular verb appears only four times in Hiph’il imperfect with first common singular (1 Sam 9:27; Isa 42:9; 48:3; Jer 18:2); of these passages, three 493F

49F

495F

See Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 156–158; Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 253; Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 57; Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 170. 333 See Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 156–158. 334 See Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 170. 335 Lessing has observed that the imperfect verb ‫אַשׁ ִמיע‬ ְ continues the thought expressed by the participle from the previous clause ‫מגִּ יד‬, ַ ‘I am (now) declaring’, thus the similarity with the imperfect ‘I am (now) making known’. Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 253. 332

160

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

of them have God as the subject (Isa 42:9; 48:3; Jer 18:2), while one passage has the prophet Samuel talking on behalf of God (1 Sam 9:27). In all these passages, God reveals something new in the future that will take place and is interrelated with the salvific process of people. It is significant that God, in Isa 42:9, is placed in opposition to the gods who cannot proclaim in Isa 41:22, in both passages using the verb ‫שׁמע‬. This identifies God as all knowing. For this reason, God can also predict who the servant will be and what is his mission. The direct object of the verb is ‫ ֶכם‬second person masculine plural. I would suggest that this pronoun reveals that God is talking to the Judahites or other people or the audience, 336 although Whybray suggests those who are in exile. 337 Because this pronoun is plural, scholars have suggested it as being an evidence that the servant refers to Israel 338 or perhaps the gods of Isa 41:21–29. 339 The verb ‫שׁמע‬, as Lessing points out, ‘often takes a double accusative construction, and means literally, “to cause (someone) to hear (something)”’. 340 Hence, the second object would refer back to ‫וַ ֲח ָדשׁוֹת‬, ‘the new things’ that are heard by the people. Thus, the pronoun ‫ ֶכם‬is not pointing back to the servant, but to Israel or the people as the audience (see Isa 52:14–15). In conclusion, it is important to note briefly now that Isa 42:1–9 is connected by key terms with earlier passages in Isaiah identifying the servant of the LORD and linking with key messianic passages, as shown in table 11. This table reveals how many terms in Isa 42:1–9 are also found in other prominent messianic passages in the first twelve chapters of Isaiah. In the next chapter, I will compare the first servant poem with the other three servant poems, demonstrating close ties between them.

See ibid.; Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 124. Whybray, Isaiah 40–66, 76. 338 Rignell, A Study of Isaiah, 35. 339 Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40–55, 168. 340 Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 253. 336 337

2. AN EXEGETICAL INVESTIGATION OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 161 Table 11. Comparison of Isaiah 42:1–9 with Messianic Passages in Isaiah 1–12 Words ‫רוּחח‬ ַ ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּטח‬ ‫גּוֹיִ םח‬ ‫ֶצ ֶדקח‬ ‫ֵשׁםח‬ ‫ִרישׁוֹןח‬ ‫צמחח‬

SUMMARY

Isa 42:1–9 vv. 1, 5

Isa 4

Isa 7

vv. 1, 3, 4

Isa 9:6

Isa 8:23; 9:2

vv. 1, 6 v. 6 v. 8 v. 9 v. 9

Isa 8–9

v. 14 v. 2

Isa 9:6

Isa 8:3; 9:6

Isa 11

vv. 1–4

Verb in vv. 3, 4

vv. 10, 12 v. 4

Isa 9:1, 15

The second section of Isa 42:1–9 is linked to the first section. The wording in vv. 5–9 is tied to vv. 1–4, and in it ideas continue to develop from the role of the servant to the mission of the servant. The structure also shows that the center, vv. 6b–7, outlines the apex of the servant’s mission in bringing the salvific plan to lost people. Israel cannot make a covenant; the servant is the only one who is faithful in accomplishing God’s plan. God leads the servant by the hand, showing the covenant relationship that is between the servant and God. The Israelites break the covenant as they worship idols rather than God who is the Creator of the heaven and earth. The glory and the praise (v. 8) that belong to God are given to the servant because the name of God is revealed and more fully understood because the servant brings healing to people. Finally, God reveals what he did in the past to save people and now he looks to how he can save them in the future (v. 9). Idols cannot save or show the future, but God can be trusted because he is faithful and unchanging throughout history. The first four verses reveal that the servant is called by God, and he helps God’s people while they are judged. The servant’s

162

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

intent is not to crush and destroy people but, as seen in the next five verses, to bring salvation to them. Therefore, the last five verses reveal the servant’s mission. God also reveals that, unlike other gods, he knows the past and can also reveal the future. In all these verses, unlike the Israelites, the servant glorifies God and is obedient to God. Thus, there is a contrast between Israel as servant and the servant of God (Isa 42:1–9).

CONCLUSION

To this point, an exegetical study of Isa 42:1–9 has revealed a number of clues for a possible application of the servant’s identity. First, this servant is the servant of the Lord, chosen by God who delights in him (v. 1). The Holy Spirit of God is placed upon the servant (v. 1) for the purpose related in vv. 2–4. Second, the servant is quiet and humble about his duty (v. 2). Third, the servant is gentle toward God’s people and brings truth in how he achieves justice (v. 3). Fourth, the servant’s mission does not crush him; instead, he depends upon God in establishing justice. The law appears to be something that is part of the servant’s justice (v. 4). Fifth, the creator God is in charge of the servant’s mission, establishing a covenant between God and the servant for the people of the earth (vv. 5–6). Sixth, the servant brings spiritual deliverance to the people of the earth (v. 7). Seventh, God’s glory is manifested both in what the servant is about to do and in the predictions of God (vv. 8–9). Based on these observations, the logical assumption is that this servant is a messianic figure. With this in mind, we will see whether the rest of my research will continue to support this analysis.

CHAPTER 3. INTRATEXTUAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES INTRODUCTION

In this chapter I will compare the first servant poem with the three other servant poems in Isa 40–55 and with other Isaianic passages that strengthen the linguistic relationships among these servant references. I will first compare Isa 42:1–9 with Isa 49:1–12, next with the third servant poem—Isa 50:4–11, and finally with the fourth servant poem—Isa 52:13–53:12. This comparison will demonstrate how the first servant poem closely relates to the other servant poems linguistically, structurally, thematically, and contextually. Next, I will examine only three servant passages surrounding Isa 42:1–9: namely Isa 41:8–9, 42:19, and 45:4, for these passages are the ones most often used as the basis from which to draw conclusions regarding the first servant poem. I will not exegete the servant poems in their entirety nor examine in depth the other nineteen occurrences of the word ‘servant’ in Isa 40–55; exploring these few passages surrounding Isa 42:1–9 will suffice to demonstrate the contrast between the corporate servant and the individual servant. To conclude, I will compare Isa 42:1–9 with four selected sample passages outside of Isa 40–55 that are considered messianic passages: two passages at the beginning of Isaiah (9:1–6; 11:1–10) and two toward the end of the book (61:1–9; 63:1–6). These crucial passages exhibit particular features relating to Isa 42:1–9 and were selected because they meet at least one of the following criteria: They use the word ‘servant’, attach a salvific tone to both Israel and the nations, develop what is accomplished in the life of the servant, or display movement from the collective servant to the singular servant. 163

164

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

COMPARISON OF FIRST SERVANT POEM TO SECOND SERVANT POEM—ISAIAH 49:1–12

Scholars do not agree on which verses encompass the pericope of the second servant poem. Suggestions range from only the first four verses 1 of Isa 49 all the way to v. 13. 2 Although I propose that the pericope includes vv. 1–12, my purpose here is not to determine which argument is correct but rather to compare several words that are closely linked with Isa 42. The chosen servant who brings light to Israel and to the nations also brings a covenant for the people (Isa 42:6), and, in Isa 49, the audience is asked to listen to God’s message regarding the servant. Linguistic Parallels Single Words

As noted in table 12, eleven words in Isa 49:1–12 exhibit a linguistic parallel to Isa 42. The first set of words ‫ ִשׁ ְמעוּ‬and ‫‘ ַה ְק ִשׁיבוּ‬hear and listen’ reflect a similar idea found in Isa 42:1 with ‫‘ ֵהן‬Look, see’. These words convey a sense of urgency, a need to pay close attention to what God is about to reveal regarding the servant. Moreover, the subject is identical in both passages (Isa 42:1–4; 49:1–7): God is the speaker announcing the servant’s identity and his role in bringing light, covenant, and redemption. 3 503F

Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 185. Melugin, The Formation of Isaiah 40–55, 144; Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 288. 3 See Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 207. 1 2

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 165 Table 12. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 49:1–12 Isaiah 42:1–9a

‫‘ ֵהן‬Behold’ v. 1

‫‘ גּוֹיִ ם‬nations’ v. 1

‫‘ ִאיִּ ים‬coastland’ v. 4 ‫‘ ָﬠם‬people’ vv. 5, 6 ‫‘ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬servant’ v. 1

‫‘ ָבּ ִחיר‬chosen’ v. 1

‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’ vv. 1, 3, 4 �‫אתי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְק ָר‬I call you’ v. 6 ‫‘ ֵשׁם‬name’ v. 8

‫‘ ָכּבוֹד‬glory’ v. 8

Isaiah 49:1–12

‫‘ ִשׁ ְמעוּ‬hear’ v. 1

‫‘ ַה ְק ִשׁיבוּ‬listen’ v. 1 ‫‘ ִהנֵּ ה‬behold’ v. 12

‫‘ ִאיִּ ים‬coastland’ v. 1

Synonym ‫‘ ְל ֻא ִמּים‬people’ v. 1 ‫‘ גּוֹי‬nation’ v. 7

‫‘ ָﬠם‬people’ v. 8

‫‘ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬servant’ vv. 3, 5, 6 ‫‘ בחר‬chosen’ v. 7

‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’ v. 3

‫‘ ְק ָראָנִ י‬he called me’ v. 1 ‫‘ ֵשׁם‬name’ v. 1

‫‘ ֶא ָכּ ֵבד‬I will be honored’ v. 5

Synonyms ‫‘ ֶא ְת ָפּאָר‬I will be glorified’ v. 3

The primary passage—Isa 42:1–9—that is contrasted with secondary passages will be found in the left column throughout this chapter. a

The imperative verbs in Isa 49:1 emphasize the importance of listening to God. Although Isa 42 does not use imperative verbs, one can see that God introduces the servant with compassion to a group of people in need. In Isa 49, the imperative expresses the sense of needing to pay closer attention, as though the servant’s work is more developed than in Isa 42. The word ‫ ִהנֵּ ה‬in Isa 49:12, also used in Isa 42:9, concludes the second poem, thus supplying an additional linguistic parallel.

166

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The second set of words, ‫‘ ִאיִּ ים‬coastland’ and ‫‘ ְל ֻא ִמּים‬people’, 4 in Isa 49:1 includes the same groups of people in need of salvation as are listed in Isa 42: ‫‘ גּוֹיִ ם‬nations’ (42:1, 6), ‫‘ ִאיִּ ים‬coastland’ (v. 4), and ‫‘ ָﬠם‬people’ (vv. 5, 6), emphasizing that both Israel and the Gentiles are meant to hear God’s message. In both passages, the Israelites and nations depend upon each other rather than trusting in God. Isaiah 48, like Isa 41, reveals that both the Israelites and the other nations had lost sight of the Creator. Isaiah 49 then begins with a shift in direction, specifying how God endeavors to lead them to trust in God again; in this case, not only Israel but also the nations are included. The third word ‫‘ ְק ָראָנִ י‬he called me’ (49:1) is more than an echo to Isa 42:6 (�‫אתי‬ ִ ‫;)ק ָר‬ ְ it is a direct parallel of God’s call to a particular individual. In Isa 42 the call appears to be made to the servant when he is mature and ready to begin his ministry, while in Isa 49 the call comes while the servant is in the womb of his mother. Thus, Isa 49 provides more details than the first servant poem, revealing that the call, rather than being a quick, haphazard decision, was part of a well-thought-out plan, made from the beginning—at conception (see Rev 13:8). It also demonstrates that God is calling for the particular purpose of filling humanity’s need for a savior. In Isa 42 the usage of ‫ ֵשׁם‬is related to the name of God, while in Isa 49 the one named by God is the servant, described in the following verse: ‫‘ וַ יָּ ֶשׂם ִפּי ְכּ ֶח ֶרב ַח ָדּה‬And he made my mouth like a sharp sword’. This is a clause about one who speaks words that cut and divide with justice on behalf of God. God’s words are considered to be like a two-edged sword (see Heb 4:12; Rev 2:12), in the sense of judgment, whether against Israel or the nations (Isa 42:1–4; also Isa 22:2; 31:8; Ezek 33:26). Thus, in these two poems the same servant depicts the idea of judgment, revealing an echo between these passages. Furthermore, the fact that the servant’s name is ‘made known’ (‫)הזְ ִכּיר‬ ִ in Isa 49:1 points back to God’s name in Isa 42:8, where ‘my glory’ and ‘my praise’ are not given to another but to his servant revealed to the world. 5 These intercon50F

These two terms constitute a merism that points to all people. See Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 468. 5 I have dealt with Isa 42:8 in ch. 2. 4

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 167 nections indicate that the servant in these passages is the same individual working to bring redemption. The fourth word ‫ ֵשׁם‬is used in Isa 49:1 to designate who God called from the womb of his mother, and the name of that individual is mentioned (‫)הזְ ִכּיר‬ ִ by God. Given its context, the name of that person can only be referring to the servant. In Isa 42:8 the name (‫)שׁם‬ ֵ refers to God as ‫אנִ י יְ הוָ ה‬. ֲ In both these poems that name appears to be important and is mentioned in conjunction with the sovereignty of God, who is able to reveal the future. The fifth word ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬of particular interest in this poem is used for the first time in Isa 49:3. This particular verse causes major difficulties, since it is the only verse in which the context suggests a singular servant with the noun ‘Israel’. 6 However, I propose that the word ‘Israel’ should not lead to interpreting the servant as being corporate instead of individual. As seen already, Isa 49 provides additional details regarding the servant’s identity. In v. 3, the author includes the noun Israel to demonstrate that the servant fills the role of Israel better than does the nation of Israel. 7 ‘Here “Israel” is not a term of address (vocative), and not merely an apposition to “my Servant,” but a name that is predicated. It need not therefore be an indication of the Servant’s proper name.’ 8 Most scholars 506F

507F

508F

See table 4 in ch. 2, which lists where the word ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬appears in Isa 40–55 and whether it references an individual or a corporate servant. 7 A similar concept is used in Num 23–24 where the oracles of Balaam move from blessings in the first three oracles, to a prophecy of Christ in the fourth one, with a change from the plural pronoun to a singular pronoun. 8 Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40–55, 369. It is important to note that if the term ‘Israel’ were to refer to a corporate servant, it would contradict the application in vv. 5–6, where the servant brings Israel back to God. The term ‘Israel’ must be retained in this verse for manuscript reasons. Franz J. Delitzsch points out that ‘Israel was from the very first the God-given name of an individual. Just as the name Israel was first of all given to a man, and then after that to a nation, so the name which sprang from a personal root has also a personal crown.’ Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, 260. David F. Payne states: ‘Verse 3 entitles this coming Servant “Israel” who will bring glory to God, in 6

168

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

acknowledge that the servant is the primary tie between these two passages. In Isa 49:7 the sixth word ‫‘ בחר‬choose’ is also used as a noun in the first servant poem (Isa 42:1) to reveal who was set apart— the servant—for the call. In Isa 49:7, a description of God is given first, then the passage moves on to a full description of the servant, which is missing in Isa 42. The passage concludes with the subject, God, who ‘chose’ and the direct object, ‘you’ masc. sing., referring to the servant. Here the verb is used with the subject being God and the object being the servant, demonstrating more directly that God chooses the servant, and specifically that God selects the servant as the redeemer of Israel. Furthermore, the author carefully interweaves the relationship between God, the redeemer, and the servant, who is also the redeemer. He does the same in reference to the aspect of the ‘holy one’ ‫קדוֹשׁוֹ‬,ְ 9 connecting this word to both God and the servant. In this verse, the nations, kings, and princes will bow and worship the servant, worship due only to God (see Ex 20:5), revealing again that the servant is related to God. 509F

marked contrast to the historical Israel.’ David F. Payne, Isaiah (NLBC; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979), 805. Concurring, S. Nyberg understands the term ‘Israel’ as a title of honor. ‘A nation’s ancestor, living on in his descendants, can be especially associated with the leader or king as the current head and “father”.’ See Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 66 n. 23. Assuming that the term ‘Israel’ is used to establish the servant’s identity, one scholar suggests that ‘Israel’ is a symbolic term that refers to the prophet himself, as a representative of all Israel, an interpretation I view as unlikely. ‘The word “Israel” can be very well justified if we translate the line in the following way: “And he said to me: You, my servant, you are (i.e. symbolize) Israel, and through you I shall be glorified.” In this divine declaration to the prophet it would thus be directly indicated that the confession of the prophet serves as an allegorical picture referring to the people of Israel.’ Lindblom, The Servant Songs in Deutero-Isaiah, 30. 9 The titles ‘the Holy One’ (Isa 40:25; 43:15; 57:15; 58:13), ‘the Holy One of Israel’ (41:14, 16, 20; 43:3, 14; 45:11; 47:4; 48:17; 49:7; 54:5; 55:5; 60:9, 14), and ‘the Mighty One of Jacob’ (49:26; 60:16) are used in reference to God.

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 169 The relationship between God and the servant in Isa 49:7 resembles that between a king and a prince in the divine realm. This aspect is not clearly presented in Isa 42:1, where the relationship between God and the servant is portrayed as a father and son relationship, although in Isa 42:8 there is a hint of a king and prince relationship on the level of divine equality. 10 Goldingay and Payne observe that ‘“Steadfast” and “choosing” develop the title “restorer”’, 11 which is one of the titles for God ‫ גּ ֵֹאל‬12 at the beginning of the same verse. 13 Again, that the servant is ‘chosen’ adds to the definition of Isa 42:1. While in Isa 49:4, the seventh word ‫מ ְשׁ ַפּט‬, ִ ‘justice’, at first appears to be a complaint on the part of the servant, a closer examination reveals a different tone from what Israel exclaims in selfpity (Isa 40:27). Here, as well as in Isa 42, the servant depends upon God for his justice to be announced. The word ‫‘ ֵכןאָ‬surely, F

513F

See ch. 2 of this work regarding v. 8. Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 172. 12 Both the LXX and 1QIsaa read ‫‘ גואלכה‬your Redeemer’ instead of MT ‫‘ גּ ֵֹאל‬Redeemer’ (see Isa 49:26; 47:4; 48:17; 54:5, 8). The term ‫ גּ ֵֹאל‬implies a covenant relationship between God as the Redeemer and the redeemed Israel/nations. Shalom M. Paul puts it this way: ‘Redemption has both judicial and social connotations. Between the Redeemer (God) and the redeemed (the nation) there exists a familial link, and thus Israel is considered the Lord’s personal possession. Just as a redeemer is required to redeem his property or his kin if they are sold to someone outside the family (Lev 25:25, 47–55), so the Lord redeemed His people from the past Egyptian subjugation (e.g., Deut 7–8; 9:26) and shall redeem them from the present Babylonian captivity: “You were sold for no price, and shall be redeemed without money” (Isa 52:3).’ Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 23. I would propose that the redemption suggested here refers not only to deliverance from the Babylonians, but also to deliverance from sin when the Messiah comes. 13 Goldingay and Payne observe that Isa 49:7 has a chiastic structure, A, B, B’, A’, making both sections of ‘A’ at the same level; the A refers to God, and A’ refers to the servant. Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 171. 10 11

170

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

however’ suggests a contrast; 14 as Lessing states, ‘The sense is this: “I thought, ‘I’ve labored in vain.’” … But [it was not in vain because] my justice is with Yahweh.’ 15 The servant does not do the work on his own; the justice that is brought to the world is based upon God’s justice. Leclerc observes: ‘Israel’s doubt and insecurity require a word of assurance, whereas the Servant’s willingness to entrust his cause to YHWH and his confidence that YHWH is the ultimate judge of his efforts allow YHWH to build upon that trust and to expand his commission.’ 16 However, while the servant brings justice (see Isa 51:4), God also gives the servant as a covenant (see Isa 42:6; 49:6, 8), an act of mercy and love, ‫י־מ ַר ֲח ָמם‬ ְ ‫‘ ִכּ‬for he has mercy on them’ (49:10). Thus, mercy and justice are mixed together (see Ps 89:14) and ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬cannot be separated from the salvific process in these two passages. There is no difference between the use of ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬in Isa 49:4 and Isa 42:4. However, these passages contrast the individual servant and the corporate servant. Leclerc clearly outlines the purpose for using ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬in Isaiah. First, after an absence from six chapters—its last occurrence was in 42:4 (the verb šāpaṭ was found in 43:26)—it reestablishes a connection to the foregoing. More specifically, the precise form of the personalized noun directly evokes an earlier lament. This sets up a contrast between doubtful Israel and the faithful Servant. Though both have their grievances—their cause before YHWH, they respond in different ways. 17

The final parallel between these passages is ‫‘ ָכּבוֹד‬glory’ in Isa 42:8 and the verb in Isa 49:5 ‫‘ ֶא ָכּ ֵבד‬I will be honored’ as well as a synonymous verb in v. 3 ‫‘ ֶא ְת ָפּאָר‬I will be glorified’. In Isa 42:8 the ‘glory’ refers to God’s glory, which he will not give to any other, while in Isa 49:5 the servant appears to be the one who is ‘honored’ See Waltke and O’Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 670. Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 470. 16 Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice, 114. Motyer further expands: ‘Resting faith is the answer to despondency.’ Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 387. 17 Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice, 114. 14 15

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 171 in the eyes of the Lord. Thus, the second servant poem would suggest that not only is God glorified as in Isa 42:8, but that the servant also glorifies God. In Isa 49:3 the synonymous verb also suggests that the servant is the one in whom God will be ‘glorified’ (‫)א ְת ָפּאָר‬. ֶ So the second servant poem suggests and supports the fact that when Isa 42:8 states that God will not give his ‘glory’ to another, it could mean not only that God will keep the glory to himself but also that he will give his glory to the servant. 18 518F

Parallel Expressions Several identical phrases appear in both Isa 42 and Isa 49. See table 13. Isaiah uses a common verb ‫נתן‬, made important by its connection with key nouns. In both Isa 42:6 and Isa 49:6, 8, the verb ‫נתן‬ appears with the direct object ‘you’, masc. sing., and it is employed in v. 8 to indicate that the direct object causes the servant to be given. In both passages, the verb ‘give’ suggests that God ‘gives’, or offers, the servant, as opposed to holding back or only lending him. This demonstrates that when God gives someone, he keeps what he said from the beginning—his covenant. In Isa 42:6, the verb ‫ נתן‬means to ‘appoint’ in office, and in Isa 49:6, 8 the appointment continues for the purpose of ‫שׁוּﬠ ִתי‬ ָ ְ‫‘ י‬my salvation’ (v. 6). Table 13. Parallel Expressions between Isaiah 42:6 and 49:6, 8 Isaiah 42:6

‫‘ ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬for a covenant of people’ ‫‘ ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִם‬for a light of nations’

Isaiah 49:6, 8

‫‘ ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬for a covenant of people’ v. 8 ‫‘ ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִם‬for a light of nations’ v. 6

It (‘gave’) is followed by both ‫‘ ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִ ם‬for a light to the nations’ and ‫‘ ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬for a covenant of the people’ (49:6, 8), supplied in reverse order to Isa 42:6, forming a chiastic structure: A more complete conclusion regarding the servant’s possible divinity is made in ch. 4 of this work. 18

172

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Isa 42:6 � ְ‫‘ וְ ֶא ָצּ ְר� וְ ֶא ֶתּנ‬And I will keep you and I will give you’ (Imperfect verb) A ‫‘ ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬for a covenant of people’ B ‫‘ ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִ ם‬for a light of nations’

Isa 49:6 �‫‘ וּנְ ַת ִתּי‬And I will give you’ (Perfect verb) B’ ‫‘ ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִ ם‬for a light of nations’

Isa 49:8 � ְ‫‘ וְ ֶא ָצּ ְר� וְ ֶא ֶתּנ‬And I will keep you and I will give you’ (Imperfect verb) A’ ‫‘ ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬for a covenant of people’.

Isaiah 49:6, 8 strengthens the mission of the servant by first showing that the servant is to redeem Jacob and restore Israel and then by outlining his mission to the Gentiles. In v. 8, the servant’s covenant is broader and more explicit than in Isa 42:6 since it includes the dimensions of that covenant: that it is a covenant to people, that it raises up a land, and that it restores the inheritance of lost properties. The use of these identical clauses demonstrates a clear link to Isa 42 and clarifies exactly what the servant accomplishes through his salvation. There is no doubt that the servant in these two passages accomplishes the same task and receives the same call because of his worthiness to fulfill what is given to him. See table 14. Table 14. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:6–7 and 49:6, 8–9 Isaiah 42:6–7

Isaiah 49:6, 8–9

�‫‘ וְ ֶא ָצּ ְר‬I will keep you’ v. 6

�‫‘ וְ ֶא ָצּ ְר‬I will keep you’ v. 8

‫‘ ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬covenant to the people’ v. 6

‫‘ ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬covenant to the people’ v. 8

� ְ‫‘ וְ ֶא ֶתּנ‬I will give you’ v. 6

� ְ‫‘ וְ ֶא ֶתּנ‬I will give you’ v. 8

‫‘ ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִם‬light to the Gentiles’ v. 6

‫‘ ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִם‬light to the Gentiles’ v. 6

�‫‘ ח ֶֹשׁ‬darkness’ v. 7

�‫‘ ַבּח ֶֹשׁ‬in darkness’ v. 9

‫אַסּיר‬ ִ ‘prisoners’ v. 7

‫סוּרים‬ ִ ‫‘ ַל ֲא‬to the prisoners’ v. 9

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 173 Thematic Parallels God and Servant Relationship Theme A number of thematic word links are based on the relationship between the servant and God. In addition to the characteristics discussed thus far, the servant is described by how he uses his voice. That the servant in Isa 42:2 ‫לֹא יִ ְצ ַﬠק וְ לֹא יִ ָשּׂא וְ לֹא־ ַבּחוּץ קוֹלוֹ‬ �‫יַ ְשׁ ִמ ַי‬, ‘will not cry nor lift [his voice] and his voice will not be heard in the street’, is related to ‫וַ יָּ ֶשׂם ִפּי ְכּ ֶח ֶרב ַח ָדּה‬, ‘and he has made my mouth like a sharp sword’ (Isa 49:2), in that both passages allude to speaking or the area of the body used for speech. While Isa 42 implies that the servant’s whisper means he does not need to shout since he is supported by God (v. 5), Isa 49 reveals that the servant speaks with the authority of God; that his mouth is like a sharp sword suggests the use of accurate, spoken words from God. Both texts are connected with God. Furthermore, the expression ‘my mouth like a sharp sword’ could possibly denote that God on the servant (Isa 42:1), which gives him places his ‘Spirit’ (�‫)רוּ‬ ַ the ability to divide justly (see Isa 11:4), as a sword would do. That the servant’s weapon is his mouth confirms that Cyrus is not the servant, since Cyrus restored God’s people through military power. In contrast, the servant of Isa 49 restores through the message of his life. 19 519F

Glorification Theme The next thematic parallel is found with the word ‫‘ ֶא ְת ָפּאָר‬glorify’ (Isa 49:3) and its synonym ‫‘ ָכּבוֹד‬glory’ in Isa 42:8. The idea is that the servant does the will of God according to the task that he has to accomplish. According to the previous verses (Isa 42:6–7; 49:1– 2), the servant is adequately equipped for the task. It appears that both passages refer to the same divine will and the common purpose of glorifying God’s name (42:8; 49:1), also expressed in the words ‫‘ וְ ֶא ָכּ ֵבד ְבּ ֵﬠינֵ י יְ הוָ ה‬and I might be honored ‫ כבד‬in God’s sight’ (49:5). 19

Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 290.

174

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Salvific Theme Another parallel demonstrates that the servant has the creative power of God because he delivers people from �‫‘ ח ֶֹשׁ‬darkness’ (42:7; 49:9). In both texts, the servant delivers people from darkness by being the ‘light’ (‫)אוֹר‬. The servant is the light because God is the light (see Isa 2:5; 60:1, 20) 20 whom the servant radiates to a lost world. Moreover, two other words connect the servant’s task ִ ‫‘ ַל ֲא‬to those bound, go out’ (49:9) with with salvation: ‫סוּרים ֵצאוּ‬ ‫אַסּיר‬ ִ ‫הוֹציא ִמ ַמּ ְסגֵּ ר‬ ִ ‫‘ ְל‬to bring out the prisoners from the dungeon’ (42:7). There is little doubt that the servant has a salvific mission, showing the divine miracle of God’s power in freeing human beings from the chains of sin. The servant’s salvific mission is exhibited in the second servant poem by the use of the noun ‫שׁוּﬠ ִתי‬ ָ ְ‫‘ י‬my salvation’ in Isa 49:6. This particular noun comes after the infinitive contruct ‫‘ ִל ְהיוֹת‬to be’, suggesting that the servant is salvation, which reaches as far as the ends of the earth. The servant not only proclaims salvation, but he is salvation for both Israel (see Isa 45:17) and everyone else on the earth. 21 521F

Creator Theme Revealed in these two pericopes is the important theme of God as the Creator. While this is a strong theme throughout Isaiah, particularly where God is compared with idols, Isa 42 and 49 especially contain an echo to God as the Creator. The terms ‫תֹהוּ‬, ‘formless, empty, chaos’, and ‫י ְֹצ ִרי ִמ ֶבּ ֶטן‬, ‘he formed/shaped me from the bel-

The terms ‘light and darkness’ are frequently used together in Isaiah (5:20, 30; 9:2; 13:10; 45:7; 58:10; 59:9). 21 The individual servant is contrasted with the corporate servant in Isa 40–55 who was supposed to proclaim God’s salvation to all the other nations (see Gen 12:2–3; Ex 33:19; 34:5; Isa 66:19; Pss 67:2; 96:3). Furthermore, the individual servant is salvation, while the corporate servant can only proclaim and live out what salvation has done for it (for example, Acts 16:17; 28:28; Rom 1:16). See, for further study, Jiří Moskala, ‘Mission in the Old Testament’, in Message, Mission, and Unity of the Church (ed. Ángel Manuel Rodríguez; Silver Spring, Md.: Biblical Research Institute, 2013), 67. 20

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 175 ly’ (49:4, 5), remind one of the creation story. First, ‫ תֹהוּ‬reveals a pre-creation time, before God begins to form and fill the earth (Gen 1:2), while ‫ יצר‬demonstrates God’s power of creation by forming Adam (Gen 2:7) and giving him the breath (‫ )נְ ָשׁ ָמה‬of life (Gen 2:7; Isa 42:5). These words are found as the bookends of the entire creation story, with earth in Gen 1:2 and humanity in Gen 2:7, ‫ תֹהוּ‬at the beginning and ‫ יצר‬at the end (see Isa 2:7 for a similar idea). The author wants his audience to know that God is the Creator of both the earth and humanity. In Isa 42, God is revealed as the Creator because of the ‫‘ ִראשׁ ֹנוֹת‬former [things]’ and ‫ֲח ָדשׁוֹת‬ ‘new [things]’ (v. 9). Both the past and the future reveal God’s sovereignty. This verse is also linked to v. 5, where God is the one who created the heavens and stretched the earth. In both cases, God is in charge of what he creates, and because he created all things and these things move according to his plan, he is therefore the redeemer of what he owns. Stéphanie Anthonioz points out: ‘The creation is also associated with redemption. … In his divine royalty, he has no resort to any human mediator.’ 22 Furthermore, the expression ‫אָרץ‬ ֶ ‫ד־ק ֵצה ָה‬ ְ ‫‘ ַﬠ‬as far as the end of the earth’ (49:6) and the presence of the ‫‘ ִאיִּ ים‬isles’ (42:4; 49:1) as well as the ‫‘ יָ ם‬sea’ (42:10), according to Anthonioz, also allow one ‘to define the universal space of the creation’. 23 This theme’s purpose is to awaken faith in God’s people to see him as the Creator, who in turn has the same power to redeem them from both enemies and sin. 523F

Structural Parallels The two poems Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 49:1–12 have much in common structurally, and both poems end with songs exhibiting the power of God and his worthiness to be worshiped as the Redeemer. Structurally, both have two parts. Isaiah 49:1–6 suggests that the servant is being called, while in vv. 8–12 the servant is accomplishing his mission. 24 Moreover, as in Isa 42:10, where a song of victory

Stéphanie Anthonioz, ‘À qui me comparerez-vous?’ Is 40,25: La polémique contre l’idolâtrie dans le Deutéro-Isaïe (Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 2011), 97. 23 Ibid., 98. 24 Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 285, 295–297. 22

176

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

reveals the Creator, ‫שׁירוּ ַליהוָ ה ִשׁיר ָח ָדשׁ‬, ִ ‘Sing to the Lord a new song’, in Isa 49:13 ‫יִפ ְצחוּ ]וּ[] ִפ ְצחוּ[ ָה ִרים ִרנָּ ה‬ ְ ‫אָרץ‬ ֶ ‫ ָרנּוּ ָשׁ ַמיִ ם וְ גִ ִילי‬, ‘Shout for joy, O heavens, rejoice, O earth; let the mountains break with joy’, is also a song of victory, proclaiming as well as demonstrating the power of God’s word to free the people from their enemies. Thus, both passages move systematically from one point—the call of the servant—to another point—the mission of the servant. For example, as I have shown in ch. 2, Isa 42:1–4 is the servant’s call while vv. 5–9 contain the servant’s mission. The same structure is found in the second servant poem: Isa 49:1–6 is the servant’s call, vv. 8–12 contain the servant’s mission. Structure of Exodus Motif The context of the second servant poem contains the same scenario. First, the exodus theme is announced in Isa 48:20–21, 25 from a prophetic point of view, urging Israel to flee Babylon and to cross the wilderness. Parallel terms include ‫‘ ברח‬flee’ (Ex 12:11; 14:5), ‫‘ וְ לֹא ָצ ְמאוּ‬and they thirst not’, ‫‘ ָח ְר ָבּה‬waste, wilderness’, ‫ַמיִ ם ִמצּוּר‬ ‫‘ ִהזִּ יל‬water flowed out from a rock’, and ‫‘ וַ ְיִּב ַקע־צוּר וַ יָּ זֻ בוּ ָמיִ ם‬and he split the rock and water flowed out’ (see Deut 8:15, still in reference to the exodus). The next scenario is the second servant poem (Isa 49:1–12), followed by a song of praise in v. 13.

COMPARISON OF FIRST SERVANT POEM TO THIRD SERVANT POEM—ISAIAH 50:4–11

Those who accept Duhm’s hypothesis that the servant poems are independent of each other consider the third servant poem as consisting of Isa 50:4–9. 26 On the other hand, scholars who see the servant as collective Israel argue for the unity of the entire ch. 50. 27 Other scholars see Isa 50:1–3 as a separate unit from the previous See Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 382. Under Duhm’s hypothesis, Isa 50:1–3 would then be considered as belonging with Isa 49:14–26. Modern scholars who subscribe to the same hypothesis include Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40–55, 383; Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 345–346; Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 192–193. 27 Lars G. Rignell, ‘Jesaja Kap. 50’, STK 29 (1952): 108–119. 25 26

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 177 one, yet not quite related to the one following (vv. 4–11), although they acknowledge some connections between vv. 1–3 and vv. 4–11 with no real break from the previous text either. 28 Hence, vv. 1–3 are not easy to place. Without debating the extent of its pericope, I will take the third servant poem to be vv. 4 to 11. Linguistic Parallels Table 15 summarizes a number of linguistic parallels. The two words ‫‘ ֲאד ֹנָ י יְ הוִֹ ה‬The LORD God’ are mentioned four times in Isa 50 (vv. 4, 5, 7, 9). These words reveal both the sovereignty of God over the universe (‫)אד ֹנָ י‬ ֲ and God’s covenantal character toward Israel (‫)יְ הוִֹ ה‬. Isaiah 50:4 begins by introducing who God is, whereas Isa 42 reveals God’s characteristics later in the pericope (see Isa 42:5, 6); Isa 42:1 begins somewhat differently, since its emphasis is on the call of the servant. However, both passages portray the sovereignty and the covenantal aspects of God that are given to the servant. In Isa 42 the sovereignty and covenantal role are gradually given to the servant, while in Isa 49 the servant ‘pushes the focus of his vocation away from himself to Yahweh’. 29 In Isa 50, the focus is on the work of God through the servant; the servant is only responding to the work of God, as seen in the four direct objects following each verb ‫( ֲאד ֹנָ י יְ הוִֹ ה‬Isa 50:4–5, 7, 9). Again, the concept of God being the subject and the servant being the direct object is also demonstrated in Isa 42:1, 6.

See Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 295. Reed Lessing sees Isa 50:1–3 as a bridge between Isa 49:14–26 and 50:4–11. Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 507. 29 Walter Brueggemann, Isaiah 40–66 (WBComp 2; Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 1998), 122. 28

178

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Table 15. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 50:4–11 Isaiah 42:1–9

Isaiah 50:4–11

‫ ֵהן‬and ‫‘ ִהנֵּ ה‬behold’ vv. 1, 9

‫‘ ֵהן‬Behold’ vv. 9, 11

‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’ vv. 1, 3, 4

‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’ v. 8

‫‘ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬servant’ v. 1

‫‘ קוֹלוֹ‬his voice’ v. 2

‫‘ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬servant’ v. 10 ‫‘ קוֹל‬voice’ v. 10

‫‘ ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה‬I YHWH’ v. 6

‫‘ ֲאד ֹנָ י יְ הוִֹ ה‬Sovereign God’ vv. 4, 5, 7, 9

�‫‘ ח ֶֹשׁ‬dark’ v. 7

‫השׁ ֲח‬ ֵ ‫‘ ָכ‬darkness’ v. 10

‫‘ אוֹר‬light’ v. 6

‫‘ ֵשׁם‬name’ v. 8

Synonym ‫‘ נֹגַ הּ‬bright light’ v. 10 ‫‘ ֵשׁם‬name’ v. 10

For the second parallel in these passages, Isa 42:1 begins with ‫ֵהן‬ ‘behold’ and concludes with the same word (v. 9). In Isa 50, ‘behold’ is not used until vv. 9 and 11; however, the idea of being attentive, getting the attention of someone, or an audible call may be present in Isa 50, with the words ‫יָ ִﬠיר ִלי אֹזֶ ן‬, ‘he arouses/wakens my ear’ (v. 4). Unlike the idols who cannot hear (see Isa 41:22–29), or Israel who needs to hear, the servant responds to God’s wakeup call every morning (‫)בּבּ ֶֹקר ַבּבּ ֶֹקר‬ ַ (50:4). The idea of hearing, introduced in Isa 50:4, then continues in v. 5 with ‫ח־לי‬ ִ ‫ֲאד ֹנָ י יְ הוִ ה ָפּ ַת‬ ‫אֹזֶ ן‬, ‘The LORD God opens my ear’. The following clause contrasts the servant’s behavior of obedience and trust in God, ‫אָנ ִֹכי לֹא‬ ‫יתי‬ ִ ‫‘ ָמ ִר‬I am not rebellious’, with the rebellion of Israel (see Isa 49:14–26; also Isa 1:20; 3:8). The same scenario is found in Isa 42, where the servant’s behavior is contrasted with Israel’s behavior in Isa 41. Another parallel is found in the use of the term ‫‘ קוֹל‬voice’ (Isa 50:10) with the fact that the servant in Isa 42:2 will not lift up ‫קוֹלוֹ‬ ‘his voice’. This word in Isa 50:10 is in the form of a rhetorical question, where the Israelites are admonished to ‘hear’ the ‫קוֹל‬ ‘voice’ of ‫‘ ַﬠ ְבדּוֹ‬his servant’. Again, the voice here suggests the im-

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 179 portance of listening to the servant when he speaks. This servant is different from the corporate servant in that he speaks. The next parallel between these two poems is ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’ (Isa 42:1, 3–4; Isa 50:8). This word reveals a close connection regarding the role of the servant. In Isa 42, the servant brings judgment on the people and nations for their lack of faith in God and their idol worship. In Isa 50:8, the servant is being accused by his adversary (‫)ב ַﬠל ִמ ְשׁ ָפּ ִטי‬. ַ 30 While in the first servant poem the servant brings judgment on the people, in Isa 50:8 the servant is being accused with judgment. Both poems contain the idea of judgment but each identifies a different recipient of the judgment. The term ‫‘ ֵשׁם‬name’ is used in both poems to refer to the name of God. In Isa 42:8, God reveals his name as ‘I am the LORD’, while in Isa 50:10 someone is admonished to trust in the name of ‘the LORD’ (see Isa 56:6). Whereas Isa 50:10 implies faith in the name of God, Isa 42:8 states who God is and what he is doing through his servant. Ultimately, Isa 42:8, when read with v. 9, also leads one to trust in God. Two other terms are used in Isa 50:10 in correlation with vv. 6–7 of the first servant poem: ‫ ֲח ֵשׁ ִכים‬and ‫נֹגַ הּ‬. In Isa 50:10, someone is walking in the ‘darkness’ and has no ‘brightness/light’ 31 from God. In Isa 42, the servant brings ‘light’ to the Gentiles and frees prisoners from ‘darkness’. This is the reason why one should trust in the name of God, since God appears to be the source of true light (Isa 50:10). The last parallel is found in the term ‫ﬠ ֶבד‬.ֶ Both poems suggest a more focused context to the servant without classifying him as Jacob or Israel. While in Isa 42:1 the servant is chosen and receives the Spirit of God and for this reason the servant obeys God, in Isa 50:10 people are admonished to obey the voice of the servant of 530F

531F

The term ‫ ַב ַﬠל‬with ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬means ‘adversary’. This construct phrase would be literally translated as ‘“the owner/possessor of my justice/cause”, that is, “one who [thinks he] has a legal case against me”, someone who wants to press a lawsuit against the Servant’. Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 515. 31 The term ‫ נֹגַ הּ‬refers to God’s illumination or theophany for his people in Isa 4:5; 60:3; 62:1. 30

180

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

God. It is as though the servant is now like God, being himself obeyed instead of obeying God. The servant here has a more elevated stature. Thematic Parallels Submission Theme Another parallel echo is found in the use of the term ‫‘ ְלשׁוֹן‬tongue’ (Isa 50:4) with the fact that the servant in Isa 42:2 will not lift up ‫‘ קוֹלוֹ‬his voice’. Both scenarios reveal that the servant is humble and submitted to his God. He is willing to be taught (‫מּוּדים‬ ִ ‫)ל‬ ִ (see Isa 8:16; 54:13) 32 and to speak adequate words of comfort and encouragement to those who are ‫‘ יָ ֵﬠף‬weary’ (Isa 50:4). Salvific Theme Submission and salvific themes connect the first and third servant poems. The first servant poem, clearly represented by the servant himself and his mission, is the gospel invitation. In Isa 42:6 the servant is called (‫ )קרא‬to bring a covenant (‫)ב ִרית‬ ְ and light (‫ )אוֹר‬to the people; as a result, they are delivered from darkness (�‫ )ח ֶֹשׁ‬and prison (‫)מ ְסגֵּ ר‬, ַ and their eyes are opened (‫( )פקח‬v. 7). This salvific theme relates to the servant’s actions toward the people. The servant in Isa 50 also has a mission to bring the gospel to a lost people. This is seen in several ways: first, the servant gives himself as a sacrifice through the persecution that he receives (‫‘ גֵּ וִ י נָ ַת ִתּי‬I gave my back’ and ‫‘ ְל ָחיַ י‬my cheeks’) (v. 6). This demonstrates a form of covenant without using the word ‫ב ִרית‬,ְ since a biblical covenant could be understood as ‘a bond in blood sovereignly adminisThe term ‫מּוּדים‬ ִ ‫‘ ִל‬to teach’ has a passive meaning in Isa 50:4 and denotes someone who is taught like a disciple. See Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 512. Moreover, Blenkinsopp states: ‘To be a disciple (limmud, lit., “one taught”) is to hold in trust and internalize the teaching of the master, whether in oral or in written form.’ Joseph Blenkinsopp, Opening the Sealed Book: Interpretations of the Book of Isaiah in Late Antiquity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006), 13. 32

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 181 tered’. 33 Second, the servant delivers those who are in darkness (�‫ )ח ֶֹשׁ‬and have no light (‫ )נֹגַ הּ‬by inviting them to trust (‫ )בטח‬in the name of the Lord and lean (‫ )שׁען‬on God (v. 10; also 10:20b). The explanation of the servant is more detailed here and continues to inform the audience of the power of the salvific theme brought by the servant. Judgment Theme Judgment is a theme common to both passages. The word ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ‘justice, judgment’, used four times in Isa 42:1–4, reveals more than just the call of the servant in bringing the gospel. Leclerc remarks that the word ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬should be kept in mind with its context as well as the previous chapter (see Isa 41:1). 34 The judgment here is against the people who worship idols; yet, God is also being judged for the purpose of demonstrating his character. James Muilenburg observes that the motif of judgment begins in Isa 41 and comes ‘to a triumphant culmination’ in the first servant poem in Isa 42:1–4. 35 Some scholars suggest that the word ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬in Isa 42:1–4 denotes a courtroom trial where judgment would normally take place. Leclerc strongly believes that ‘the Servant’s mission is to bring forth from the courtroom and to establish throughout the world a two-sided judgment—that the gods are nothing and that YHWH alone is sovereign’. 36 John Watts and Pietro Bovati also see this scene as a ‘legal setting of the trial’. 37 Judgment is also strongly mentioned in the third servant poem, even more so than in the first servant poem. While the same 536F

537F

See O. Palmer Robertson, The Christ of the Covenants (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980), 4. 34 Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice, 107. 35 James Muilenburg, ‘A Study in Hebrew Rhetoric: Repetition and Style’, in Congress Volume: Copenhagen, 1953 (VTSup 1; Leiden: Brill, 1953), 110. See also Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice, 108. 36 Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice, 108. Also Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 255. 37 Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 119; Pietro Bovati, Re-Establishing Justice: Legal Terms, Concepts and Procedures in the Hebrew Bible (trans. Michael J. Smith; JSOTSup 105; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), 347–348. 33

182

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

word ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬appears in Isa 50:8, the judgment theme is not dependent on it. The term ‫‘ ריב‬contend, strife’, often used in a covenant lawsuit, is used here against the servant (see Mic 6:1–13), suggesting a legal setting. Furthermore, the concept of ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬comes after the term ‫ב ַﬠל‬,ַ as Bovati points out: The fact that prosecution witnesses are the basic bringers of a juridical action in the courts means that the outcome of the judgment and therefore the re-establishment of justice depends on them; it is not perhaps banal to note that the accuser is called ba‘al mišpat (+ pron. suff.) (Isa. 50:8). 38

It is as though the accuser here is the Lord God and the servant receives the judgment (see Isa 49:4), which is not the case in Isa 42:1–4 where the servant brings judgment on others. 39 Yet, while the servant is the cause of the judgment, he remains faithful to God in his actions, something that Israel as the servant did not do. Isaiah 50:11 continues the theme of judgment; this time, the judgment is not on the servant but on those who do not trust in the name of the Lord and have a wrong attitude toward the Lord’s servant. These wicked ones, under condemnation of ‫‘ זִ יקוֹת‬flaming arrows’ because they set fire (‫ )ק ְֹד ֵחי ֵאשׁ‬to the servant, are juxtaposed with vv. 4–9, where the servant obeys and trusts his God. Therefore, the wicked ones are destroyed with fire sent by God. Moreover, the fact that God extends his hand (‫‘ ִמיָּ ִדי‬from my hand’) often suggests that God’s judgment is upon the earth or the people (for example, Ex 3:20; Isa 1:25; 9:12, 17). The last two words (in Isa 50:11) commit the people to suffer for their actions and their lack of faith in God (‫‘ ְל ַמ ֲﬠ ֵצ ָבה ִתּ ְשׁ ָכּבוּן‬you will lay down in torment’). 40 A play on words may be occurring with the use of the word torment (‫)מ ֲﬠ ֵצ ָבה‬, ַ derived from the verb ‫‘ עצב‬pain, hurt’, and Bovati, Re-Establishing Justice, 259 n. 5. See also Bonnard, Le Second Isaïe, 235. 39 See Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice, 110–111. 40 Brueggemann concludes that the word ‘torment’ is ‘a term suggestive of extreme punishment, a horror nearly unutterable’. Brueggemann, Isaiah 40–66, 125. 38

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 183 the noun ‫‘ ָﬠ ָצב‬idol’, also related to ‘pain, hurt’ (see Isa 46:1). A connection between these words could suggest that judgment comes because the people trust in idols more than God, or it could imply that judgment falls on both the worshipers of idols and the idols themselves. As the servant receives the divine judgment earlier in the text (Isa 50:8), so now apostate Israelites and their false gods receive the divine judgment. 41 In summary, Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 49:1–12 reveal the salvation that the servant brings to those human beings who accept him as their Lord. While the judgment theme is strong in both passages, it is more developed in Isa 50 with the insight that the servant is judged. This is part of the HB’s salvific message—the servant taking the punishment of the sinners. Yet those who reject the servant as their Lord receive the punishment that they inflicted on the servant, and for them final destruction is inevitable. 541F

Structural Parallels Isaiah 42:1–9 has two sections: vv. 1–4 and 5–9. 42 Many scholars view the third servant poem as having only one section comprised of Isa 50:4–9 and title this servant poem in various ways; Watts calls it ‘the sufferer/martyr’, 43 Melugin suggests this passage to be ‘an imitation of a psalm of confidence’, 44 while Begrich sees it as a lament of a individual with vv. 4–6 showing his complaint. 45 O. Kaiser, Westermann, and Elliger call it a psalm of confidence. 46 ‘The related nouns ‫[ ִﬠ ָצּבוֹן‬hardship] and ‫[ ֶﬠ ֶצב‬pain in childbirth], both of which mean “pain”, denote effects of the fall into sin for both man and woman (Gen 3:16–17).’ Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 518. For this reason, both man and woman received consequences for their action, pain thus being an aspect of judgment. 42 See ch. 2 of this work. 43 Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 227–229. 44 Melugin, The Formation of Isaiah 40–55, 71–73, 152. 45 Joachim Begrich, Studien zu Deuterojesaja (Munich: C. Kaiser, 1963), 20:54–55. 46 Elliger, Deuterojesaja, 34; Otto Kaiser, Der königliche Knecht: eine traditionsgeschichtlich-exegetische Studie über die Ebed-Jahwe-Lieder bei Deuterojesaja 41

184

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

However, recently some scholars have recognized the third servant poem as having two sections, 47 thus making it structurally similar to the previous two servant poems, with vv. 4–9 considered the first part and vv. 10–11 the second part. Using this model, in the first part, the servant talks about his relationship to God through obedience and the prophetic view of what will happen to the servant because of his faithfulness. The second part concludes the previous verses by demonstrating the need for people to be saved from their condition of sin. Hence, when the third servant poem is comprised of vv. 4–11, the last two verses bring the HB salvific message and judgment together. 48

(FRLANT 70; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1962), 67–69; Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 226–227. 47 Motyer recognizes that all the servant poems have two parts; however, he labels these parts differently. See Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 15, 401. Lessing also perceives Isa 50:10–11, which he calls the epilogue, as belonging with vv. 4–9; this is similar to Isa 42:5–9 and 49:7– 13. See Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 523. Lindsey observes that the third servant poem is composed of two units, Isa 50:4–9 and vv. 10–11, though he also labels these units differently. Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 81. 48 The following scholars see vv. 10–11 as being the second part of the third servant poem: Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40–55, 412; Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 523; Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 93; McKenzie, Second Isaiah, 116; North, The Second Isaiah, 205; Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 303–305. On the other hand, Baltzer considers the conclusion to be vv. 9–11. Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 339. Comparing Isa 49:1–6 and Isa 50:4–11, Goldingay suggests an important relationship between the two: ‘The “I” form of 50.4–9 recalls that of the servant’s testimony in 49:1–6, and 50:10–11 indeed invites the audience to understand 50.4–9 as words of Yhwh’s servant. The same logic that suggests that the prophet speaks in 49:1–6 implies that the same is so here.’ Goldingay believes that, in these sections, the prophet is speaking, while I believe that the servant is speaking. Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40–55, 401.

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 185 Structure of Exodus Motif The same structural theme continues with the third servant poem. First, the exodus theme occurs in Isa 50:2–3 with the words ‫אַח ִריב‬ ֲ ‫‘ יָ ם‬I dried up the sea’ (Ex 14), ‫אָשׂים נְ ָהרוֹת ִמ ְד ָבּר‬ ִ ‘I made the rivers a wilderness’ (Ex 14), and ‫אַל ִבּישׁ ָשׁ ַמיִ ם ַק ְדרוּת‬ ְ ‘I clothed the heavens with blackness’ (Ex 10:21). The next pericope is the third servant poem (Isa 50:4–11) and is followed also by a song of praise in Isa 51:3. Differences between the First and Third Servant Poems There is a progression between Isa 42:3 and 50:6 that solidifies the contrast between Israel’s actions and the servant’s actions in these texts. The description of the servant’s life in Isa 50 is much more detailed than that in Isa 42. However, Isa 42 includes a more detailed description of the servant’s role. The servant in Isa 42:3 is portrayed as a gentle person who will not ‫‘ יִ ְשׁבּוֹר‬break’ his people nor ‫‘ יְ ַכ ֶבּנָּ ה‬quench it [the people]’. In Isa 50:6 the servant is not repaid accordingly: While he is kind and loving to the people, the people are unkind and unloving toward the servant. Although the servant willingly submits himself to be abused, the text describes what the people do to the servant; they ‫‘ נכה‬smite’, ‫‘ מרט‬pull out hair’, ‫‘ ְכּ ִל ָמּה‬disgrace’ him, and ‫‘ ר ֹק‬spit’ upon him.

COMPARISON OF FIRST SERVANT POEM TO FOURTH SERVANT POEM—ISAIAH 52:13–53:12

The last servant poem of Isa 40–55 is the best known and the most studied of the servant poems. Containing fifteen verses, it is also the longest servant poem, wonderfully structured into five stanzas of three verses each. Many scholars agree that this servant poem is messianic in tone, although some Jewish scholars still hold that this poem refers to Israel. 49

See my discussion in ch. 1 regarding different views of the fourth servant poem. 49

186

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Linguistic Parallels Several linguistic relationships exist between Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 52:13–53:12. Both poems begin with the particle ‫‘ ִהנֵּ ה‬behold’ (Isa 42:1; 52:13), stressing the importance of being attentive to who is being talked about—the servant. That both poems begin the same way would suggest a linguistic link or, at the very least, draw the reader’s attention to the fact that the servant’s roles are interconnected. See table 16. Table 16. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 52:13–53:12 Isaiah 42:1–9

Isaiah 52:13–53:12

‫‘ ֵהן‬behold’ v. 1

‫‘ ִהנֵּ ה‬behold’ 52:13

‫‘ נַ ְפ ִשׁי‬my soul’ v. 1

‫‘ נַ ְפשׁוֹ‬his soul’ vv. 10, 11, 12

‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’ v. 1 ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’ vv. 1, 3, 4 ‫‘ גּוֹיִ ם‬nations’ vv. 1, 6 ‫אָרץ‬ ֶ ‘earth’ v. 5

‫‘ ָﬠם‬people’ v. 6

‫‘ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in righteousness’ v. 6

‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’ 52:13 ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’ 53:8 ‫‘ גּוֹיִ ם‬nations’ 52:15 ‫אָרץ‬ ֶ ‘earth’ 53:2, 8

‫‘ ַﬠ ִמּי‬my people’ v. 8

‫‘ ַצ ִדּיק‬righteousness’ v. 11

Beyond the word ‘behold’, the first and fourth servant poems are linked by introductions containing the word ‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’ (Isa 42:1; 52:13). It is not coincidental that the term ‘my servant’ occurs at the beginning of both these poems; the theme of servanthood becomes important in relation to the servant’s mission of saving Israel and the nations. Furthermore, Isa 42:1 reveals the servant as being upheld (‫ )תמך‬and pleased (‫)רצה‬, and in Isa 52:13 the servant is introduced as being exalted (‫ )רוּם‬and highly esteemed (‫)גָ ַבהּ ְמאֹד‬. While these sets of words are not directly related, in both passages the servant appears highly favored by God, and God—as the subject—speaks about the servant.

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 187 The next parallel word ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬connects the first and the last servant poems. In Isa 42 the servant brings judgment to the people of God and to the nations, while in Isa 53:8 the servant is taken away to suffer judgment. There is a complete change in who is being judged in these respective poems. God appears to bring the judgment on his servant in Isa 53, while in Isa 42 God brings judgment through his servant to his people and other nations. The next parallel is ‫גּוֹיִ ם‬, used in Isa 42:1, 6, where the servant brings justice and light to the nations. In Isa 52:15 the same term suggests that the servant will ‘sprinkle’ (‫ )יַ זֶּ ה‬50 many nations; in this case the passage does not say what the nations are sprinkled with. 50F

There have been alternate understandings of the verb ‫ יַ זֶּ ה‬in Isa 52:15, including ‘cause to spring’ or ‘startle’. See North, The Second Isaiah, 228; Edward J. Young, Studies in Isaiah (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954), 202–203. Oswalt translates this word as ‘startle’ based on the following argument: ‘Two factors have raised a question about the correctness of MT: (1) the parallelism does not show any synonym for “sprinkle”, and (2) in the other occurrences of nzh, “sprinkle”, in the OT the object of the verb is the liquid that is being sprinkled, and the thing being sprinkled on is prefixed with a preposition such as ‘al, “upon”. Thus we would expect here that the servant is sprinkling the nations onto something else, an obvious absurdity. By itself this anomalous usage is not insuperable, but when it is coupled with the problem of the parallelism, a serious question arises. A number of alternatives have been proposed (cf. BHS), but the best seems to be that this is the single occurrence in the OT of nzh II, which, on the basis of Arabic, means “startle”. This meaning has the merit of good parallelism and does not require emending the MT consonantal text.’ Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 374. However, this term is associated with a technical term of the Hebrew cult, in which sprinkling was an involvement of the priest in the purification and expiation for the people and the sanctuary. Brevard Childs would dispute the fact that there is any cultic context to this passage. See Childs, Isaiah, 412–413; KyeSang Ha, ‘Cultic Allusions in the Suffering Servant Poem (Isaiah 52:13–53:12)’ (unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 2009), 63, 86; Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 338– 339. For more on this particular word history and its use in the HB, see Ha, ‘Cultic Allusions in the Suffering Servant Poem (Isaiah 52:13–53:12)’, 59–86. 50

188

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

However, in both passages the nations receive something from the servant, either justice (Isa 42:1) and light (v. 6) or sprinkling (Isa 52:15). Another parallel is found with the term ‫אָרץ‬, ֶ which in Isa 42:5 is related to God spreading out the earth. This term is used in connection with God as the Creator of heaven and earth and describes who was in charge of creation. In Isa 53:2, 8 this same term is found in two different intermediate contexts; first, in v. 2 the servant is compared to a root coming out of the earth. The second use in v. 8 is in reference to the servant being cut from the land of living, meaning this world. Thus, this term has a similar meaning in both passages, in that it refers to the present world, and yet within the context of each passage it is surrounded by words that lead to a different overall meaning. The term ‫ ָﬠם‬also exhibits parallels between the first and fourth poems. This term in Isa 42:6 is in relation to the servant’s actions in bringing a covenant. As demonstrated in ch. 2, this term may strongly suggest the people of God. In Isa 53:8 the same term is used in relation to the servant being cut off from the land of living because of the transgression of ‘my people’. This suggests that the servant is killed for God’s people. Thus, in both poems, ‘people’ refers to God’s people—Israel. The word ‫ נֶ ֶפשׁ‬forms an intriguing parallel, since usage of this word begins in Isa 42:1 and ends by being used three times in the last three verses of Isa 53. In Isa 42:1 the term ‫‘ נַ ְפ ִשׁי‬my self’ 51 refers to God’s delighting in the servant. In Isa 53:10–12 the term is ‫‘ נַ ְפשׁוֹ‬his soul’, referring to the servant’s being. In this particular ‫ נַ ְפשׁ‬can refer to ‘my self or soul’; however ‘soul’ could be misunderstood to mean disembodied intelligence, which the Hebrew word nepesh doesn’t connote (see Lev 21:11; Num 6:6, where a dead nepesh is simply a corpse). I am indebted to Roy Gane for this idea. ‘Soul’ in the HB has emotion; it feels hate (2 Sam 5:8; Isa 1:14), it loves (Song 1:7; 3:1– 4; Jer 12:7), it experiences grief and weeps (Jer 13:7), it is troubled because of illness (2 Kings 4:27), and so on. Hans Walter Wolff, Anthropology of the Old Testament (trans. Margaret Kohl; London: SCM Press, 1974), 17–18. Thus, Isa 42:1 is better translated as ‘my self’ since it refers to God’s selfdelighting, which is an emotion. 51

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 189 passage, the servant is given as an ‘offering of guilt’ (‫)אָשׁם‬ ָ (v. 10), the servant’s soul is troubled (‫)ﬠ ָמל‬ ָ (v. 11), and the servant’s soul is poured out to death (‫)ל ָמּוֶ ת‬ ַ (v. 12). In all these instances, this term refers to the being of either God or the servant. The last linguistic parallel ‫ ֶצ ֶדק‬defines the servant. The servant in Isa 42:6 is called ‘in righteousness’, while in Isa 53:11 the servant is perceived as ‘my righteous servant’ (‫)צ ִדּיק ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬. ַ In both poems, the servant fits within the realm of God’s righteousness because of what the servant does. Thematic Parallels Humility and Submission Theme In both of these passages, the servant exhibits humility and submission to God. In Isa 42, the servant does not say anything, but he is revealed as an obedient person who does his work without complaints. This is demonstrated through the sequence of active verbs (see table 17). On the other hand, the servant in Isa 53 also does not say anything and responds to God with obedience, but this time his humility is exhibited in the form of passive verbs, as demonstrated in table 18.

For the servant in Isa 42 to be active at the beginning would suggest that the servant’s ministry is comprised of his active service to others. In Isa 53 the servant’s passivity reveals the end of his ministry and the pinnacle act of salvation in his being offered as a sacrifice. The servant’s ministry in Isa 42 demonstrates salvation by the way the servant did his ministry, which is also true for Isa 53—the servant concludes why he was chosen to redeem Israel as well as the nations (see Isa 42:6), namely as a covenant, while Isa 53 demonstrates and seals that covenant by the death of the servant (see Ex 19–24).

190

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT” Table 17. First Servant Poem: Active Verbs

Text 42:1 42:2 42:2 42:2 42:3 42:3 42:3 42:4 42:4

Hebrew ‫יוֹציא‬ ִ ‫יִ ְצ ַﬠק‬ ‫יִ ָשּׂא‬ �‫יַ ְשׁ ִמ ַי‬ ‫יִ ְשׁבּוֹר‬ ‫יְ ַכ ֶבּנָּ ה‬ ‫יוֹציא‬ ִ ‫יִ ְכ ֶהה‬ ‫יָ רוּץ‬

Translation

Verbs

He will cry out

Qal Imperf

He will bring

He will lift up He will hear

He will break

He will quench it He will bring out He will dim

He will crush

Hiph’il Imperf Qal Imperf

Hiph’il Imperf Qal Imperf

Pi’el Imperf

Hiph’il Imperf Qal Imperf Qal Imperf

In contrast to these servant poems, the literary structure that comes before the redemptive acts of the servant portrays the servant Israel in the act of sinning. In Isa 41:21–29, Israel openly worships idols that cannot save them, then in Isa 42 the servant brings redemption, without which Israel would be destroyed. The servant’s actions in Isa 42 are limited but nevertheless reveal that the servant is the one who intercedes between God and Israel, as demonstrated in ch. 2 of this work with the term ‘give’ (see Isa 42:6–7). While Israel’s wickedness is prominent in the first two chapters (Isa 40– 41), the details of how the servant’s salvific plan unfolds are limited and narrow (in the first servant poem).

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 191 Table 18. Fourth Servant Poem: Passive Verbs Text 53:3 53:3 53:4 53:4 53:4 53:5 53:5 53:5 53:7 53:7 53:7 53:8 53:8

53:12

Hebrew ‫נִ ְבזֶ ה‬ ‫ידוּ� ח ִֹלי‬ ַ ִ‫ו‬ �‫גוּ‬ ַ ָ‫נ‬ ‫ֻמ ֵכּה‬ ‫ְמ ֻﬠנֶּ ה‬ ‫ְמח ָֹלל‬ ‫ְמ ֻד ָכּא‬ ‫נִ ְר ָפּא‬ ‫נִ גַּ שׂ‬ ‫נַ ֲﬠנֶ ה‬ ‫יוּבל‬ ָ ‫ֻל ָקּח‬ ‫נִ גְ זַ ר‬ ‫נִ ְמנָ ה‬

Translation

He was despised

and known of sickness struck

smitten

afflicted pierced

crushed healed

He was oppressed He was afflicted

He was led (to slaughter) He was taken (away) He was cut off

He was numbered (with transgressors)

Verbs Niph’al

Qal passive Qal passive Hoph’al Pu’al Po’lal Pu’al Niph’al Niph’al Niph’al Hoph’al Pu’al Niph’al Niph’al

The theme of redemption is therefore strong in both the first and the fourth servant poems, connecting the life and death of the servant. If the death of the servant were separated from the life of the servant, or vice versa, the salvific message would not be complete. Thus, the servant cannot be Israel, since Israel did not demonstrate a positive relationship with God. And the servant is more than Israel, because Israel needs a redeemer and cannot die for itself. Therefore, while most scholars acknowledge Isa 53 to be

192

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

messianic, I propose that the servant of Isa 42 is strongly connected with Isa 53 and thus is also messianic. 52 Sustaining Theme An indirect but important theme of sustaining is also apparent in the first and fourth servant poems. The first clause of Isa 42:5 establishes the sustaining theme as being prominent through the terms ‫אָרץ‬ ֶ ‫יהם ר ַֹקע ָה‬ ֶ ‫נוֹט‬ ֵ ְ‫בּוֹרא ַה ָשּׁ ַמיִ ם ו‬ ֵ ‘who created the heavens and stretched them out, who stretched out the earth’. By referring back to Gen 1, 53 the reader is reminded about the God of creation. The theme of sustaining is revealed further in Isa 42:5 with the word ‫‘ ֶצ ֱא ָצא‬offspring, produce’, in the sense of young plant shoots; these offspring may also refer to animals (see Gen 1:12, 24). This word is found in the first half of the verse, connected to the clause ‫בּוֹרא‬ ֵ ‫אָרץ‬ ֶ ‫יהם ר ַֹקע ָה‬ ֶ ‫נוֹט‬ ֵ ְ‫ה ָשּׁ ַמיִ ם ו‬.ַ As discussed in ch. 2, this word could Many scholars have seen a connection between the first and the fourth servant poems, but they only highlight the linguistic connection in the first verse of each poem. However, the extent of the connection of the servant as redeemer between the two of them has not been shown. For example, Westermann is correct in his analysis that Isa 42 shows us the origin of the servant’s work while Isa 52:13–53:13 gives us its culmination. See Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 258. Yet, he does not reveal how the servant accomplishes this work but simply states the origin and success of the servant’s work. Other scholars see the call and mission of the servant in each poem, but there is no real emphasis on the servant being the redeemer, particularly in Isa 42; for example, Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 107–120. However, Oswalt does recognize that the servant of Isa 42, 49, and 50 is the same one as in chapters 52–53 and ‘what is said about his work, his character, and his nature is what was initially described in those passages [three previous poems]’. Ibid., 375. See also Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 98–99; Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40– 66, 335. On the other hand, Watts does not appear to see any connection between Isa 42 and Isa 52–53; Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 226–233. Lessing also does not see the theme of redemption between Isa 42 and Isa 52–53, since, for him, these passages reveal a different servant; Lessing, Isaiah 40– 55, 579. 53 See ch. 2 of this work (on v. 5) for more details. 52

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 193 very well employ imagery pointing back to Isa 11:1, ‘and a shoot will come out from the stem of Jesse and a branch out from its root’ (see Isa 11:10). As Oswalt points out regarding v. 5, ‘The one who calls the Servant to establish God’s loving order on the earth is in fact the creator of the earth.’ 54 He further adds, ‘The Servant’s ministry will not constitute an imposition of some new regimen, but will be, in fact, the renewal of creative design.’ 55 Likewise, in Isa 53:2 the theme of sustaining is clearly portrayed by using wording similar to Isa 42; the words ‫‘ יּוֹנֵ ק‬tender plant’ 56 and ‫‘ שׁ ֶֹרשׁ‬root’ suggest the theme of sustaining and that the servant has power to recreate Israel by giving new life through the death of the servant. 57 The same word ‫ שׁ ֶֹרשׁ‬is also found in the Isa 11:1, 10, thus connecting the first and fourth servant poems even more closely 58 because of their link to Isa 11. Thus, sustaining is an 58F

Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 116. Ibid., 116–117. 56 The LXX translates ‫ יּוֹנֵ ק‬in Isa 53:2 with παιδίον ‘child’, which would connect to Isa 9:5 [ET 9:6] where the Messiah is called the παιδίον. This word is found in Isa 11:6 for the same reason. Furthermore, in Ezek 17:22; Hos 14:7 [ET 14:6], the feminine synonym and cognate ‫ יוֹנֶ ֶקת‬describes Israel’s future hope. Ekblad points out that the usage of παιδίον would mean ‘like a child/little servant’, with this word purposely linking to the child in Isa 9:6 [ET 9:5]. Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems According to the Septuagint, 201–202. See also Peter John Gentry, ‘The Atonement in Isaiah’s Fourth Servant Song (Isaiah 52:13–53:12)’, SBJT 11, no. 2 (2007): 20–47. 57 A seed needs to die first before it can live and grow. 58 Peter J. Gentry suggests that a wide gap between the first and the last three servant poems is based on the literary structure, in which ‘the first servant poem belongs to the introductory opening section which is devoted to the theme of the consolation of Israel and of the nations (40:1–42:17)’. The last three servant poems ‘are placed together to focus on redemption from sin’. Gentry, ‘The Atonement in Isaiah’s Fourth Servant Song’, 22. However, I disagree with his premise, for the reason given above. The first and fourth servant poems have too much in common. While it is true that these servant poems refer to different parts of the servant’s ministry, the first servant poem includes much more than 54 55

194

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

essential theme in these passages, and this suggests that both Israel and the nations need God’s sustaining power. Israel was to be exiled in Babylon; therefore, physically it would also need, at some point, a new beginning, deliverance from Babylon. Spiritually, Israel also needed a new beginning, a fresh start with God, since Israel had broken the covenant. This new beginning, or new covenant, would be accomplished by the death of the servant (Isa 52:13– 53:12; see Gen 22). Kingship Theme The kingship theme follows on the heels of the sustaining theme. The concept of kingship is more prominent in Isa 42, although Isa 53 also mentions it in passing. In Isa 42:1 the phrase ‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‫נָ ַת ִתּי‬ ‘I put my Spirit upon him’ 59 is a deliberate phrase particularly used for the inauguration of kings in relation to ‫שׁ ֶמן‬, ֶ ‫יִּ צֹק‬, ‘he poured oil’ (1 Sam 10:1), which is often a symbol of the Spirit, 60 and ‫וְ ָצ ְל ָחה‬ just consolation to Israel. The servant is also doing the work of redemption; Isa 42:6–7 particularly must not be overlooked in this case. 59 The ‘Spirit’ resting on an individual (see Isa 11:1–2) in the OT implied that it was intended for that individual to perform special roles, such as judge, king (1 Sam 10:6, 10; 11:6; 16:13), and prophet (1 Kings 18:12; 2 Kings 2:9). Paul D. Wegner, An Examination of Kingship and Messianic Expectation in Isaiah 1–35 (Lewiston, N.Y.: Mellen Biblical Press, 1992), 254. I would also add that the Spirit did the equipping (for example, Ex 35:31–36:1; Num 11:16–30). 60 Bill T. Arnold, 1 & 2 Samuel (NIVAC; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), 164; Robert D. Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel (NAC 7; Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1996), 126–127; Carl F. Keil and Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Books of Samuel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952), 95; John N. Oswalt, ‘‫’משׁח‬, NIDOTTE 2:1123–1127. David T. Tsumura states that ‘Samuel as God’s agent pours the oil and announces that the Lord anointed Saul in order to give him a new status in his relation to the Lord, namely, as Yahweh’s prince who rules over his estate.’ David T. Tsumura, The First Book of Samuel (NICOT 1; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 282. Kyle McCarter, Jr., states that ‘in Israel anointing was first of all a royal rite. … The king was “the anointed one” or “messiah” of Yah-

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 195 ‫רוּחחיְ הוָ ה‬ ַ �‫ ָﬠ ֶלי‬, ‘and the Spirit of the Lord rush upon you [Saul]’ (1 Sam 10:6). Oil was used in the ANE for anointing kings and had a contractual and covenantal meaning. 61 This same scenario is seen in Israel. If people performed the anointing, this would suggest a covenant between the king and the people; but if God did the anointing, this would suggest God’s pledge to the king as a divine covenant. 62 A similar image occurs when Samuel anoints David and ‫ל־דּוִ ד‬ ָ ‫וַ ִתּ ְצ ַלח רוּ ַח־יְ הוָ ה ֶא‬, ‘and the Spirit of the Lord rushed upon David’ (1 Sam 16:13). 63 God thus demonstrated his approval of a king by giving him his Spirit. There is a close connection between the Spirit of God coming on people to set them apart for a particular task and Isa 11:1–2. Here, as in 1 Samuel, the context of ‫וְ נָ ָחה‬ ‫רוּחחיְ הוָ ה‬ ַ ‫ ָﬠ ָליו‬, ‘and the Spirit of the Lord will rest on him’, points to a Davidic kingship for the purpose of delivering Israel (see 37:35). Isaiah 42:1 has the same imagery as Isa 11:1–2, which suggests that the servant in Isa 42 includes the notion of kingship, or at least the notion of a continuation of the Davidic kingship and lineage. The term ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬justice’ is often related to the aspect of a king who sits on a throne and judges his people (see Isa 2:2–4; Ps 2:8–9; Isa 9:1–7). For example, David ‫ל־ﬠמּוֹ‬ ַ ‫וּצ ָד ָקה ְל ָכ‬ ְ ‫ע ֶֹשׂה ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬, ‘made judgment and righteousness to all his people’ (2 Sam 8:15). Israel also perceived Solomon to be a king of great wisdom and justice (1 Kings 3:28). Thus, Isa 42 uses the word ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬in connection to kingship, demonstrating that the servant receives the Spirit of God and is thus equipped to do justice or judge his people and the nations. The term ‫תּוֹרה‬ ָ ‘law’ (Isa 42:4) denotes that this servant is also living by the law of God, and the people proclaim his just decisions weh.’ P. Kyle McCarter, Jr., 1 Samuel: A New Translation with Introduction, Notes & Commentary (AB 8; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1980), 178. 61 Ralph W. Klein, 1 Samuel (WBC 10; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1983), 85. 62 Ibid. 63 See Daniel I. Block, ‘Empowered by the Spirit of God: The Holy Spirit in the Historiographic Writings of the Old Testament’, SBJT 1 (1997): 42–61.

196

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

in vv. 1 and 3 (see 2:3–4). The law was meant to guide Israelite kings (see Deut 17:14–20). This servant is described as being a loyal king as opposed to a disloyal servant/king (for example, Isa 42:18– 25; 43:1–7, 8–13; 44:1–5, 21–22). 64 Several other factors allude to kingship. The servant ‘humbly’ does not lift his voice (Isa 42:2) and does not crush the people (the v. 3 attributes demonstrate a king who has confidence in God instead of his own military power [see Isa 7 about Ahaz; Deut 17:16– 17]). 65 The fact that God ‘grasped’ the servant ‘by the hand’ further illustrates a royal role. 66 Another term related to the theme of kingship is ‘covenant’ (Isa 42:6). 67 Verses previous to Isa 42:1–9 also suggest kingship imagery: God sitting on his throne judging (Isa 41:22–29). Finally, the freeing of captives in v. 7 suggests a royal idea of a king freeing his people (see 49:8–10; 61:1–2), also demonstrated by the kings of ANE nations. 68 Weinfeld points out that ‘these privileges, known as “liberation” (andurāru) during the NeoAssyrian period, entailed the return of exiles to their homes, the restoration of towns and temples, the release of prisoners, etc.’, 69 either by the raising of a banner on the city gates or in the form of stelae at the city gates. 70 Kingship imagery is not as strong in the fourth servant poem, since the main image there is of the suffering servant. However, the See Antti Laato, A Star Is Rising: The Historical Development of the Old Testament Royal Ideology and the Rise of the Jewish Messianic Expectations (USFISCJ 5; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 174–175. 65 See ibid., 175. 66 See ch. 2 of this work (on v. 6) for the ANE analogy of ‘grasping the hand’. 67 See ch. 4 for further information on the first servant poem and kingship. 68 Moshe Weinfeld, Social Justice in Ancient Israel and in the Ancient Near East (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), 14–15, 140–143. In Isa 42:1–9, God places his Spirit on the servant to establish justice in the land. A similar phrase is found in the Akkadian mīšaram ina mātim šakānum, which is about freeing those who are imprisoned. Ibid., 12–13. 69 Ibid., 12. 70 Ibid., 102–103. 64

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 197 context itself suggests kingship, 71 since Isa 52:13b reveals that the servant will be ‘raised and lifted up and highly exalted’, suggesting not only suffering but also kingship. 72 Moreover, there is a passing echo in Isa 53:2 with the term ‫‘ שׁ ֶֹרשׁ‬root’ that allows the reader to see a connection to kingship. Other kings respect the servant (52:14–15). 73 Some scholars remark that this term (‫ )שׁ ֶֹרשׁ‬is related to the imagery of kings 74 found in texts such as Ezek 17:31 and Dan 4. Non-biblical texts also suggest that the word ‫ שׁ ֶֹרשׁ‬is related to kings. 75 Furthermore, the use of ‫ שׁ ֶֹרשׁ‬in Isa 53 appears to be deliberate, as this term is also used in a previous prophecy, Isa 11:1, 10, the context of which reveals a correlation between ‫ שׁ ֶֹרשׁ‬and the Davidic king image (see Isa 4:2; Jer 23:5; Zech 3:8; 6:12). This

See Daniel I. Block, ‘My Servant David: Ancient Israel’s Vision of the Messiah’, in Israel’s Messiah in the Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. Richard S. Hess and R. M. Daniel Carroll; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 50. 72 Both the servant’s suffering and his exaltation are essential to the ‘will of the LORD’ (Isa 53:10). See Averbeck, ‘Christian Interpretations of Isaiah 53’, 59. 73 Block, ‘My Servant David’, 50. 74 Gary V. Smith observes that ‘about 70 years later Esarhaddon, the king of Assyria, was called “a precious branch of Baltil, and enduring shoot”’. Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 445 n. 353. 75 Smith states: ‘In a Phoenician text, Karatepe, A. i, line 9–10, it says, “I kindly acted towards the root (šrš) of my lord and I set him on his father’s throne.” In Aramaic, Sefire, i. C, lines 24–25 is the curse “may his root (šršh) have no name”, so both documents use the term “root” to refer to a descendant. The Old Greek understood “root” to refer to descendents [sic] in Isa 14:29, 30; the Targum in Mal 4:1 [Heb 3:19] does the same thing; and Ben Sira 47:22 has a similar understanding. The Ugaritic “Tale of Aqhat”, used šrš four times to mean “son, descendent [sic]”, in lines 20–27, 41–43 “no son … nor scion (šrš) for him”.’ Ibid., 445 n. 354. See also James B. Pritchard, ed., The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures (trans. and annot. W. F. Albright et al.; Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1958), 119. 71

198

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

could imply that the same servant who is primarily a suffering servant is also a king. 76 This kingly servant is willing to give up his life for the safety of his people, as seen with the term ‫אָשׁם‬ ָ ‘guilt offering’ (53:10). In this case, the servant king of Isa 53 gives his life for his people, for redemption from their sins. John Walton has identified such a ‘kingly servant’ image in the ancient Mesopotamians’ ritual of the substitute king. 77 In a parallel Assyrian ritual, if during an omen (for example, eclipse of the sun or moon) the life of the king was threatened, the diviners would choose a man from the community (whether of high stature, or common man, or half-wit) who would serve as a substitute king, and he would take the curse of the omens upon himself. This substitute king would dress in a king’s robe and be given a crown, weapon, and scepter. This king not only sat on a throne but also presented offerings before the altar. The true king meanwhile would perform different purifying rituals, while the substitute king took upon himself the evils that were threatening the real king. The climax of this ritual was the execution of the substitute king for the sake of the true king. In this way the substitute king realized their redemption. 78 Daniel Block acknowledges that the links between this practice and Isaiah’s servant are impressive and that the prophet adapts the ANE custom to his own theology, and therefore the roles are reversed in Isa 53. 79 Nevertheless, Block points out that, while ‘the 57F

578F

The author also notes three times, in the same passage (Isa 53:2), that the servant’s appearance was not (‫ )לֹא‬like someone of royal status. This is the opposite of how king Saul (1 Sam 9:20) or even king David (see 1 Sam 16:12) was described. 77 John H. Walton, ‘The Imagery of the Substitute King Ritual in Isaiah’s Fourth Servant Song’, JBL 122, no. 4 (2003): 734–743. 78 For texts, see Simo Parpola, Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars (SAA 10; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1993), nos 1, 2, 3, 4, 12, 25, 189, 219, 220, 221, 314, 350, 351, 352. For a full discussion of the ritual, see Jean Bottéro, Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods (trans. Zainab Bahrani and Marc Van De Mieroop; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), 138–155. 79 Block, ‘My Servant David’, 53. 76

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 199 substitute king ritual has a commoner taking on himself the curse that hangs over the king and dying in his place, the Servant Song has the king taking upon himself the sins of the common people and being slain in their place’. 80 As in Isa 42, Isa 53 also uses the term ‫( ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬v. 8), but instead of the servant performing the judgment (Isa 42), he receives the judgment (Isa 53). 81 In Isa 42:1–4 the servant judges like a king, but in Isa 53 the servant is being judged as a king or, as G. Liedke suggests, as a ‘verdict’. 82 The servant is being judged because of taking on the sins of the people, but the servant is also revealing the justice of God (as king of the universe). As Baltzer states, ‘The interpretation can differ according to whether the viewpoint is that of human beings or of God.’ 83 In this case, the servant reveals how certain God is about his kingship and that the servant is willing to die to demonstrate the true justice of God, at the same time redeeming his people (see Isa 55:8). The servant as king is also acting in a priestly role, which would explain his taking the sins of the people. This can also be seen in the ANE where kings served as priests. 84 Thus, the king is also the priest, performing a dual function. 581F

582F

583F

584F

Ibid., 53–54. See Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 312. 82 G. Liedke, ‘‫’שׁפט‬, TLOT 3:1392–1399. He also suggests that the term ‘verdict’ can ‘signify deliverance or condemnation: deliverance, Deut 32:4; Isa 4:4; 30:18; 51:4; 58:2; Jer 9:23; 10:24; Psa 17:2; 33:5; 36:7; 76:10; 101:1; 111:7. For condemnation, destruction, Isa 34:5; Jer 48:21: 51:9: Ezek 23:24; 39:21; Mic 3:8; Zeph 3:8; Psa 9:17; 48:12; 97:8; Job 36:17. See also mišpāṭ-māwet “death sentence” (Deut 19:6; 21:22; Jer 26:11, 16)’. Ibid. 83 Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 415. 84 See Engnell, Studies in Divine Kingship in the Ancient Near East, 31; Henri Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods, 252; Jean-Jacques Glassner, ‘Le roi prêtre en Mésopotamie, au milieu du 3 millénaire’, in L’Ancien Proche-Orient et les Indes: parallélismes interculturels religieux: colloque franco-finlandais les 10 et 11 novembre 1990 à l’Institut finlandais, Paris (ed. Finnish Oriental Society; vol. 70 of Studia Orientalia, ed. Heikki Palva et al.; Helsinki, Finland: Finnish 80 81

200

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The final image of kingship in the fourth servant poem is the rich burial of that servant, which is fit for a royal person (Isa 53:9). 85 Additionally, the term ‘my servant’ (Isa 52:13) is often attributed to a royal servant in the book of Isaiah (see 37:35). In summary, both the first and fourth servant poems have a common theme of kingship. While in Isa 42 the servant is more decidedly portrayed as a king, Isa 53 does not ignore the kingship theme completely; rather it is more subtle, muted, in the background. Alienation Theme The theme of separation in Isa 42 is illustrated by the noun �‫ח ֶֹשׁ‬ ‘dark’ (v. 7) and by the ideas of the phrases ‫‘ ֵﬠינַ יִ ם ִﬠוְ רוֹת‬blind eyes’ and ‫אַסּיר‬ ִ ‫‘ ִמ ַמּ ְסגֵּ ר‬prisoners from the dungeon’ (v. 7). Israel and the nations are described as being in darkness in this verse, and the servant will deliver them from their conditions, both physical and spiritual. In this particular passage, the servant is delivering those in darkness, suggesting that the servant is himself a light, not darkness. Although the term �‫ ח ֶֹשׁ‬is not used in Isa 53, there is imagery of separation. Words like ‫‘ בזה‬despise’, ‫‘ חדל‬abandoned’, ‫ַמ ְכאֹב‬ ‘pain’, ‫‘ ֳח ִלי‬sickness’ (v. 3), and ‫‘ ֶק ֶבר‬grave’ (v. 9) connote separation. The separation in this passage does not point to Israel nor the nations but rather to the servant of the Lord. The servant is separated for his people so that they can be reconciled. Thus, the separation images of Isa 42 have been transposed to the servant in Isa Oriental Society, 1993), 9–19; Ted Kaizer, ‘Kingly Priests in the Roman Near East?’, in Imaginary Kings: Royal Images in the Ancient Near East, Greece and Rome (ed. Olivier Hekster and Richard Fowler; vol. 11 of Oriens et Occidens, ed. Richard Fowler; Munich, Germany: Decker & Bokor, 2005), 177–178; Samuel Mercer, ‘Divine Service in Ur’, JSOR 5, no. 1 (1921): 1–17; Walton, ‘The Imagery of the Substitute King Ritual in Isaiah’s Fourth Servant Song’, 734–743. For the biblical concept of kings being priests, see Karl Deenick, ‘Priest and King or Priest-King in 1 Samuel 2:35’, WTJ 73, no. 2 (2011): 325–339. 85 Block, ‘My Servant David’, 50.

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 201 53. From the first servant poem to the fourth one, there is a progressive development of who is separated from God. Structural Parallels At first glance, the structures of Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 52:13–53:12 appear to be dissimilar. However, although there are differences, a closer look at these passages reveals a noteworthy relationship. These passages are situated at either end of the servant poems, which suggests that if they do represent different stages of the career of one person, then the servant is at a different point in his life ministry in each one and that therefore one might expect the flow of these poems themselves to be structured differently. However, in actuality their context reveals close structural similarities. Isaiah 42:1–9 is first contrasted with the previous chapter (Isa 41), where Israel is spiritually in captivity, and then it is followed by verses praising God. Isaiah 52:13–53:12 also contrasts with the first part of ch. 52, where Israel is still in a land of captivity (vv. 1–6). Chapter 54 follows the fourth servant poem with an exclamation of singing (‫( ָ)רנִּ י‬v. 1). Thus, the passages within which the fourth servant poem is located reveal a structural similarity to Isa 42. Structure of Exodus Motif Both the exodus theme and a song of joy also surround the last servant poem. In Isa 52:4, 11–12, the exodus theme is again used to prepare for the servant poem. The exodus-related terms include ‫‘ ִמ ְצ ַריִ ם‬Egypt’, ‫‘ סוּרוּ סוּרוּ‬depart, depart’, ‫‘ ִח ָפּזוֹן‬haste’ (Ex 12:11), ‫נוּסה‬ ָ ‫‘ ְמ‬flight’ (see Ex 14:5), and ‫יכם יְ הוָ ה‬ ֶ ֵ‫‘ ִכּי־ה ֵֹל� ִל ְפנ‬for the Lord will go before you’ (see Ex 13:21; 14:19). Then comes the last servant poem (Isa 52:13–53:12), followed by Isa 54 with a song of joy. Thus, it is apparent that the exodus theme precedes all four servant poems, and the servant poems are followed by hymns of joy. This implies that the servant-of-the-Lord passages follow for a particular reason, expressing hope of deliverance from Babylon or spiritual evil in general. Differences between the First and Fourth Servant Poems The differences between these two texts are found within the poems themselves and in the context. Isaiah 42:1–9 is divided into two structures, as demonstrated in ch. 2. In contrast, the fourth

202

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

servant poem is structured with five stanzas with three verses each, thus suggesting a different inner structure. Nevertheless, the fourth servant poem, like the first one, also includes a call to ministry through the idea of exaltation (52:13–15), followed by the servant’s ministry (53:1–12) in giving his life. The other difference is that Isa 52:7–12, just prior to the fourth servant poem, is a praise hymn, a feature not found in the first servant poem. The two praise hymns, one before and one after Isa 52:13–53:12, could signal the grand finale of the servant’s mission in redeeming Israel. In summary, the structural differences in these passages are minimal and do not change what the servant is called to do. The larger context demonstrates a similarity between these texts that strengthens the servant’s message.

COMPARISON OF FIRST SERVANT POEM TO OTHER ISAIANIC ‘SERVANT’ PASSAGES

As pointed out in ch. 2 of this work, the term ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬is found twentyone times in Isa 40–55, in some passages referring to an individual servant and in others to a corporate servant. Now that I have examined the first servant poem in relation to the three other servant poems, I will compare Isa 42:1–9 with some other passages in Isa 40–55 where the term ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬is found. This exercise should help to determine if the first servant poem has any correlation with a corporate servant. I will look at only three passages for this analysis: Isa 41:8–9; 42:19; and 45:4, chosen because they have often been used in relation to Isa 42:1–9 to explain this passage’s relationship with the corporate servant.

COMPARING THE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 WITH THE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 41:8–9

Both Isa 42:1 and 41:8–9 use the term ‫ﬠ ֶבד‬.ֶ Because of this, many scholars have concluded that since in Isa 41:8–9 the word ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬is described by the proper noun ‘Israel’ beforehand and ‘Jacob’ afterward, then wherever this term ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬is used, it would also refer to Israel. However, linguistic parallels, structural parallels, context, and themes should determine whether these passages are compatible with each other in this sense.

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 203 Linguistic Parallels The term ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬is used in both passages. However, the differences between these passages are significant. Isaiah 41:8–9 states clearly that the ‘servant’ is Israel/Jacob, while Isa 42:1 does not include an apposition to the word ‫ﬠ ֶבד‬,ֶ leading one to see this servant as someone different. Furthermore, in Isa 42 the servant is appointed (‫( )נתן‬v. 6) for a special purpose, while in Isa 41:8–9 the servant is not appointed but rather reassured that he is not being cast out from God. See table 19. Table 19. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 41:8–10 Isaiah 42:1–9

Isaiah 41:8–10

‫‘ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬servant’ v. 1

‫‘ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬servant’ v. 8

�‫‘ ֶא ְת ָמ‬I will hold’ v. 1

�‫‘ ְתּ ַמ ְכ ִתּי‬I upheld you’ v. 10

‫‘ ְבּ ִח ִירי‬my chosen’ v. 1 �‫אתי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְק ָר‬I called you’ v. 6 ‫אַחזֵ ק‬ ְ ‘I hold’ v. 6

‫‘ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in righteousness’ v. 6

�‫‘ ְבּ ַח ְר ִתּי‬I chose you’ vv. 8, 9 �‫אתי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְק ָר‬I called you’ v. 9

�‫‘ ֶה ֱחזַ ְק ִתּי‬I have taken hold of you’ v. 9 ‫‘ ִצ ְד ִקי‬my righteousness’ v. 10

The second term found in both passages is ‫( בחר‬Isa 41:8–9), ‘chosen’, and ‫( ָבּ ִחיר‬42:1), ‘chosen’. In ch. 41, we learn why the servant was ‘chosen’: because he is Jacob (‫ )יַ ֲﬠקֹב‬and also because he comes from ‘the seed of Abraham’ (‫אַב ָר ָהם‬ ְ ‫)זֶ ַרע‬, both communicating the covenant that God made with him. However, in Isa 42, the servant is ‘chosen’, not as a seed from Abraham, but rather because God is pleased with him (‫)ר ְצ ָתה נַ ְפ ִשׁי‬, ָ and because the servant will be given as a covenant (v. 6). The next two terms, ‫‘ חזק‬hold’ and ‫‘ קרא‬call’, appear in Isa 41:9 and 42:6. The servant of Isa 41:9 has been ‘taken hold’ of and ‘calls’ for protection. The word ‫ חזק‬means ‘to grasp, seize, take hold of’. If ‫ חזק‬were used with the preposition ‫ ְבּ‬attached, then its meaning would be similar to its usage in Isa 42:6, that is, a grasping of the hand; however, in Isa 41:9, the verb is followed by an object

204

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

suffix, rather than by a prepositional phrase, and therefore the term has a different connotation. Lessing therefore suggests that ‘“seize” conveys divine monergism in salvation’. 86 However, in Isa 42:6 God ‘grasps’ the servant’s hand, not in a divine monergism in salvation, but rather in a handshake that seals an agreement between two parties, God and the servant, to accomplish the salvific plan through the servant. 87 The word ‘call’ in Isa 41:9 refers to Israel being called from the ‘remotest parts’ of the earth (‫יה‬ ָ ‫)מ ֲא ִצ ֶיל‬ ֵ to respond to God’s call. The servant in Isa 42:6 is ‘called’ for a special purpose, in righteousness (‫)ב ֶצ ֶדק‬, ְ not from somewhere on the earth but regarding salvation. Furthermore, in Isa 41:10 the servant who is upheld by the right hand of God’s righteousness (‫ימין ִצ ְד ִקי‬ ִ ‫)תּ ַמ ְכ ִתּי� ִבּ‬ ְ demonstrates God’s power to protect and save Israel, while in Isa 42 the terms used are ‫‘ תמך‬uphold’ (v. 1) and ‫‘ ֶצ ֶדק‬righteous’ (v. 6). In Isa 42:1 God ‘upholds’ the servant to reveal who he is, and for this reason he receives the ‘Spirit of God’, while in Isa 41:10 the servant is ‘upheld’ for support and protection but does not receive the ‘Spirit of God’. Moreover, ‫ ֶצ ֶדק‬in Isa 42:6 refers to the servant’s calling as a description of the salvation he brings. In Isa 41:10, ‫ֶצ ֶדק‬ functions as God’s right hand, which again demonstrates his power to keep Israel safe. Thus, while both passages do have some words in common, they are used for different purposes in light of the different identity of the servant in each passage. In Isa 41 the servant points to Israel/Jacob, but in Isa 42 the servant cannot be Israel because this servant serves and brings salvation to Israel.

Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 209. Goldingay and Payne see a continuation in v. 9 from v. 8, which ‘draws attention to one of the implications of the audience’s being an Abrahamic people’. Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 162. 87 See ch. 2 of this work, on Isa 42:6, where the word ‫ חזק‬is discussed. 86

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 205 Thematic Parallels Salvific theme Isaiah 41:8–9 demonstrates that God is saving Israel because they are his covenant people, while in Isa 42 the servant acts as an instrument in the hand of God to save Israel. Although the same salvific theme occurs in both passages, in one passage the servant receives salvation or the action of saving is done to him (Isa 41), while in the other passage the servant does the saving and he is represented as the savior (Isa 42). Judgment theme Likewise the judgment theme in these two passages has some similarities. In Isa 41 the judgment is first directed to other nations and the servant (Israel) is spared; then, later on in the same chapter, because Israel is doing what the other nations are doing, Israel will also be judged. The judgment on Israel in Isa 42 comes through the action of the servant, which means the judgment is focused in a different direction, away from the servant, although the servant also reveals that God’s judgment is just by how he treats Israel in Isa 42:1–9. In Isa 41 God judges, yet there is no vindication of God to show him to be right in his approach. Thus, this theme reveals that the servant in each passage is different. Structural Parallels Isaiah 42:1–9 is divided into two parts: vv. 1–4 reveal the call of the servant and vv. 5–9 exhibit the mission of the servant. Isaiah 41:8– 9, even if expanded to include vv. 5–10, does not demonstrate the call of that servant. Additionally, the structure of Isa 41 reveals a contrast between Israel mentioned in vv. 8 and 9 and the previous verses because of the use of the disjunctive waw beginning in v. 8. 88 The first seven verses appear to suggest a judgment (‫יַ ְח ָדּו ַל ִמּ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ‫( )נִ ְק ָר ָבה‬v. 1) in which the nations are judged and Israel is remembered as the covenantal people and therefore protected (vv. 8–9). See Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 159. 88

206

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The servant is contrasted with the craftsman and idols of the previous verse (v. 7), but not in the sense that Israel has sinned; however, the same concept appears in later verses where Israel is described as worshiping idols. In Isa 42 the servant is contrasted with the idols in the previous verses (Isa 41:22–29). The servant of Isa 42 is one who saves and who does not act like those idols. The following verses (Isa 42:5–9) then reveal that the servant is divine and is used by God to save his people Israel. Again, the structure of Isa 41:8–9 does not show sufficient similarities with Isa 42:1–9 in their respective servant’s development.

COMPARING THE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 WITH THE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 42:16–25

The word ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬occurs in both Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 42:19, leading some scholars to conclude that these passages must refer to the same servant. However, just because the term ‘servant’ is found in a particular passage does not mean that it refers to the same servant as a previous passage. Surrounding words, context, and themes help to unveil the true nature and identity of the servant— individual or corporate. Linguistic Parallels Many words in Isa 42:16–25 are also found in Isa 42:1–9. These terms in Isa 42:16–25 include ‫‘ ִﬠוֵּ ר‬blind’ (5 times in vv. 16, 18–19), �‫‘ ַמ ְח ָשׁ‬dark place’, ‫‘ אוֹר‬light’, and ‫‘ ָפּ ֶסל‬graven image’ (vv. 16–17). As in Isa 42:5–8, these particular words reveal the state of the people; because of their condition, God wants to bring changes to their lives (42:16–17). From vv. 18 and onward, the people’s condition is openly revealed by questions and key words that describe their sinful state. The imperative verbs in v. 18 suggest paying atִ because they tention to those who are deaf (‫ ) ֶח ֶרשׁ‬and blind (‫)ﬠוֵּ ר‬ cannot hear or see. The next verse reveals who is deaf and blind— the servant (‫)ﬠ ֶבד‬ ֶ (v. 19). See table 20.

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 207 Table 20. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 42:16–25 Isaiah 42:1–9

Isaiah 42:16–25

‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’ v. 1

‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’ v. 19

‫‘ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in righteousness’ v. 6

‫‘ ִצ ְדקוֹ‬his righteousness’ v. 21

‫תּוֹרה‬ ָ ‘law’ v. 4 ‫‘ אוֹר‬light’ v. 6

‫‘ ִﬠוְ רוֹת‬blind’ v. 7 �‫‘ ח ֶֹשׁ‬dark’ v. 7

‫‘ ֶכּ ֶלא‬prison’ v. 7

‫‘ ְפּ ִס ִילים‬graven images’ v. 8

‫תּוֹרה‬ ָ ‘law’ v. 21

‫‘ אוֹר‬light’ v. 16

‫‘ ִﬠוְ רוֹת‬blind’ vv. 16, 18–19 �‫‘ ַמ ְח ָשׁ‬darkness’ v. 16 ‫‘ ְכ ָל ִאים‬prisons’ v. 22

‫‘ ָפּ ֶסל‬graven image’ v. 17

Synonym ‫‘ ַמ ֵסּ ָכה‬cast image’ v. 17

It is noteworthy that, in the description that is given of the ‘servant’ in v. 19, the question ‫‘ ִמי ִﬠוֵּ ר‬who is blind?’ is followed by a positive ַ ‫‘ ִכּי ִא‬verily/indeed oath clause 89 in the form of an answer ‫ם־ﬠ ְב ִדּי‬ my servant’. The servant is not only blind but also ‘deaf’ (‫)ח ֵרשׁ‬, ֵ as the next word suggests. As if the description of the servant in the first half of the verse was not enough, the description is repeated in a second question: ‫‘ ִמי ִﬠוֵּ ר ִכּ ְמ ֻשׁ ָלּם וְ ִﬠוֵּ ר ְכּ ֶﬠ ֶבד יְ הוָ ה‬Who is blind as a peace maker 90 and blind as the servant of the Lord?’ It is as though the author wants to ensure that his audience knows that he is talking about the servant. The servant’s blindness and deafness reveal the servant’s spiritual deficiency (Isa 42:20; also Isa 6:9–10; 29:18; 35:5; 43:8; 56:10; 59:10). The author clearly discloses that the servSee Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’כּי‬, ִ HALOT 2:470. The textual meaning of ‫ ְמ ֻשׁ ָלּם‬is uncertain; thus, it is hard to translate with its correct meaning. 89 90

208

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

ant is Jacob (‫ )יַ ֲﬠקֹב‬and Israel (‫( )יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל‬Isa 42:24), and‫ זוּ ָח ָטאנוּ לוֹ‬, ‘whom we have sinned against’ (v. 24) is God; ‫ זוּ‬is a relative particle and ‫ לוֹ‬a third masculine singular pronominal suffix, both referring back to God (‫)יְ הוָ ה‬. Two more such words found in both passages are ‫‘ ֶצ ֶדק‬righteousness’ and ‫תּוֹרה‬ ָ ‘law’ (v. 21). These words are attributed to God and do not have any direct relation to the servant; instead, they reveal how God brings the ‘servant’ into alignment with his ‘law’ in which he delights. In Isa 42:6 the righteousness is attributed to the servant whom God calls, but in Isa 42:21 the righteousness also belongs to God, with the third masculine singular pronominal suffix ‫וֹ‬, meaning ‘his’ righteousness and not the servant’s. Thus, according to the language used to describe the servant, the servant of Isa 42:19 does not refer to a messianic servant of the Lord. The last parallel word is ‫‘ ֶכּ ֶלא‬prison’ in Isa 42:7 and ‫ְכ ָל ִאים‬ ‘prisons’ in Isa 42:22. In Isa 42:7 the servant frees Israel from the ‘prison’, while in Isa 42:22 Israel as the servant is in a hidden ‘prison’. This would suggest a contrast between these two passages regarding the servant’s place in the prison. In Isa 42:7 the servant delivers the people, suggesting that he is outside of the prison, while in Isa 42:22 Israel represented as the servant is hidden inside the prison. Thematic Parallel: Judgment The primary theme of judgment is found in both Isa 42:18–25 and Isa 42:1–9. In both cases, the judgment falls on the people of God. In Isa 42:1–9, the people of God are judged by the servant’s ministry because of their idolatrous acts in Isa 41:22–29. In Isa 42:18–25, God judges the servant—Israel—also for its idolatrous action. Hence, in the first servant poem, the servant judges (‫)מ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ִ Israel, while in Isa 42:18–25, the servant—Israel—is judged by God (v. 24). These passages refer to two different servants: One is the messianic servant (42:1–9) while the other is the Israelite servant (42:18–25). If the servants in these passages were identical, how could the servant both receive judgment and give judgment? It is impossible, particularly if the servant is Israel. Thus, the servant’s identity in these two scenarios is different, and these passages cannot be placed at the same level.

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 209 Structural Parallels Scholars see Isa 42:19 as belonging to the pericope of vv. 16–25. 91 In these verses, the servant is not called nor does he have a mission. In other words, this pericope does not have the same twopart structure as Isa 42:1–9—the call of the servant and his mission. The structure of Isa 42:18–25 can be divided into two parts: vv. 18–21, in which the Lord proclaims the servant’s blindness and deafness, and vv. 22–25 containing the Lord’s judgment on his idolatrous people. 92 Alternatively, Smith suggests a slightly different division: vv. 18–22 ‘Who was the blind servant that was plundered?’ and vv. 23–25 ‘Why did the servant receive God’s anger?’ 93 In summary, it does not matter how Isa 42:18–25 is divided; it contains no structure that parallels Isa 42:1–9, and this difference suggests that the passages refer to different servants.

COMPARING THE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 WITH THE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 45:1–8

The last passage containing the word ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬in comparison to Isa 42:1–9 is Isa 45:1–8. As with the previous two passages, this passage will be compared linguistically, thematically, and structurally. Isaiah 45 is an important text, often seen as the answer to the identity of the servant in Isa 42:1–9, with the usual identification being Cyrus or Israel. Linguistic Parallels The term ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬is used only in Isa 45:4 in apposition to the name Jacob. (See table 21.) The second term used in reference to the Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 148–149; Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40–55, 178–179; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 326–327; Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 130; Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 198–199; Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 184; Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 108–109. 92 See Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 285–287. 93 Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 184. 91

210

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

servant of Isa 42:1 and Israel in Isa 45:4 is ‫‘ ָבּ ִחיר‬chosen’, here used in apposition to Israel. In Isa 42:1, ‫ ָבּ ִחיר‬is not used as an apposition; instead, it applies to the servant, meaning that this servant is set apart from other servants. Moreover, the servant of Isa 45:4 is mentioned to demonstrate that he is delivered from the Babylonians’ hand by Cyrus. In Isa 42:1 the servant is doing the delivering instead of being delivered (see vv. 6–7). The next clause, �‫א ְק ָרא ְל� ִבּ ְשׁ ֶמ‬, ֶ ‘I called you by your name’ (Isa 45:4), points back to Cyrus (v. 1), with the preposition ‫ְל ַמ ַﬠן‬ ‘because of, in order to, for the sake of’ (v. 4) revealing why Cyrus was called—’for the sake of Jacob my servant, Israel my chosen’. Hence, the servant in v. 4 would not point to Cyrus but to God’s people. Yet, Cyrus is ‘called’ (‫)קרא‬, as was the servant in Isa 42:1, which could serve as a link between these passages. Furthermore, in the same clause, Cyrus is not only called, but he is called by ‘name’ (‫)שׁם‬, ֵ suggesting that he is known and predicted by God (45:4). Also, the servant is ‘named’ (‫)שׁם‬ ֵ in receiving God’s name for his faithfulness (Isa 42:8), not only as being predicted but also because of his nature and actions. It is noteworthy that the servant of Isa 42 is ‘called in righteousness’ (‫אתי� ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬ ִ ‫)ק ָר‬, ְ while Cyrus is never called in righteousness, but only by name for the purpose of physically delivering Israel. The servant in Isa 42 delivers both physically and spiritually (see v. 7), which Cyrus cannot do. Therefore, the passages differentiate the servants. Additionally, while the servant is given for a covenant to the people and as a light for the nations in Isa 42:6, Cyrus is called only ‘to loose the loins of kings’ (‫( ) ָמ ְתנֵ י ְמ ָל ִכי ֲא ַפ ֵתּ ַח‬45:1). Also, the author specifies that God goes ahead of Cyrus, as though Cyrus is only a tool in the hands of God (vv. 2–3); 94 this is particularly apparent in the clause ‫�הי יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל‬ ֵ ‫קּוֹרא ְב ִשׁ ְמ� ֱא‬ ֵ ‫י־אנִ י יְ הוָ ה ַה‬ ֲ ‫ ֵתּ ַדע ִכּ‬, ‘you know that I am the Lord who called you by your name, the Lord of Israel’ (v. 3). On the other hand, the servant in Isa 42 is See Randall Heskett where he argues that Cyrus cannot be a messianic figure, but rather he is used as were the Assyrians and Babylonians. Randall Heskett, Messianism Within the Scriptural Scroll of Isaiah (OTS 456; New York: T&T Clark, 2007), 15–37. 94

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 211 portrayed as equal with God in his mission (42:1, 8) by the use of ִ , ‫בוֹדי‬ ִ ‫ ְכ‬, and ‫ ְת ִה ָלּ ִתי‬. 95 the terms ‫רוּחי‬ 59F

Table 21. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 45:1–8 Isaiah 42:1–9

Isaiah 45:1–8

‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’ v. 1

‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’ v. 4

‫‘ יִ ְשׁבּוֹר‬he will break’ v. 3

‫‘ ֲא ַשׁ ֵבּר‬I break’ v. 2

‫‘ ְבּ ִח ִירי‬my chosen’ v. 1 ‫בּוֹרא‬ ֵ ‘created’ v. 5

‫‘ ָשׁ ַמיִם‬heaven’ v. 5

‫אַחזֵ ק‬ ְ ‘I will uphold’ v. 6

‫‘ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in righteousness’ v. 6 ‫אתי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְק ָר‬I called’ v. 6 ‫‘ אוֹר‬light’ v. 6

‫‘ ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה‬I am the LORD’ vv. 6, 8 ‫‘ ִל ְפקֹ ַח‬to open’ v. 7

�‫‘ ח ֶֹשׁ‬dark’ v. 7 ‫‘ ֵשׁם‬name’ v. 8

‫‘ ִתּ ְצ ַמ ְחנָ ה‬they will sprout’ v. 9 95

See also ch. 2 of this work.

‫‘ ְבּ ִח ִירי‬my chosen’ v. 4 ‫אתי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְבּ ָר‬I have created’ vv. 7, 8 ‫‘ ָשׁ ַמיִם‬heaven’ v. 8

‫‘ ֶה ֱחזַ ְק ִתּי‬I uphold’ v. 1

‫‘ ֶצ ֶדק‬righteousness’ v. 8 ‫‘ ֶא ְק ָרא‬I called’ v. 4 ‫‘ אוֹר‬light’ v. 7

‫‘ ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה‬I am the LORD’ vv. 5, 6, 8

‫תּ ַח‬ ֹ ‫‘ ֲא ַפ ֵתּ ַח ִל ְפ‬I open’ and ‘to open’ v. 1 �‫‘ ח ֶֹשׁ‬dark’ vv. 3, 7 ‫‘ ֵשׁם‬name’ vv. 3, 4

‫‘ ַת ְצ ִמי ַח‬she springs up’ v. 8

212

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Lastly, if the author of the book of Isaiah had written only chs 40– 48, Cyrus could have been the most prominent personage in Isa 42:1–9. However, the author included three other poems in chs 49–55, thus turning the focus away from Cyrus, since these poems have more in common with Isa 42:1–9. This makes recognition of a greater alignment of the author’s intentions with these three other poems the soundest course. 96 Thematic Parallels Judgment/Salvation theme The only aspect of judgment that emerges from Isa 45:1–8 is that God uses Cyrus as a rod against Babylon (see 10:5). Cyrus brings judgment to foreign nations (v. 1), not to Israel at all, while in the first servant poem judgment is first brought to Israel and then to the other nations (v. 1). 97 God uses Cyrus to bring judgment upon other nations because of how these nations mistreated Israel (45:1– 8), while the servant of God brings judgment on Israel as well as the other nations because they have acted unfaithfully toward God (41:22–29; also 13–23). However, in both of these passages, the judgment reveals the sovereignty of God. In addition to judgment, both texts also exhibit a salvation theme. In Isa 42:6–7 the servant brings salvation and healing to people—also seen in Isa 45:8 where Cyrus delivers Israel from the hands of their enemies, with Israel portrayed by the image of fertile earth ‫יִ ְפרוּ־יֶ ַשׁע‬, ‘let it bear fruit of salvation’ dripping from heaven.

John H. Eaton, Festal Drama in Deutero-Isaiah (London: SPCK, 1979), 98. 97 I deal with the judgment aspect as being both positive and negative on pp. 278–280. Also, Isa 41:21–29 portrays a court scene, which suggests ‘judgment’; see pp. 91–93. 96

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 213 Creation theme Finally, since these passages demonstrate the sovereignty of God, they both include the image of God as Creator (Isa 42:5; 45:7–8). This image returns the audience to Gen 1. However, there is a difference between the two passages. The Creator revealed in Isa 42:5 has power and is able to stretch out the heavens and the earth, giving breath to people and portraying God as worthy to be trusted in the mode of salvation. Isaiah 45:7–8 gives the impression that God is being compared to other nations’ gods of light and darkness (v. 7); however, this is disputable and is better connected to the realm of history where God created each day and night in Gen 1. 98 Verse 8, using the terms ‫ ַה ְר ִﬠיפוּ‬and ‫תּ ְפ ַתּח‬,ִ reveals God as the one who is involved through Cyrus to bring salvation to the whole earth. Smith observes that ‘God’s desire and will is that the heaven and the clouds should shower down righteousness on the earth like rain, that the earth should “open wide” and produce salvation and righteousness (55:10).’ 99 Hence, these passages do convey the same aspect of how God is involved in saving people. 59F

Spirit-led theme Both the servant of Isa 42 and Cyrus receive the Spirit of God. While the terminology is different in each passage, the idea is definitely the same. The servant receives the Spirit (‫ )רוּ ַח‬of God (Isa 42:1) for the purpose of performing his ministry (vv. 2–3). It is essential for the servant to be guided by the Spirit and not doing his own will. On the other hand, Cyrus is ‘anointed’ (‫ ) ָמ ִשׁי ַח‬100 by God for the purpose of accomplishing his mission—to deliver Israel out of Babylon. In any case, both of them receive something special to accomplish a God-given mission. These similarities alone do not justify the conclusion that the servant in Isa 42 and Cyrus are the same person; instead, Isaiah reveals that judgment and salvation have different dimensions. God 60F

See Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 257–258. Ibid., 258–259. 100 See pp. 257–262 where I discuss the Spirit and the anointing of kings. 98 99

214

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

sometimes brings judgment by himself (for example, Gen 6) and sometimes he uses other people and events (see Ezek 23). This is also seen with the concept of salvation (see Ex 12; Gen 3:15). Cyrus was only a deliverer commissioned at one point of time, while the servant of Isa 42 is a savior that delivers not just physically, but spiritually in a more future, distant time. However, Cyrus also fulfills some characteristics of the first servant poem as a typological fulfillment. 101 Thus, a contrast is revealed between the concept of unconditional prophecy—not based upon human decisions—and predictions that are not based on covenantal relationship, such as Cyrus (44:28; 45:1–6) or the destruction of Assyria (10:12–19) founded on divine sovereignty. 102 Structural Parallels Isaiah 45:1–8 is normally considered as a pericope 103 but it lacks a two-part structure like the one in Isa 42:1–9. If the author wanted While Cyrus may not be the primary fulfillment of Isa 42:1–9, Cyrus still is a candidate for the fulfillment of that servant. For a similar parallel, Noah is patterned as a typological fulfillment after the first Adam; Noah has the same commission as the first Adam (Gen 1:28; Gen 9:1–2, 7). Yet, it is also clear that Noah, in all his accomplishments, does not prefigure the first Adam perfectly (Gen 1:26–28; 2:15–17). Thus, ‘God’s commission to Adam remained unfulfilled even in the semi-typological fulfillment in Noah, so that both the first Adam and Noah, as a secondary Adamic figure, pointed to another Adam to come, who would finally fulfill the commission.’ Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 16; see also W. A. Gage, The Gospel of Genesis: Studies in Protology and Eschatology (Winona Lake, Ind.: Carpenter Books, 1984), 3–72. 102 See Richard M. Davidson, ‘Biblical Principles for Interpreting Old Testament Classical Prophecy’, in Prophetic Principles: Crucial Exegetical, Theological, Historical and Practical Insights (ed. Ron du Preez; Berrien Springs, Mich.: LithoTech, 2007), 10. 103 See Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 221–231; Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40–55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, 245–250; Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40– 55, 261–275; Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 379–385; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 101

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 215 to communicate a messianic concept with Isa 45:1–8, he would likely have followed the same pattern that he used with all of the servant poems and other messianic passages in Isa 40–66. 104 This reinforces the assessment that Isa 45 is not primarily a messianic profile, but rather only identifies a warrior who delivers Israel from physical bondage.

OTHER SERVANT PASSAGES IN ISAIAH 40–55

The theology of the first servant poem, as pointed out in table 22 with the seven occurrences of servant passages between Isa 40–55, reveals few similarities and many differences. The table considers only the servant passages that were not dealt with in the previous chapters of this work, and the terms compared are located only in the particular passages where the term ‘servant’ is found. The purpose here is not to exegete each passage but rather to compare and conclude with theological observations.

INDIVIDUAL SERVANT OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 VS. CORPORATE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 43:10

Isaiah 43:10 and the first servant poem have two similar terms ‫ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬ ‘chosen/choose’ that could suggest ‘my servant’ and ‫בּ ִחיר‬/‫בחר‬ ָ correlation between these two passages. Both these terms ‘servant’ and ‘chosen/choose’ are words of election. In Isa 43:10 the parallel between ‘my witnesses’ and ‘my servant’ is significant, since each one enlightens the other with meaning. The suggestion here is that the servant should represent God in both lifestyle and behavior. 105 This idea is also found in the term ‘chosen’ people, suggesting that Israel should know by personal experience that the Lord is God. 106 605F

60F

356–360; Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 199–206; Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 251–259. 104 See the upcoming discussion on Isa 61 and 63 and their structures. 105 See Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 146. 106 See ibid.

216

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The differences between these passages are ‫אַתּם ֵﬠ ַדי‬ ֶ ‘you are my witnesses’ or ‫‘ ֵתּ ְדעוּ‬you may know’ second masculine plural pronoun (Isa 43:10); in Isa 42:1–8 the person is third masculine singular ‫ו‬. The difference in person and number suggests that the servants in Isa 42:1 and 43:10 are different because the second masculine plural pronoun suggests a collective body of people, while the third masculine singular suggests a single person. Furthermore, the clauses ‫‘ ֵתּ ְדעוּ וְ ַת ֲא ִמינוּ ִלי וְ ָת ִבינוּ‬you may know and you may believe me, and you may understand’ suggest that the servant of Isa 43:10 had some growth to do in relation to God. The servant of Isa 42:1–9 appears, by the tone of the passage, to already know, believe, and understand God, since he is called in righteousness (v. 6), the Spirit of God is upon him (v. 1), he does what is asked of him (vv. 2–4), and he is a mediator between God and the people whom he delivers (vv. 6–7).

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 217 Table 22. Similarities and Differences between the Servant of Isaiah 42:1–9 and Occurrences of the Term ‘Servant’ in Isaiah 40–55 Isaiah 42:1–9

Similarities

Differences

Isa 42:1

‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’; ‫בּ ִחיר‬/‫בחר‬ ָ ‘chosen/choose’

Isa 42:1

‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’; ‫בּ ִחיר‬/‫בחר‬ ָ ‘chosen/choose’

‫אַתּם ֵﬠ ַדי‬ ֶ ‘you are my witnesses’ or ‫‘ ֵתּ ְדעוּ‬you may know’ Plural pronoun (Isa 43:10); in Isa 42:1–8 the person is third masculine singular ‫ו‬.

Isa 42:1–8 uses third person masculine singular ‫ו‬, while Isa 44:1–2 uses second person masculine singular �. Isa 42 does not use the terms ‫ יַ ֲﬠקֹב‬and ‫ישׁרוּן‬ ֻ i while Isa 44:1–2 does.

Isa 44:2 the term ‫אַל־תּ ָירא‬ ִ ‘fear not’ is not found in Isa 42:1–9. Isa 44:2 the terms �‫י ֶֹצ ְר‬ ‫‘ ִמ ֶבּ ֶטן‬I formed you from the womb’ are not found in Isa 42:1–9.

Isa 42:1 ‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‘my Spirit upon him’ is not found in Isa 44:1–2. Isa 42:1, 3–4 the term ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬justice’ is not found in Isa 44:1–2.

Occurrences of the Term ‘Servant’ in Isaiah 40–55 Isa 43:10

Isa 44:1–2

218

Isaiah 42:1–9

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Similarities

Differences Isa 42:6 ‫אתי� ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬ ִ ‫‘ ְק ָר‬I called you in righteousness’ is not found in Isa 44:1–2.

Occurrences of the Term ‘Servant’ in Isaiah 40–55

Isa 42:6 � ְ‫וְ ֶא ָצּ ְר� וְ ֶא ֶתּנ‬ ‫‘ ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִ ם‬and I will give you for covenant of people, for a light of nations’ is not found in Isa 44:1–2.

Isa 42:1– 9

‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’ is used in both passages

Isa 42:7 ‫הוֹציא‬ ִ ‫ִל ְפק ַֹ� ֵﬠינַ יִ ם ִﬠוְ רוֹת ְל‬ ‫אַסּיר ִמ ֵבּית ֶכּ ֶלא‬ ִ ‫ִמ ַמּ ְסגֵּ ר‬ �‫‘ י ְֹשׁ ֵבי ח ֶֹשׁ‬to open the eyes of the blind, to bring out the prisoners from prison, those that sit in darkness from the house of prison’ is not found in Isa 44:1–2. Isa 44:21 ‫יַ ֲﬠקֹב וְ יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל‬ ‘Jacob and Israel’ is used while in Isa 42:1–9 it is not used.

Isa 42:1–8 uses third person masculine singular ‫ו‬, while Isa 44:21 uses second person masculine singular �.

Isa 44:21 �‫‘ יְ ַצ ְר ִתּי‬I formed you’ is not found in Isa 42:1–9.

Isa 44:21 (2x)

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 219

Isaiah 42:1–9

Similarities

Isa 42:1– 9

Differences Isa 44:26 ‫‘ ַﬠ ְבדּוֹ‬his servant’ while Isa 42:1 is ‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’.

Occurrences of the Term ‘Servant’ in Isaiah 40–55 Isa 44:26

Isa 44:26 ‫אָכיו‬ ָ ‫‘ ַמ ְל‬his messengers’ is not found in Isa 42:1–9.

Isa 42:1 ‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‘my Spirit upon him’ is not found in Isa 44:26.

Isa 42:1 Isa 42:2

‫‘ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬servant’ ‫‘ קוֹל‬voice’

Isa 42:1 ‫‘ ְבּ ִח ִירי‬my chosen’ is not found in Isa 44:26. Isa 48:20 ‫‘ ַﬠ ְבדּוֹ יַ ֲﬠקֹב‬his servant Jacob’ is not found in Isa 42:1.

Isa 48:20 ‫‘ גָּ אַל יְ הוָ ה‬the LORD has redeemed’ is not found in Isa 42:1–9.

Isa 48:20 ‫ְצאוּ ִמ ָבּ ֶבל ִבּ ְרחוּ‬ ‫‘ ִמ ַכּ ְשׂ ִדּים‬go out from Babylon, flee from Chaldeans’.

Isa 42:1 ‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‘my Spirit upon him’ is not found in Isa 48:20. Isa 42:1 ‫‘ ְבּ ִח ִירי‬my chosen’ is not found in Isa 48:20.

Isa 48:20

220

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Isaiah 42:1–9

Isa 42:1, 3–4

Similarities ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’

‫‘ ְצ ָד ָקה‬righteousness’

Differences ‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ֵדי יְ הוָ ה‬servants of the Lord’.

Occurrences of the Term ‘Servant’ in Isaiah 40–55 Isa 54:17

However, in Isa 54:17 the term ‫‘ ִצ ְד ָק ָתם‬their righteousness’ is different from Isa 42:6 ‫‘ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in righteousness’.

Isa 42:1 ‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‘my Spirit upon him’ is not found in Isa 54:17. Isa 42:1 ‫‘ ְבּ ִח ִירי‬my chosen’ is not found in Isa 54:17.

Isa 42:1–8 uses third person masculine singular ‫ו‬, while Isa 54:17 uses second person feminine singular �.

‫ישׁרוּן‬ ֻ ‘Jeshurun’ is another term for ‘Israel’ (see Deut 32:15; 33:5-26). It may have to do with straightness or uprightness if it comes from the root ‫ישׁר‬. The LXX translates ‘Jeshurun’ as ‘beloved Israel’.

i

INDIVIDUAL SERVANT OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 VS. CORPORATE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 44:1, 2

The similarities between these passages, ‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’ and ‫ ָבּחִיר‬/‫‘ בחר‬chosen/choose’, again reveal words of election. Even though they have rejected him, in Isa 44:1–2 God still looks favorably on Israel as his precious people. 107 The phrase ‘fear not’ re607F

107

See ibid., 165.

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 221 veals God’s care and protection toward Israel. While the same terms are found in Isa 42:1, the servant is elected to bring about God’s will in his calling and mission toward Israel. The servant’s purpose is different between these passages: In Isa 42 the servant brings deliverance, while in Isa 44 the servant is being delivered. The differences further reveal what the similarities have demonstrated. The terms ‘Jacob, Israel and Jeshurun’ in Isa 44:1–2 are not found in Isa 42:1–9, thus clarifying the identity of the servant in Isa 44:1, 2. Isaiah 42:1–8 uses third person masculine singular ‫ ו‬to describe the servant, while Isa 44:1–2 uses second person masculine singular �. These differences are amplified by the fact that the servant of Isa 42:1 receives the ‘Spirit’ while the servant of Isa 44:1, 2 does not. The servant of Isa 44:2 is ‘made’ and ‘formed from the womb’ by God, but the servant of Isa 42 appears to already exist, since no indication is given of where he comes from. The servant of Isa 42 brings ‘justice’ and he is ‘called in righteousness’. He is given ‘for a covenant of people and a light of Gentiles’. He even delivers people from ‘prisons’ and ‘open[s] blind eyes’, which the servant of Isa 44:1–2 does not do. Thus, these differences suggest an individual servant (Isa 42:1–9) and a corporate servant (Isa 44:1–2).

INDIVIDUAL SERVANT OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 VS. CORPORATE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 44:21

The similarity between these passages is limited to only one word, ‫‘ ַﬠ ְב ִדּי‬my servant’. From the beginning of the chapter (Isa 44), the servant is elected by God to be redeemed. ‘My servant’ is used twice for emphasis. The differences lead the same way as seen in the earlier part of ch. 44. The terms ‫‘ יַ ֲﬠקֹב וְ יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל‬Jacob and Israel’ used in Isa 44:21 are not used in Isa 42:1–9 to describe the servant. In 44:2, the servant is ‘formed’, while the servant of Isa 42:1–9 is not formed. Isaiah 42:1–8 uses third person masculine singular ‫‘ ו‬him/his’, while Isa 44:21 uses second person masculine singular � ‘you’ in addressing the servant. In Isa 44:21 ‘you’ is used as a direct object referring back to ‘Jacob and Israel’ as a corporate people, while in Isa 42:1–8 the third masculine singular pronoun suggests a singularity of a person. Again, Isa 44:21 reveals a contrast of individual, of person, or group of persons with Isa 42:1–9.

222

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

INDIVIDUAL SERVANT OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 VS. CORPORATE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 44:26

In the same chapter of Isa 44, Isa 44:26 again contains one term that is similar to Isa 42:1–9, ‫‘ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬servant’, although the possessive is different. In Isa 44:26 the possessive is third masculine singular (‫)ﬠ ְבדּוֹ‬, ַ while in Isa 42:1 the possessive is first common singular (‫)ﬠ ְב ִדּי‬. ַ In Isa 44:26 the term ‫אָכיו‬ ָ ‫‘ ַמ ְל‬his messengers’ reveals a parallel to the word ‘his servant’. 108 The term �‫‘ ַמ ְלאַ‬messenger’ can be synonymous with ‫‘ נָ ִביא‬prophet’ (see Hag 1:13 with Hag 1:3; Mal 3:1). Scholars are divided concerning the identity of the ‘servant’ because of different manuscripts and the use of the term ‘messengers’. Oswalt takes the ‘servant’ in Isa 44:26 to refer to the prophet himself and ‘messengers’ to refer to the true prophets of God. 109 J. Muilenburg takes the view that the ‘servant’ is Israel. 110 J. Koole takes the position that the ‘servant’ can be the ‘Servant of the Lord’ mentioned in Isa 42:1. 111 And G. Smith acknowledges the ambiguity of the text yet takes the position of the servant being God’s prophets. 112 Furthermore, in Isa 42:1 the servant receives the ‘Spirit’ and he is ‘chosen,’ while in Isa 44:26 there is no indication of the servant being chosen or receiving the spirit of God. Therefore, the preferable conclusion for Isa 44 is that the servant is corporate, while the servant of Isa 42:1–9 is individual. 609F

610F

61F

612F

See Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, 216. Oswalt points out, regarding the term ‘servant’ in Isa 44:26, the following: ‘LXX Codex Alexandrinus and Targ. read pl., “servants”, which BHS recommends and several modern versions adopt (cf. REB, NIV, CBAT, etc.). But the spelling is such that the error could have gone either way (‫ יו‬or ‫)ו‬, and MT is the harder reading: “servant” does not exactly parallel “messengers”. In addition, it is likely that the prophet has himself in mind as the servant and the rest of the prophets as the messengers. Thus I retain the sg. with NRSV and JPSV.’ Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 190 n. 80. 109 Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 194. 110 Muilenburg, The Book of Isaiah, 518. 111 Jan L. Koole, Isaiah III (HCOT; Leuven: Peeters, 1998), 421. 112 Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 249. 108

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 223

INDIVIDUAL SERVANT OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 VS. CORPORATE SERVANT OF ISAIAH 48:20

The similarities between these passages are found in two words, ‫‘ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬servant’ and ‫‘ קוֹל‬voice’. Both Isa 42:1 and 48:20 demonstrate that there is a servant in place. Regarding the ‘voice,’ the servant of Isa 42:2 reveals that the servant will not lift up ‘his voice’, while in Isa 48:20 the servant is encouraged to leave Babylon with a ‘voice’ of singing. Although these two terms are used in both passages, they give different characteristics to the servant. There are several differences. The term ‘servant’ in Isa 48:20 is described by the term ‘Jacob’, which is not found in Isa 42:1. In Isa 42:2 the servant does not lift up his voice, as a sign of humility, while in Isa 48:20 the servant is to make noise with his ‘voice’. In Isa 48:20 the servant is being ‘redeemed’ (‫ )גָּ אַל‬by ‘God’ (‫)יְ הוָ ה‬, while in Isa 42:1–9 the servant delivers people. The servant of Isa 48:20 does not receive the ‘Spirit’ of God nor is he ‘chosen’ like the servant of Isa 42. The servant of Isa 48:20 comes out of Babylon and Chaldea, which is not the scenario of the servant of Isa 42. Thus, these differences point to two different servants, one being an individual servant (Isa 42:1–9) and the other one a corporate servant (Isa 48:20).

INDIVIDUAL SERVANT OF ISAIAH 42:1–9 VS. PLURAL SERVANTS OF ISAIAH 54:17

Two similar terms are found in these passages: ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’ and ‫‘ ְצ ָד ָקה‬righteousness’. The ‘judgment’ in Isa 54:17 is done by the servants against those who spoke condemnation toward them. In Isa 42:1–4, the ‘judgment’ is also done by the servant against the people of God. The term ‘righteousness’ in Isa 54:17 is applied to the servants but comes from God. The same term is used in v. 14a where it ‘refers to restoration of a right relationship with God’. 113 In Isa 42:6 the servant is called ‘in righteousness’ by God, but there is no indication that the righteousness comes from God. Again, there are several differences. The term ‘servant’ in Isa 54:17 is plural, while in Isa 42:1 it is singular. Furthermore, Isa 613F

113

Ibid., 492. See also Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 431.

224

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

42:1–8 uses third person masculine singular as subject or as personal pronoun ‫ו‬, while Isa 54:17 uses second person feminine singular � in addressing God’s people. The ‘servants’ of Isa 54:17 do not appear to have received the ‘Spirit’ of God like the servant of Isa 42:1 nor do they appear to have been ‘chosen’ for the same task as the servant of Isa 42:1. Thus, the ‘servant’ of Isa 54:17 refers to the plural servants of corporate Israel, while the ‘servant’ of Isa 42:1–9 refers to an individual servant. However, the ‘servants’ of Isa 54:17 introduce the use of the plural term through to the end of the book of Isaiah. The ‘servants’ reveal a change of status or condition because of what the ‘servant’ did for them (see 42:1–9; 49:1–7; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). These servants are now reflecting positive traits of character: the trust and obedience that the servant exhibited. The author demonstrates that the servants are living in harmony with God. A full covenant relationship flows from both parties: God and servants.

INTRATEXTUAL LINKS BETWEEN ISAIAH 42:1–9 AND OTHER MESSIANIC HOPE PASSAGES OUTSIDE OF ISAIAH 40–55

Intratexuality is employed throughout the book of Isaiah; thus, some linkage between the first servant poem and other Isaianic passages is likely. As Walter C. Kaiser Jr. suggests, ‘the promises of God were interrelated and usually connected in a series’, 114 a concept also found in Isaiah. Thus far in this research, Isa 42:1–9 appears to be talking about a deliverer from the Lord who will work on behalf of the Israelites. This deliverer could be considered messianic, a term normally applied in the OT to everything that reveals ‘the hope of a glorious future’. 115 According to J. Alec Motyer, the term ‘messianic hope’ would fall under three messianic portraits: ‘as King (Isa 7:10–15; 9:1–7; 11:1–16; 14:28–32; 24:21–25; 31:1–8; 33:17–24), as Servant (42:1–4; 49:1–6; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12), and as

114 115

Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 28. Ibid., 15.

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 225 anointed Conqueror (55:3–5; 61:1–6; 63:1–6)’. 116 Based on these fifteen passages (and Kaiser adds three more: Isa 4:2; 28:16; 30:19– 26), I will compare the first servant poem with four messianic hope passages not already discussed: Isa 9:1–6 [Eng. 9:2–7]; 11:1–10; 61:1–9; and 63:1–6, two passages on each side of Isa 40–55. Comparing Isaiah 42:1–9 with Isaiah 9:1–6 The pattern found in Isa 7:14, 117 a promise, then an allusion to a son, followed by the completion of the prophecy in later chapters (Isa 9 and 11), appears also to be the pattern of the servant poems in Isa 40–55. First, Isa 42:1–9 promises a servant, a deliverer for Israel, but the details are limited, thus leaving the first servant poem ambiguous. The first servant poem is then separated by several chapters from the last three servant poems, leaving the audience wondering who is the true deliverer. In Isa 45 Cyrus is mentioned, bringing the Isa 42 servant to a partial fulfillment, but in reality the Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 13. See also Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 155. 117 It is vital to note that Isa 9:1–6 and 11:1–10 are the fulfillment of Isa 7:14, which is also a messianic prophecy. Isaiah 7:14 is the beginning of a messianic prophecy that is developed in the next five chapters, revealing the unfolding of the identity of the Messiah or deliverer. Isaiah 7:14 is found in the greater literary structure of Isa 6–12. If Isa 7:14 is the launching messianic prophecy for Isa 9 and 11, this brings an interesting flow of understanding in how Isaiah develops his concept of messianic prophecy and can help us to perhaps see a similar pattern in the servant poems. First, Isa 7:14 does not clearly state who is the deliverer that will come to deliver Israel. Second, between Isa 7:14 and Isa 9:1–6 there is a remarkable allusion to another person in Isa 8 who appears to fulfill the Isa 7:14 prophecy: Isaiah’s son—Mahershalalhashbaz. However, Isaiah has a greater person in mind who will more accurately fulfill Isa 7:14’s prophecy as he continues to develop a more concrete image of the prophecy. Isaiah’s son is only a partial fulfillment of Isa 7:14. The person who fully completes and accomplishes the details of Isa 7:14 is found in both Isa 9:1–6 and 11:1–10. These chapters reveal that the ‘child’ that is promised is the Messiah who will fulfill Isa 7:14 in the future. 116

226

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

author has someone else in mind who will faithfully accomplish the prophecy of Isa 42:1–9. Then, the next three servant poems elaborate on details and make the servant’s call and mission clearer. The last three servant poems, like Isa 9 and 11, demonstrate that the servant is none other than the messianic servant who is yet to come. Linguistic parallels The first parallel these two passages have in common is found in the term ‫מ ְשׁ ָפּט‬. ִ In Isa 42:1, 3–4 this term reveals that the servant brings judgment to God’s people. In Isa 9:6 the same term describes the child’s kingdom that will be established; that kingdom will be upheld with justice. This implies that his government will rule with justice and not with violence. Both passages demonstrate that the servant of the Lord or the child is bringing true justice in his actions. See table 23. The second term ‫ קרא‬also reveals a correlation between these passages. Both the child and the servant are called. In Isa 42:5 the servant is called by God as a sure thing in the past. On the other hand, the child of Isa 9:5 is called in the future: ‘shall be called’. 118 The past and future tenses may reflect a perspective of looking at Isa 42:5 in the eyes of Isa 9:5. The child who is to come is now the servant. The third term ‫ ֶצ ֶדק‬demonstrates both the servant’s and the child’s manner of life. The servant is called in ‘righteousness’, revealing what type of servant he is. The child’s kingdom in Isa 9:6 is founded on the principle of ‘righteousness’, revealing that the child has a righteous appearance, a kingdom based upon the child’s character. Both passages convey the importance of a righteous way of life. 618F

All the verbs in Isa 9:1–6 are in the perfect tense, but the events are manifestly in the future. These perfect verbs are apparently prophetic perfects. See John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1–39 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 242. 118

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 227 Table 23. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 9:1–6 Isaiah 42:1–9

Isaiah 9:1–6

‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’ vv. 1, 3, 4

‫‘ ְבּ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬with judgment’ v. 6

‫‘ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in righteousness’ v. 6

‫‘ ִב ְצ ָד ָקה‬justice’ v. 6

�‫אתי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְק ָר‬I called you’ v. 6 ‫‘ ַﬠם‬people’ v. 6 ‫‘ אוֹר‬light’ v. 6

�‫‘ ח ֶֹשׁ‬dark’ v. 7 ‫‘ ֵשׁם‬name’ v. 8

‫‘ וַ יִּ ְק ָרא‬he will be called’ v. 5 ‫‘ ַﬠם‬people’ v. 1

‫‘ אוֹר‬light’ (2x) v. 1 �‫‘ ח ֶֹשׁ‬dark’ v. 1 ‫‘ ֵשׁם‬name’ v. 5

The fourth parallel is ‫ﬠם‬.ַ In Isa 42:6 the people receive from the servant a covenant, a covenant made between the servant and the people. In Isa 9:1 the description of the people is given with similar wording, ‘darkness’ (�‫ )ח ֶֹשׁ‬and ‘light’ (‫)אוֹר‬, with linguistic parallels that are found in Isa 42:6–7 (�‫ ח ֶֹשׁ‬and ‫ ;)אוֹר‬the people who walked in ‘darkness’ (�‫ )ח ֶֹשׁ‬have seen the ‘light’ (‫( )אוֹר‬9:1). In Isa 42:6–7 the servant brings ‘light’ to the Gentiles and delivers prisoners from ‘darkness’. In both passages the ‘people’ have a changed condition. ‘Darkness’ and ‘light’ are often opposite conditions (spiritual conditions) in the Bible (see 1 John ‘child of darkness’ and ‘child of light’). Also, ‘light’ in the Bible represents God’s presence (see Isa 42:16; 2 Sam 22:29; Job 29:3; Ps 139:11, 12; 1 John 1:5). The last parallel is found in the term ‫שׁם‬. ֵ This particular term brings a vital connection between the first servant poem and Isa 9. In Isa 42:5 this term is related to the name of God, and its context is that God will not give his glory to someone else, but also suggests that God is glorified by what the servant is doing; this could imply that the glory of God can be given to the servant. In Isa 9:5 the ‘name’ comes before a descriptive list of names regarding the child. The child is named ‘Wonderful’, ‘Counselor’, ‘Mighty God’, ‘Everlasting Father’, and ‘Prince of Peace’. Thus, the servant and the child may have much in common regarding the name that they

228

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

represent, which may reveal the divine view of God embodied in both the servant and the child. Thematic parallels The theme of kingship as the basis for the salvation is presented by the parallelism between key elements in Isa 9:1–6 and Isa 42:1–9. God saves people from their condition by giving someone other than Israel. In both of these passages, a group of people that is in ‘darkness’ needs ‘light’ (Isa 42:6–7; 9:1). In Isa 42 the servant is ‘called’ ‘in righteousness’ to bring ‘justice’ to people, and in Isa 9 the child has ‘his name’ ‘called’ and, because of his name, his kingdom is founded on ‘justice’ and ‘righteousness’. 119 The difference between these passages is that the servant in Isa 42 is revealed first as a ruler who brings deliverance to people, while in Isa 9 the people are first portrayed as being in need of deliverance and then the child is revealed as the ruler who will deliver them. Isaiah 42 exhibits this ruler as a positive reality in place, while Isa 9 shows the need of a ruler first. Isaiah 42 conveys a more concrete dimension of the servant and its role as a ruler, while Isa 9 conveys a general aspect of the ruler. The theme of hope is exhibited in these passages through the references to the presence of one who can redeem Israel from the oppression of the enemy. This occurs through a system of analogous images as follows: According to Brevard S. Childs, ‘there has been no attempt made within the chapters of Second Isaiah to identify the servant with any figure in First Isaiah’. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture, 335. He continues by specifying that ‘the editors did not identify the servant with the royal eschatological figure of First Isaiah (9.1 ff.; 11.1ff.;)’. However, as I have demonstrated, both Isa 9 and 11 have a lot more in common with the first servant poem of Isaiah from an exegetical perspective than Childs seems willing to admit. Finally, Childs assumes that the servant of Isa 40–55 represents Israel, and therefore he cannot relate the servant to earlier prophecies in Isaiah. 119

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 229 Isa 42:3, 7

A bruised reed (‫ ) ָקנֶ ה ָרצוּץ‬He will not break (‫)יִ ְשׁבּוֹר‬, and smoking flax (‫)פ ְשׁ ָתּה‬ ִ He will not quench; to bring out prisoners from the prison, those who sit in darkness (�‫ )ח ֶֹשׁ‬from the prison house.

Isa 9:1, 3 [Engl.]

The people who walked in darkness (�‫ …)ח ֶֹשׁ‬the yoke (‫ )עֹל‬of his burden, and the staff (‫)מ ֵטּה‬ ַ of his shoulder, the rod (‫)שׁ ֶבט‬ ֵ of his oppressor, for you have broken (‫)ה ִחתּ ָֹת‬ ַ …

These words in Isa 42 are not particular themes per se; instead they echo the expressions in Isa 9. These images may have been intended to convey a sense of hardship, or even a sense of hopelessness, on the part of God’s people. However, these passages reveal hope by the introduction of a child, a son who will govern, who is equal with God; as Mighty God, he has wisdom and he brings peace (Isa 9:5–6). This is echoed by the similar outcome of the servant of the Lord bringing a covenant and subsequently leading the prisoners out from prison (Isa 42:6–7). Hope is expressed in the person given by God: the child/son and the servant. Hope also demands trust in God who provides his chosen messianic ruler. Structural parallels Although there is no apparent parallel structure between Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 9:1–6, nor within Isa 9:1–6, that would resemble the twopart structure of Isa 42:1–9, there is, however, a structural similarity in the context of these passages. Isaiah 9 is contrasted with the story of Ahaz, who did not believe and trust God to perform a miracle, trusting more in himself (Isa 7). Isaiah 42 is contrasted with the people of Isa 41, who trusted idols more than a God who performs miracles. Comparing Isaiah 42:1–9 with Isaiah 11:1–10 Linguistic parallels Several linguistic connections exist between Isa 42 and Isa 11. The first term is ‫רוּ ַח‬. In Isa 42:1 the servant receives the Spirit of God to set him apart, equipping him and leading him in his calling. In Isa 11:2, 4 the Spirit of God is also gifting the person represented by a ‘shoot’ to receive ‘wisdom and understanding’, ‘counsel and might’, and ‘knowledge and fear of God’. In v. 4 the ‘shoot’ has the

230

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Spirit’s power to kill the wicked. Thus, the Spirit plays an important role in the ministry of both the servant and the ‘shoot’. See table 24. Table 24. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 11:1–10 Isaiah 42:1–9

‫רוּחי‬ ִ ‘my Spirit’ v. 1

‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬justice’ vv. 1, 3, 4 ‫‘ יַ ְשׁ ִמי ַﬠ‬he be heard’ v. 2

‫‘ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in righteousness’ v. 6

Isaiah 11:1–10

‫‘ רוּ ַח‬Spirit’ vv. 2 (3x), 4

‫ יִ ְשׁפּוֹט‬and ‫‘ וְ ָשׁ ַפט‬and he will judge’ vv. 3, 4 ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ַמע‬hearing’ v. 3

‫‘ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in righteousness’ vv. 4, 5

The second parallel is based on the use of words derived from the lexeme ‫‘ שׁפט‬to judge’. In Isa 42:1, 3–4 the servant brings judgment against those who rejected God as their God. In Isa 11:3, 4 the ‘shoot’ comes as a judge, but not based upon his own ability. He will also judge with righteousness (v. 4). In both passages the purpose of judging is to reveal the condition of the people and the condition of God. The servant and the ‘shoot’ bring judgment to demonstrate how God has been with his people and how much the people are in need of his help. The third parallel is the term ‫שׁמע‬. In Isa 42:2 the servant’s voice is not heard in the street; it is as though the servant whispers. Also, it reveals that the servant will not depend upon his own ability to be heard. In Isa 11:3 the ‘shoot’ does not depend upon what he hears; rather he will depend upon God. This term demonstrates on the part of both the servant and the ‘shoot’ a dependence upon God for their ministry. The last parallel is found in the term ‫ב ֶצ ֶדק‬,ְ and both passages reveal that the servant and the ‘shoot’ are surrounded by righteousness in what they do. In Isa 42:6 the servant is called in righteousness, while in Isa 11:4, 5 the ‘shoot’ judges with righteousness (v.

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 231 4); he has a belt of righteousness around his waist, suggesting the capacity to do the right thing and to keep his promises. 120 Thus, both the servant and the ‘shoot’ have righteousness as their principle of behavior. Thematic parallels The messianic hope found in Isa 9:1–6 continues in Isa 11:1–10 and is also apparent in Isa 42:1–4. The first connection to Isa 11 in Isa 42 is found in the anointing of the servant and the branch. In both passages, God places his ‘Spirit’ on the one who will bring hope to the people. The servant, like the branch, receives the ‘Spirit’ as a sign of being set apart to bring justice in righteousness. These two passages reveal how God uses the Davidic king (see Jer 30:9; Ezek 34:23– 24; Hos 3:5) to save the people from their enemies. 121 Isaiah 11 contrasts with ch. 10, where God’s people depend on the strength and wisdom of Assyria while under the yoke of that foreign nation (Isa 10:10–11, 24–27). The context of Isa 42 portrays the same scenario: God’s people depend on the strength and wisdom of idols and therefore are under the yoke of idolatry. Both the branch and the servant are used for God’s purpose to reveal that the chosen of the Lord, not Assyrian kings and idols, will save them. The Spirit of the Lord resting on the branch (although the name of the person is not given until v. 10) 122 reveals a recurring royal theme because of Isa 11:1 (see 2 Sam 7:14). ‘This teaches that God’s spirit speaks and acts through his Anointed One. Anointing (1 Sam 12:13) is intended to impart the gift of the spirit.’ 123 This concept develops throughout the book of Isaiah. In the first servant poem, the author specifies once again that the servant receives the Spirit of the Lord for a special, messianic task. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1–39, 282. Motyer explains, regarding the Davidic kingship: ‘The reference to Jesse indicates that the shoot is not just another king in David’s line but rather another David.’ Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 121. 122 Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 171. 123 Ibid. 120 121

232

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Structural parallels There is no apparent parallel structure between Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 11:1–10 nor within Isa 11:1–10 that would resemble the two-part structure of Isa 42:1–9. Comparing Isaiah 42:1–9 with Isaiah 61:1–9 Linguistic parallels Linguistically, these passages express expansion of the cumulative mission of the servant by demonstrating how he is used to bring this salvation. The servant in Isa 42 is given by God ‫‘ ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬for a covenant to the people’, while in Isa 61, God, being the subject, makes a covenant with the people (‫עוֹלם ֶא ְכרוֹת ָל ֶהם‬ ָ ‫( ) ְב ִרית‬v. 8), linking to God the theme of the salvation which the servant brings. See table 25. Furthermore, the covenant concept is related with the ‘justice’ (‫)מ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ִ context found in both passages. Isaiah 42 uses this word three times in relation to what the servant is doing (vv. 1, 3, 4), while God is portrayed in Isa 61 to ‘love justice’ (‫( )א ֵֹהב ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬v. 8), signifying a close connection between covenant and the justice in which the servant is engaged in the first servant poem. These passages are connected by an important term, ‫רוּ ַח‬. The Spirit of God called and equipped the servant of Isa 42; and the same ‘Spirit’ of God is upon the individual of Isa 61:1 for the purpose of anointing (‫ ) ָמ ַשׁח יְ הוָ ה‬him to preach to the meek and broken-hearted. This ‫ רוּ ַח‬is the same one who, in turn, helps to clarify Isa 42:1 in that the Spirit of God was not only placed on the servant but, according to Isa 61:1, the Spirit also ‘anointed’. This means that the Spirit in these two passages gives power to bring ‫ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ and ‫ ֶצ ֶדק‬on the earth (see Isa 11:2; 32:15–16; 44:3; 48:16; 59:21). 124 The same term (‫ )רוּ ַח‬is used a second time in Isa 61:3, but this time it refers to the ‘spirit of heaviness’ of the people.

124

Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 564.

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 233 Table 25. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 61:1–9 Isaiah 42:1–9

‫רוּחי‬ ִ ‘my spirit’ vv. 1, 5

Isaiah 61:1–9

‫‘ רוּ ַח‬spirit’ vv. 1, 3

‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’ vv. 1, 3, 4

‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’ v. 8

‫‘ יִ ְשׁבּוֹר‬he will break’ v. 3

‫‘ ְלנִ ְשׁ ְבּ ֵרי‬to the broken’ v. 1

‫‘ גּוֹיִ ם‬nations’ vv. 1, 6 ‫‘ ֱא ֶמת‬truth’ v. 3

‫‘ ֶצ ֱא ָצא‬offspring’ v. 5

‫‘ ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה‬I am the LORD’ vv. 6, 8 ‫‘ ֶצ ֶדק‬righteousness’ v. 6 ‫אתי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְק ָר‬I called’ v. 6 ‫‘ ָﬠם‬people’ v. 6

‫‘ ְב ִרית‬covenant’ v. 6 ‫אַסּיר‬ ִ ‘prisoner’ v. 7

‫בוֹדי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְכ‬my glory’ v. 8

‫‘ ִראשׁוֹן‬first, former’ v. 9 ‫‘ ֲח ָדשׁוֹת‬new’ v. 9

‫‘ גּוֹיִ ם‬nations’ v. 9

‫‘ ֶבּ ֱא ֶמת‬in truth’ v. 8

‫‘ ֶצ ֱא ָצא‬offspring’ v. 9

‫‘ ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה‬I am the LORD’ v. 8 ‫‘ ֶצ ֶדק‬righteousness’ v. 3 ‫‘ ִל ְקרֹא‬to call’ vv. 1, 2, 3 ‫‘ ַﬠ ִמּים‬people’ v. 9

‫‘ ְב ִרית‬covenant’ v. 8

‫סוּרים‬ ִ ‫‘ ַל ֲא‬prison’ v. 1

Synonym ‫‘ ְל ִה ְת ָפּ ֵאר‬to show one’s glory’ v. 3 ‫‘ ְכבוֹד‬glory’ v. 6

‫‘ ִראשׁוֹן‬first, former’ v. 4 ‫‘ ִח ְדּשׁוּ‬they renew’ v. 4

The similarities continue in terms of what the servant and the anointed are doing. In both passages the term ‫ שׁבר‬is used. In Isa 42:3 the servant will not ‘break’ the reed, while in Isa 61:1 the anointed is sent to bind (‫)ל ֲחבֹשׁ‬ ַ the ‘broken’-hearted. Both passages

234

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

also use the term ‫ ;קרא‬in Isa 42:6 the servant is ‘called’, while in Isa 61:1–3 the same term is used three times. Twice it refers to what the anointed is doing, ‘proclaiming’ (vv. 1–2) liberty and the year of the Lord, and the third time it refers to the people being ‘called’ (v. 3) as trees of righteousness. The third term ‫ אסר‬further elaborates on the reasons for the servant’s and the anointed’s actions. In both Isa 42:7 and 61:1 the ‘prisons’ are opened. The servant and the anointed are to open prisons, both physical and spiritual. The next term has an interesting distinction in how it is applied. In Isa 42:6, ‫ ֶצ ֶדק‬refers to the servant, while in Isa 61:3 it refers to the people. The contrast may suggest that the servant’s righteousness will eventually lead to what the anointed (61:1) is doing for God’s people. Because of the servant’s and the anointed’s tasks of self-denial, the people of God will turn from their selfexaltation and they will live a life of righteousness. 125 For this reason the next term ‫ פאר‬is connected to this one. In both passages, God is glorified. In Isa 42:8 God does not give his ‘glory’ (‫)כּבוֹד‬ ָ to someone else; however, in Isa 61:3 God is glorified by how the people live (see v. 6). The name of the Lord is important in both passages in how the Lord addresses himself as the subject ‫אנִ י יְ הוָ ה‬. ֲ This is the language of self-predication (Isa 61:8). 126 In Isa 42:6, 8 the term ‘I am the Lord’ reveals a sovereign God. A following term also combines these passages and the name of God. In Isa 42:3 ‫ ֱא ֶמת‬is what the servant brings with justice. In Isa 61:8 the name of God (‫)אנִ י יְ הוָ ה‬ ֲ precedes ‘love justice’ and he will give recompense ‘in truth’ (‫)בּ ֱא ֶמת‬. ֶ Thus, ‘justice’ and ‘truth’ are attributes describing God’s task through the servant and the anointed. The term ‘nations’ (‫ )גּוֹיִ ם‬also bridges these passages, referring to people other than the Israelites. What the servant and the See ibid., 567. The self-predication is found in Isaiah from ch. 27 and onward, but especially in chs 41–49. The normal sentence is composed of the first person independent pronoun plus the divine name and is followed by a participle. However, although Isa 42:6, 8 does not follow the same pattern, there is a close connection. 125 126

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 235 anointed do is not limited to God’s people; their task is also known to the surrounding nations. Finally, both passages refer to both ‘former’ and ‘new’, though with different subjects. God reveals in Isa 42:9 the ‘former things’ displaying the sovereignty of God. (‫ ִ)ראשׁוֹן‬and a ‘new thing’ (‫)שׁח ָד‬, ָ In Isa 61:4, these same terms are used, but with the people as the subject. These people are portrayed as rebuilding a new city to replace the old living places that were flattened by the enemy. The contrasts focus on the subject and time; God knows the future, while the people rebuilt what was destroyed in the past. Yet, if the people had listened to God, they would not have had to face a wasted land and rebuild their houses. Thus, the text underscores God’s wisdom related to his plan of salvation. Isa 42:9

Behold, the former things (‫)ה ִראשׁ ֹנוֹת‬ ָ have come to pass, And new things (‫)ח ָדשׁוֹת‬ ֲ I declare; Before they spring forth I tell you of them.

Isa 61:4

And they shall rebuild the old ruins, They shall raise up the former (‫ ִ)ראשׁ ֹנִ ים‬desolations, And they shall repair (…‫ )וְ ִח ְדּשׁוּ‬the ruined cities, The desolations of many generations.

Isaiah 42:5 discloses that God is the Creator of the heavens and the earth, and that offspring (‫יה‬ ָ ‫)צ ֱא ָצ ֶא‬ ֶ come out of the earth, an image that suggests new growth. As I suggested in ch. 2 of this work, in Isa 11 this word may be related to the idea of the shoot coming out. Nevertheless, the author does not abandon this idea, since in Isa 61:3 a similar echo emerges. The phrases ‫ק ָֹרא ָל ֶהם ֵא ֵילי ַה ֶצּ ֶדק‬, ‘they will be called trees of oak’, and ‫מ ַטּע יְ הוָ ה ְל ִה ְת ָפּ ֵאר‬, ַ ‘planted by the Lord for his glory’, suggest that something happens on the earth. First, ‘trees of oak’ implies already mature, fully-grown trees. The second phrase further suggests intentional cultivation of something new that will emerge. Shalom Paul makes an important observation about this phrase: ‘They shall be called the Lord’s shoots, which He has planted and in whom He glories.’ 127 In the previous chapter, there is a similar statement: ‘a shoot of My own planting, a 627F

127

Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 542.

236

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

work of My hands in which I glory’ (‫] ַמ ָטּ ַﬠי[ ַמ ֲﬠ ֵשׂה יָ ַדי נֵ ֶצר ַמ ָטּעוֹ‬ ‫)ל ִה ְת ָפּ ֵאר‬ ְ (60:21). Could this be a double entendre using the denominative verb ‫ל ִה ְת ָפּ ֵאר‬,ְ meaning ‘beautiful, glory’, derived from the substantive ‫ארה‬ ָ ‫פּ‬/‫ה‬ ֻ ‫אר‬ ָ ֹ ‫‘ פּ‬branches, shoots’ (see Ezek 17:6; 31:5, 128 8, 12; also Isa 10:33)? If so, Isa 61:3 echoes the idea of a branch or shoot, with Isa 42:5 reflecting back the images of Isa 11:1, thus connecting all the texts. In contrast, the branches in Isa 61:3 refer to what God’s people have become because of the Anointed One; without the Anointed One, they would not be in that state. Hence, the branches are branches only because of the Branch (see Isa 54:17; 56:6; 65:9, 13–15; 66:14). 129 628F

629F

Thematic parallels The thematic relationship between Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 61:1–9 may be even closer than some of the other servant poems, particularly with the theme of deliverance or salvation. The servant of Isa 42 receives ‘my Spirit’ (‫)רוּחי‬ ִ (v. 1) for his ministry; in Isa 61 the Anointed One also receives the ‘Spirit of the Lord’ (‫)רוּ ַח ֲאד ֹנָ י יְ הוִ ה‬ (v. 1). 130 Both are anointed or set apart for delivering people, either from sin (Isa 42) or from the day of vengeance of our God ( ‫יוֹם נָ ָקם‬ ‫א�הינוּ‬ ֵ ‫)ל‬ ֵ (Isa 61:2). The concepts of being chosen (‫)בּ ִח ִירי‬ ְ and being anointed (‫)מ ַשׁח‬ ָ are strongly interrelated in the OT; before a priest or king is anointed, he is chosen (see Deut 18:5; 21:5; 1 Sam 10:24; 16:8–10, 13). 131 For example, God claims David as chosen and, for this reason, God swears an oath with his servant (Ps 89:4 [Eng. 89:3]) and follows this up by having him anointed (see 1 Sam 631F

Ibid. See also Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫ארה‬ ָ ‫’פּ‬, ֻ HALOT 3:309. This compares to the concept of the ‘servant’ who becomes ‘servants’ from Isa 54 to 66. Here the branches have victory because of the branch. 130 See Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 365. 131 Note that, in the case of David, when Samuel is asked to anoint David, the term ‫א־ב ַחר‬ ָ ֹ ‫‘ ל‬not chosen’, referring to David’s brothers, is connected with ‫‘ יְ הוָ ה ְמ ִשׁיחוֹ‬the LORD’s anointed’ (1 Sam 16:6, 8–10), who is David, then in v. 12 Samuel is told to ‫‘ ְמ ָשׁ ֵחהוּ‬anoint him’. See Alberto R. Treiyer, ‘The Priest-King Role of the Messiah’, JATS 7, no. 1 (1996): 64–80. 128 129

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 237 16:12). Both priests and kings were set apart for a special purpose; the priests were set apart for ministry in the temple, while the king was to judge, protect, and fight for his people (Deut 17:14–20; also 1 Sam 8:11–18; 10:25). 132 Once the Spirit of the LORD is placed on the servant, his mission is to free the people both physically and spiritually. The manner of this deliverance is similar in these passages. In Isa 42 the ִ ‫הוֹציא ִמ ַמּ ְסגֵּ ר‬ ִ ‫ִל ְפקֹ ַח ֵﬠינַ יִ ם ִﬠוְ רוֹת ְל‬ servant’s mission is to ‫אַסּיר ִמ ֵבּית‬ �‫כּ ֶלא י ְֹשׁ ֵבי ח ֶֹשׁ‬,ֶ ‘to open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison [and] those who sit in darkness from the prison house’ (Isa 42:7). Similar wording is found in Isa 61: ‫ְל ַב ֵשּׂר ֲﬠנָ וִ ים‬ ‫סוּרים ְפּ ַקח־קוֹ ַח‬ ִ ‫י־לב ִל ְקרֹא ִל ְשׁבוּיִ ם ְדּרוֹר וְ ַל ֲא‬ ֵ ‫ ְשׁ ָל ַחנִ י ַל ֲחבֹשׁ ְלנִ ְשׁ ְבּ ֵר‬, ‘to bring news to the meek, he sent me to bind the broken-hearted, to call liberty to those who are captive, and opening the prisons to those who are bound’ (Isa 61:1). The redemptive theme is part of this big picture of how salvation is developed for God’s people. The servant is portrayed as the ‘glory’ (‫)כּבוֹד‬ ָ of God because he delivers the people. This is expressed in relation to God’s name as ‫בוֹדי‬ ִ ‫‘ ְכ‬my glory’, which is not given to any other than the servant (Isa 42:8). In the same sense, the Anointed One brings deliverance to them, the object of the action of the subject, who as a result of his actions glorifies God or shows one’s glory (‫)ל ִה ְת ָפּ ֵאר‬ ְ 133 (Isa 62:3; also 49:3; 60:21; as opposed to Israel, Isa 44:23). 63F

See Victor H. Matthews, ‘The King’s Call to Justice’, BZ 35, no. 2 (1991): 204–216. Furthermore, Jacob Stromberg states, ‘By recalling the servant of 42, Isaiah 61 may have wanted to give the speaker a royal role. … Isaiah 61:1 may strike a royal note, as it alludes to the spirit-endowed servant of 42:1.’ Jacob Stromberg, ‘An Inner-Isaianic reading of Isaiah 61:1–3’, in Interpreting Isaiah: Issues and Approaches (ed. David G. Firth and H. G. M. Williamson; Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2009), 264, 266–267. See also Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture, 84–88; Hugh G. M. Williamson, Variations on a Theme: King, Messiah and Servant in the Book of the Isaiah (Carlisle, Cumbria: Paternoster, 1998), 175. 133 While the term ‫ פאר‬is not the same as ‫כּבוֹד‬, ָ it is a synonym and reveals in Hipa’el the same meaning in relation to God. 132

238

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Structural parallels Structurally, Isa 42:1–9 and 61:1–9 are each divided into two parts: Isa 42 into vv. 1–4 and 5–9, with vv. 5–9 being considered the end piece; Isa 61:1–9 is also divided into the Anointed One’s testimony of vv. 1–3, followed by a tailpiece of his mission in vv. 4–9. 134 In general, most scholars accept the pericope as being Isa 61:1–9 instead of vv. 1–6 or 1–3, although it is plausible to perceive vv. 1–3 as the more direct verbal link to other messianic prophecies (see Isa 11:2; 42:1–4; 49:1–6; 50:4–9). As in the first servant poem, where the completion of the servant’s pericope ends with a song of joy, Isa 61:10–11 ends with the terms ‫אָשׂישׂ‬ ִ ‫‘ שׂוֹשׂ‬I will greatly rejoice’. This indicates a close structural relationship between these passages. Comparing Isaiah 42:1–9 with Isaiah 63:1–6 The word ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬is not found in Isa 63:1–6, but nevertheless some scholars identify this passage as a messianic text, 135 making it essential to compare it with Isa 42:1–9. The comparison will not be based strongly on linguistic links, although there are a few linguistic parallels, but will be based mainly on structural and thematic connections. 635F

Linguistic parallels There are a few linguistic parallels between Isa 42 and Isa 63. (See table 26.) The first term, ‫‘ ִבּ ְצ ָד ָקה‬in righteousness’ (Isa 63:1), has See Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 499. Motyer observes that Isa 61:1–9 is more closely related to the second servant poem (Isa 49:1–6), as they both have the theme of transformation. Scholars who accept the pericope as being Isa 61:1–9 include Brueggemann, Isaiah 40–66, 212; Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, 428; Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 570; Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 536; Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 301. 135 Pierre Grelot, ‘L’Exégèse Messianique d’Isaie 63:1–6’, RB 70, no. 3 (1963): 371–380; Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 184–185; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 3; Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 596. 134

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 239 God as its subject, although the prophet is speaking. Hence, God is speaking about the one (‫)מי‬ ִ who is coming from Edom, and that particular one is ‘righteous’. In Isa 42:6, the servant is called ‘righteous’ also, suggesting a common character between the servant and the Mighty Warrior. Moreover, the clause ‫אנִ י ְמ ַד ֵבּר ִבּ ְצ ָד ָקה‬, ֲ ‘I am speaking in righteousness’, is followed by a qualifying phrase, ‫ַרב‬ �‫‘ ְלהוֹ ִשׁ ַי‬mighty to save’. The infinitive �‫הוֹשׁ ַי‬ ִ ‫ ְל‬derives from the verb ‫ישׁע‬, ‘deliver, save, help, come to assist with’, and the proper noun �ַ ‫הוֹשׁ‬ ֻ ְ‫‘ י‬Joshua’ derives from the denominative verb ‫ישׁע‬. Therefore, this may suggest that this individual who is ‘mighty to save’ (�‫הוֹשׁ ַי‬ ִ ‫ ַ)רב ְל‬is the ‘Mighty Warrior’—the one who saves. Joshua was a mighty warrior and conquered the enemies in the land that God had promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. 136 The Heis used twice in Isa 63, here in v. 1 and also in v. brew term (�‫)הוֹשׁ ַי‬ ִ 5. The second usage of �‫הוֹשׁ ַי‬ ִ (v. 5) has a primary meaning of to ‘save’. This concept is closely related to another linguistic parallel. The term ‫זְ ר ִֹﬠי‬, ‘my arm’, is parallel to Isa 42:6, where it states, ‘I will hold your hand’ (�‫אַחזֵ ק ְבּיָ ֶד‬ ְ ). The imagery of an arm or hand is closely related in terms of God’s actions. The ‘arm’ of God is to ‘salvation’ in Isa 63:5, as in Isa 42:6 where the hand of bring ‫תּוֹשׁע‬ ַ God leads the servant in saving people by means of the covenant. Table 26. Linguistic Parallels between Isaiah 42:1–9 and 63:1–6 Isaiah 42:1–9

Isaiah 63:1–6

‫‘ ָרצוּץ‬crush’ v. 3

Synonym ‫‘ ֶא ְר ְמ ֵסם‬I trampled them’ v. 3

‫‘ ָﬠם‬people’ v. 6

‫‘ ַﬠ ִמּים‬people’ vv. 3, 6

‫‘ ְב ֶצ ֶדק‬in righteousness’ v. 6 �‫‘ ְבּיָ ֶד‬with your hand’ v. 6

‫‘ ִבּ ְצ ָד ָקה‬in righteousness’ v. 1

Similar function ‫‘ זְ ר ִֹﬠי‬my arm’ v. 5

In the NT, Joshua is also the name for the Greek Ἰησοῦ, Jesus, the antitype of the type �‫הוֹשׁוּ‬ ַ ְ‫י‬. 136

240

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The term ‫ ָﬠם‬reveals a different scenario in these passages. In Isa 42:6 the people have made a covenant with God through the servant, while in Isa 63:3, 6 the people appear to be under judgment because of the associated terms ‫ין־אישׁ‬ ִ ‫‘ ֵא‬no man’ and ‫‘ אָבוּס‬I trod down’. However, in both passages ‘the people’ refers to Israel. The last parallel is found between synonymous words. The term ‫ ָרצוּץ‬in Isa 42:3 reveals that the reed is not fully crushed, since it is found in the passive; instead, it is a ‘bruised reed’. The servant appears to be cautious toward the reed even though the reed is under judgment. However, in Isa 63:3 the people appear to be under greater condemnation, since the word ‫ ֶא ְר ְמ ֵסם‬means ‘crush to pieces’, indicating a severe judgment (see Isa 1:12). It is significant that there is a difference between Isa 42:1–9 and Isa 63:1–6 in regard to the timing of the individual’s mission. In Isa 42:1–9, the servant performs his mission during his lifetime, while in Isa 63:1–6, God’s Mighty Warrior conducts his ministry during the eschatological time period (see Rev 19:13–15). 137 Yet, the servant remains the same individual; there is simply a development of each messianic prophecy from Isa 42 to Isa 63, making Isa 63 the climax or apex of Isaiah’s messianic, eschatological prophecy. Thematic parallels The judgment theme is quite evident in these two passages. Judgment is expressed in Isa 63:1–6 against Edom, as opposed to against Israel in Isa 42:1–9. However, the judgment theme suggests that God is in control and knows what is going on in the earth. Moreover, in both passages the judgment is mixed with salvation, the second theme (the theme of salvation will be discussed next). First, judgment comes to Edom in the terms ‫‘ ֲחמוּץ ְבּגָ ִדים‬with brightly-colored garments’, suggesting that there is an element of

See Grelot, ‘L’Exégìse Messianique d’Isaie 63:1–6’, 371–380; Herbert C. Leupold, Exposition of Isaiah (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979), 336– 337; Muilenburg, The Book of Isaiah, 724. 137

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 241 retaliation against Edom (see Isa 59:15b–20). 138 In this passage, Edom is a symbol of the enemies of God’s people or the evil ones, but it (the term Edom, not the physical Edom) can also denote the inward chronic rebellious aspect of Israel that is distracting them from receiving God’s blessing (see 63:17; 64:5–7; Deut 28:1–14). 139 God will also bring a day of vengeance (‫ )יוֹם נָ ָקם‬on Edom, a clear reference to judgment (see Isa 34:8; 61:2; Deut 32:35) when God is the subject. Other terms that convey the image of judgment in Isa 63:3 include ‫פּוּרה ָדּ ַר ְכ ִתּי‬, ָ ‘I trod the winepress’ (also used in v. 2), although this is not the first time Isaiah uses the term ‫( דרך‬see Isa 16:10; Mic 6:15). Judgment is further revealed by how God relates to Israel: ‫אַפּי‬ ִ ‫א ְד ְר ֵכם ְבּ‬, ֶ ‘I trod them in my anger’, and ‫וְ ֶא ְר ְמ ֵסם‬ ‫בּ ֲח ָמ ִתי‬,ַ ‘and I trampled them with my wrath’ (Isa 63:3). The same images are used in the conclusion (v. 6) ‫אַפּי‬ ִ ‫אָבוּס ַﬠ ִמּים ְבּ‬, ‘I tramֲ ‘I make them pled the people with my anger’, 140 ‫א ַשׁ ְכּ ֵרם ַבּ ֲח ָמ ִתי‬, ‘I poured their lifedrunk with my wrath’, and ‫אָרץ נִ ְצ ָחם‬ ֶ ‫אוֹריד ָל‬, ִ blood on the earth’ (see Rev 14:17–20). Verse 6 marks the climax of the judgment. In Isa 42 the judgment theme is not related to the same linguistic terms found in Isa 63 but rather these two passages are related by the image that is given by these terms. Israel is being judged in Isa 42 for their unfaithfulness to God. Hence the term ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment, justice’ is used to reveal what the servant will be doing. Also, the term ‫‘ ָקנֶ ה ָרצוּץ‬crushed reed’ demonstrates that Israel is being judged for what it has done; even though the reed is not broken (‫)לֹא יִ ְשׁבּוֹר‬, there is a sense of justice taking place. Judgment may also be revealed in the fact that Israel does not shine brightly (‫)וּפ ְשׁ ָתּה ֵכ ָהה לֹא יְ ַכ ֶבּנָּ ה‬, ִ as though it has lost its purpose of living for God. See Bernard Gosse, ‘Isa 63,1–6 en relation à la synthèse du livre d’Isaïe en mšpṭ ṣdqh/yšwʿh ṣdqh, et la place d’Isa 34–35 dans la rédaction du livre’, ZAW 113, no. 4 (2001): 535–552. 139 See Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66, 595. 140 The term ‫ בוּס‬is another word used in poetry to connote ‫דרך‬. It is often used in a warfare context; Isa 14:19, 25; 22:5; 63:18; Ps 44:6 [Eng. 5]; 60:14 [Eng. 12]; Zech 10:5. 138

242

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The judgment theme is clearly found in the servant’s actions against Israel in Isa 42, purposely revealing Israel’s state of sin. Also, the Mighty Warrior brings the judgment to Edom in the eschatological perspective where Israel’s enemies will be destroyed. Even more clearly, it shows that the Mighty Warrior judges Edom, as a type, representing the removal of sin from Israel (see Rev 19:13– 15). The next common theme that naturally follows judgment is the theme of salvation. Several terms in Isa 63 reveal the work of the Mighty Warrior in redeeming the people. The first term, which appeals to the image of salvation in contrast to the judgment against Edom, is �‫בוּשׁ‬ ֶ ‫אָד ֹם ִל ְל‬, ‘red on your clothing’, 141 also pointing to ‘blood’ as an image, a play on words with ‫‘ ֱאדוֹם‬Edom’, 142 which means red in color. This time, however, the ‘red on your clothing’ refers to the Mighty Warrior’s clothes. Why would he have blood on his clothes? Because he fights on behalf of his people (v. 3), and v. 4 further explains that ‘the year of my redeemed has come’ (‫אוּלי ָבּאָה‬ ַ ְ‫)שׁנַ ת גּ‬. ְ The term ‫אוּלי‬ ַ ְ‫ גּ‬is often translated ‘redemption’, but literally translated reads ‘the year of my bloodrevenge’, deriving from ‫גּוֹאל‬ ֵ ‘avenger of blood’ (see Num 35:19– 30; Deut 19:6, 12; Josh 20:3–9; 2 Sam 14:11). God avenges because, like a father, he has had enough of his children being mistreated. Next, in two places Isaiah uses the term ‫‘ ישׁע‬to save’ (vv. 1, 5), demonstrating that the image of blood is used because of the redemption of God’s people. Thus, the salvific theme is presented in conjunction with the vengeance against Edom. Salvation in Isa 42 is portrayed by the type of work the servant does. Isaiah uses a covenant image to communicate the salvific theme. For this reason, the servant is ‘given for a covenant for the people’ (‫)א ֶתּנְ � ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬ ֶ (v. 6). Isaiah’s use of the term ‘give’ sugThe term ‫ אָד ֹם‬is attributed to the color of blood (2 Kings 3:22) and of grape juice (Isa 63:2). Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’אָד ֹם‬, HALOT 1:15. 142 The proper name ‘Edom’ (‫)מ ֱאדוֹם‬, ֵ as found in Isa 63:1, could be taken as a Pu’al participle, which would mean, ‘dyed red with grape juice’. See Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’אדם‬, HALOT 1:14. 141

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 243 gests that the servant is offered for a cause. Furthermore, the servant delivers those who sit in prison and darkness (v. 7) and restores eyesight to the blind, again revealing the process of freeing and healing found in the salvific plan. Therefore, these passages contain similar themes that relate to judgment and salvation. These themes strengthen the possibility that the servant of Isa 42 is doing the same work as the Mighty Warrior of Isa 63:1–6, an eschatological messianic person delivering God’s people from sin. Structural parallel I would argue that the structure found in Isa 63:1–6 is similar to that of Isa 42:1–9. As stated previously, Isa 42:1–9 is divided into two parts: vv. 1–4 and 5–9, followed by a praise song. I propose that Isa 63:1–6 could also be divided into two parts: vv. 1–4 where the individual brings judgment on the nation (Edom) that is persecuting God’s people; then in the next two verses (vv. 5–6) the individual brings salvation to God’s people. Finally, v. 7 has the sense of a praise song or hymn with the term ‫אַזְ ִכּיר‬, a Hiph’il imperfect conveying the meaning of ‘profess, praise (in hymn)’, as already used in Isaiah (26:13; 48:1; 62:6) and in the Psalms (71:16; 45:18). A second term, ‫‘ ְתּ ִה�ת יְ הוָ ה‬praises of the Lord’, again implies that praises are given to God for his actions on behalf of his people. Moreover, this same idea is repeated later in the same chapter with the contemplation on the blessings of God revealed in Israel’s history when Moses led them out of Egypt (Isa 63:11–14). Thus, Isa 63:1–6 is structurally parallel with Isa 42:1–9 and, for that matter, any of the other servant poems. This reveals a commonality among these passages and strengthens their connections to the messianic concept.

SUMMARY

In this chapter, I first compared Isa 42:1–9 with the three other servant poems: Isa 49:1–12; 50:4–11; and 52:13–53:12. This comparison unveiled many key terms that are interrelated with Isa 42:1–9, suggesting a close connection among these passages. Each of these poems has a two-part structure, further reinforcing their resemblance and linking the servant’s purpose as a messiah. Thematically, these passages are related to judgment, salvation, re-

244

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

demption, and creation. These themes also help the reader to capture a sense of what the servant is doing. Thus, Isa 42:1–9 is very interconnected with the other servant poems in demonstrating the life, ministry, and death of the servant. Second, I compared Isa 42:1–9 with three passages in Isa 40– 55 that contain the term ‫ﬠ ֶבד‬:ֶ Isa 41:8–9; 42:19; and 45:4; and explored possible linguistic, structural, and thematic links. While there is some resemblance to Isa 42:1–9, the context reveals that the meaning of these terms is applied differently to the servant in these passages than to the servant in the first poem. Structurally, these passages do not correspond to the two-part structure of Isa 42:1–9. Lastly, although some of the themes are similar, they are applied to the servant of these passages, Israel, instead of to the servant of Isa 42:1–9. Hence, the servant of these three passages does not correspond to the servant of Isa 42:1–9. Third, I compared Isa 42:1–9 with four other messianic prophecies in Isaiah; two passages in the earlier part and two passages in the latter part of the book. Those passages include Isa 9:1– 6; 11:1–10; 61:1–9; and 63:1–6; I compared them linguistically, structurally, and thematically with Isa 42:1–9. In the final analysis, these passages reveal a divine character like that in Isa 42:1–9, the same mission and goal of saving God’s people, and a similar connection between God and that individual. These passages have a two-part structure and contextually resemble Isa 42:1–9. Finally, the themes of judgment, salvation, redemption, and creation are found in most of these passages.

CONCLUSION

After comparing the first servant poem with particular passages throughout Isaiah, we can conclude that the servant in Isa 42:1–9 is different from the servant in Isa 41:8–9, for example. The closest linguistic parallel to the servant of the first servant poem is in Isa 45:1–8. While the servant in Isa 45:4 refers to Israel, the one who does deliver Israel (Isa 45:1) has some similar characteristics to the servant in Isa 42:1–9. Cyrus, like the servant of Isa 42:1–9, is called by God (Isa 45:4). Cyrus is also ‘upheld’ by a hand (v. 1). Cyrus is

3. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVANT REFERENCES 245 the ‘anointed’ of the Lord (v. 1), which is related to the servant’s receiving the Holy Spirit (Isa 42:1). Cyrus will deliver Israel out of Babylon, from captivity (Isa 45:3, 7). Cyrus is ‘named’ (v. 4). Like the servant of Isa 42:1–9, Cyrus is the ‘anointed’ (Isa 45:1), 143 which is related to the placing of the Holy Spirit upon the servant (Isa 42:1). Cyrus typologically fulfills some characteristics of the servant in Isa 42:1–9, but Cyrus also has differences from the servant in the first servant poem (see ch. 4 of this work). Therefore, we also can see that the servant of Isa 42:1–9 seems to be someone greater than Cyrus: the Messiah. Chapter 4 will explore more connections between Cyrus and the messianic figure. Let us see if these two interpretations will be supported in the research that follows.

143

See pp. 257–262 of this work.

CHAPTER 4. THEOLOGY OF THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN ITS CANONICAL CONTEXT INTRODUCTION

In examining the theology of the first servant poem, I explore several primary themes revealed in Isa 42:1–9. These theological themes include servanthood, the character of God revealed in the servant, servant as deliverer, covenant, servant and judgment, God and the future, servant as king, and the exodus motif. Next I explore the theology of the first servant poem in light of the other servant poems. Again, I focus on the theological themes of servanthood, God and the servant, servant as redeemer, covenant, servant and judgment, God and the future, servant as king, and the exodus motif. Next, I compare the theology of the servant in the first servant poem with its context of Isa 40–55, exploring the similarities and differences. I conclude with the suggested identity of the servant in the first servant poem.

THEOLOGY OF THE FIRST SERVANT POEM Isaiah 42:1–9 Servanthood Here, the conceptualization of servanthood relates to the nature and character of the servant of the Lord. 1 In this section I focus on both the action of servanthood and who the servant ‘is’ as a being. See W. Kaiser on the concept of what he calls ‘corporate solidarity’. He points out, from the Pentateuch’s perspective, this phenomenon in 1

247

248

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Israel has been called the servant of God (see Isa 41:8–9), meaning a peculiar people (see Ex 19:5; Deut 7:6; 14:2; 26:18; Ps 135:4; Mal 3:17), a close people of God (Ex 3:10; 7:4), and a child of God (Isa 49:15). However, that servant of God has not always been a good child, trustworthy, reliable, and in good standing with God (see Isa 1:2–9). That servant has broken ties with God— spiritually (Isa 41:22–29), and it (Israel) was in need of redemption (see Isa 40:1–11). Yet the same word and imagery are used to refer to the servant of God in 42:1–9. The first servant of the Lord has the characteristics of a genuine servant of the Lord: humble (42:2), obedient (v. 1d), trustworthy (v. 4), kind (vv. 1–4), loving (v. 6), patient (v. 3), self-sacrificing (vv. 6–7), careful (v. 3), and gracious (v. 3). In other words, the author reveals to his audience that there is a servant of the Lord who is superior to the one who was called the servant of the Lord in Isa 41:8–9 (Israel). This individual servant of the Lord has been called for a special mission (42:6–9), that is, to deliver Israel from its sinful condition. Servanthood is also demonstrated by the fact that God seizes the hand of the servant (Isa 42:6) and in response the servant also seizes the hand of God. This shows a willing acceptance of servanthood on the part of the servant. This servant is not a servant on his own but God directs him, giving this servant superiority in doing his task. The Character of God Revealed in the Servant The servant of the Lord in Isa 42 reveals a portrait not only of the servant but also of God. The servant exhibits the uniqueness of God’s character. First, God appears as the instigator since the subject ‘I’ appears ten times, either in the form of the first person the passages pointing to the Messiah: ‘He [Paul] was carefully observing that the divine revelation had distinctly chosen the collective singular word over the plural in order to provide for the single but inclusive concept of corporate solidarity between the one and the many.’ W. Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 48–49. See also Paul Joyce, ‘The Individual and the Community’, in Beginning Old Testament Study (ed. John Rogerson; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1982), 77–93.

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 249 common singular of the verbs or by the use of the personal pronoun ‫;אנִ י‬ ֲ this is an amazing number of occurrences for these few verses (Isa 42:1–9). Second, the clauses ‘I am the LORD’ (42:8) and ‘I the LORD’ (v. 6) suggest that the God of this servant is not like the gods whom Israel worshipped (see 41:21–29). 2 Isaiah 42:8 particularly demonstrates the divine self-predication ‘I am the LORD’. 3 God, through the servant of Isa 42:1–9, uses self-predication to reveal to his people Israel that he is unique, unlike any other gods. God has the ability and power to save his people, while the other gods cannot. This ability is demonstrated by the way the mission of the servant is applied to both Israel and the nations (Isa 42:6). But this raises a question of why the self-predication of God 645F

64F

Moreover, Isa 40–66 reveals that ‘God predicates uniqueness upon himself through the insistent claim: “I am God and there is no other” (43:10; 44:6; 45:5–6, 14, 18, 21, 22; etc.).’ Fanwar, ‘Creation in Isaiah’, 149. 3 Divine self-predication permeates the book of Isaiah in at least six different ways: ‘I am’ ‫( ֲאנִ י‬42:8; 47:8, 10), ‘I am God’ ‫( ֲאנִ י ֵאל‬43:12; 45:15; 46:9), ‘I am your God’ �‫�הי‬ ֶ ‫( ֲאנִ י ֱא‬41:10), ‘I am’ ‫( ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה‬41:4; 42:6, 8; 43:15; 45:3, 5, 6, 18; 49:23, 26; 60:16, 22), ‘I am your God’ �‫�הי‬ ֶ ‫ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה ֱא‬ (41:13; 43:3; 48:17; 51:15), ‘I am your God, the Holy One of Israel’ ‫ֲאנִ י‬ ‫�הי� ְקדוֹשׁ יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל‬ ֶ ‫( יְ הוָ ה ֱא‬43:3), or ‘I am your Holy One’ ‫דוֹשׁ ֶכם‬ ְ ‫ֲאנִ י יְ הוָ ה ְק‬ (43:15). M. L. Phillips provides an excellent discussion on the use of the divine self-predication formula in Isa 40–55. He suggests that the formula consists of a first-person pronoun with a proper noun or another pronoun. This formula has six variations and most likely had cultic uses. He also observes that the same formula used elsewhere in the OT has two components: first, covenant renewal (see Gen 15:1–21; the Decalogue; Ex 6:2–8), second, covenant complaint (see Deut 32; Ps 50; 81; Jer 14:17–22; 1 Kings 18:35). Morgan L. Phillips, ‘Divine Self-Predication in DeuteroIsaiah’, BR 16 (1971): 32–51. Walther Zimmerli has also discussed this formula with variations; see Walther Zimmerli, I Am Yahweh (ed. Walter Brueggemann; trans. Douglass W. Stott; Atlanta: John Knox, 1982), 17– 19. Fanwar observes this formula in Isaiah: ‘Significantly the formula is employed primarily in Isa 40–55. It does not appear in chaps. 1–39 and is used minimally in chaps. 56–66. The concentration of themes and ideas in chaps. 40–55 is evident from every angle.’ Fanwar, ‘Creation in Isaiah’, 150 n. 1. 2

250

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

is so important. When God asks, ‘To whom will you compare me?’ (40:25), the author follows with another question, ‘Lift up your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these?’ (40:26), thus deliberately pointing to God as the Creator. Why does he assign such a high claim to God? The answer is found in Isaiah’s description of the servant. This Creator image of 40:25–26, referring to God, is also portrayed in the servant in the next two chapters (Isa 41, 42). In addition, the two pericopes (Isa 41:21–29 and Isa 42:1– 9) are linked with ‫‘ ֵהן‬behold’ (41:24, 29; 42:1), suggesting that both servants, the corporate servant (Isa 41) and the individual servant (Isa 42:1–9), were intended to reflect the image of God. This association of the Creator image with both God and the servant is further intensified in Isa 42:8 where God’s image under the term ‫‘ ְשׁ ִמי‬my name’ is not given to any other person except his servant. Again, God gives his ‘glory’ (‫בוֹדי‬ ִ ‫)כ‬ ְ to no one other than the servant whose life represents the name of God (see 42:6). Thus, the servant may display a divine-human personality in how he responds and acts toward God. Servant as Deliverer Isaiah’s theology also reveals the servant’s role as a redeemer. The individual servant’s task is to be a savior and mediator (42:6–7), while the corporate servant’s condition is to be delivered from sin (41:21–29). The author proposes that the individual servant is to reveal to Israel and the nations that God is merciful toward humanity even though they have sinned; God has a solution to the sin problem. The first servant poem has as its purpose to mediate the covenant with Israel and to establish a pathway for justice in the Gentile world. With the term ‘justice’ (‫) ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬, referring to a covenant trial to hold his people accountable, Isa 42:1–4 reveals that Israel has a problem, the sin of idolatry, for which God is to bring justice on them. 4 God will keep his part of the covenant (see Gen 12; 15; 647F

According to God’s law, Israel’s sin makes it worthy of the punishment of death (see Gen 18:20; Deut 21:22; 24:16c; 2 Kings 14:6; 2 Chr 4

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 251 17; Ex 19–24), and his character is kind, patient, and gracious (see Ex 34:6–7); he will give himself through the servant of the Lord to rescue his people and the nations (see Isa 53:12). Thus, the servant is the means of rescuing people. The servant is seen as accomplishing his mission of redeeming in two ways. The servant as a deliverer is clearly stated: first, he is given ‘for a covenant of people’ (‫( ) ִל ְב ִרית ָﬠם‬42:6); second, he is a deliverer because he is given ‘for a light of the Gentiles’ (‫) ְלאוֹר גּוֹיִ ם‬ (v. 6). In these two phrases, the servant is performing the action of delivering Israel and the nations. 5 648F

25:4). If God does not intervene for Israel and the nations, they will receive their due consequences (see Isa 1:15–18; 2:12; 5; and so on). 5 Israel could not redeem itself, even though some scholars suggest that some Israelites would help other Israelites by being a light and witness so that they could be saved. Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 189; James M. Ward, ‘The Servant Songs in Isaiah’, RevExp 65, no. 4 (1968): 433–446; Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 150–152. On other views, see Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah, 260–261; Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 344–345; Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 270–271. But the text does not give any indication that some of the Israelites would be deemed righteous enough to be considered as potential redeemers for other Israelites. Doukhan provides clear evidence that ‘the use of the first person plural in the book of Isaiah reveals that whenever the first person plural is used (“we”, “us”, “our”, etc.), it always refers to Israel or Judah. On the basis of these observations in our text and in the general context of the whole book, it is reasonable to conclude that the speakers in Isaiah 53 are the people of Israel, and by implication the listeners are the nations. The Servant is, therefore, someone distinct from Israel, as is evident from the following verses: Isa 53:2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8.’ Doukhan, On the Way to Emmaus, 114–116. Isaiah states: ‘The ox knows its owner and the donkey its master's crib; but Israel does not know, My people do not consider’ (Isa 1:3), suggesting that Israel as a whole is faulty.

252

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Covenant The first servant poem also incorporates covenant theology. 6 Covenant theology is most prominent in the latter part of Isa 42:1–9, where the mission of the servant is elaborated upon (vv. 5–9). In v. 6 the servant is called ‘in righteousness’ for the purpose of being ‘given’ for a ‘covenant of the people’. This covenant is important for both God and the Israelites. It is important for God, because it reveals that God has not abandoned his people; he still pursues them and is willing to make a contract with them. It is important for Israel, because they have been responsible for breaking the covenant with God. Therefore, this covenant demonstrates that God is faithful and trustworthy and also reveals the responsibility that the people need to live by obedience. 7 The covenant in Isa 42:6 also suggests theologically that the servant is ‘given’ as a mediator between God and the people. The servant is the embodiment of the covenant, ‘a cause, source, mediator, or dispenser of covenant realities’. 8 In parallel with covenant, a similar idea is found in the next clause where the servant is ‘for a light of nations’ (v. 6). Again, the servant is not literally a light, but he is an illumination to the nations. Malachi 3:1 picks up the idea of a covenant being transmitted by a servant of the Lord by referring to a ‘messenger of the covenant’, that is, a covenant mediator. Jeremiah also speaks of the covenant theme where he suggests that a servant of God is a mediator of the New Covenant with Israel (Jer 31:31–34; also Isa 54:10; 55:3; 59:20–21; 61:8; Ezek 16:60–63). As further shown in ch. 2 of this work, the servant as a covenant appears to be a stretch of the definition of a covenant. However, Lev 24:8 enlightens us somewhat: The ‘bread of the Presence’, consisting of 12 loaves that represented the 12 tribes, consti-

The following section on ‘Servant and Judgment’ is also covenantally related to the covenant lawsuit. 7 See Peter J. Gentry and Stephen J. Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant: A Biblical-Theological Understanding of the Covenants (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2012), 434. 8 Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 54. 6

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 253 tuted an eternal covenant between God and his people. This seems to mean that the bread was a token of the divine-human bond. 9 Therefore, this could imply that the servant represents the covenant in the sense that the divine and human are bonded in him. As demonstrated in ch. 2 of this work, the servant is ‘given’ ‘for a covenant of the people’, suggesting that the servant is the covenant embodied in a promissory bond (see Ex 24:8; Lev 24:5– 9). 10 Another indication in Isa 42:6 of the covenant image is the fact that God ‘grasps’ the servant’s hand. This is how ancient Near Eastern kings sealed a covenant between the gods and themselves. Also, in the OT, the king is responsible for the covenant between God and his people (2 Kings 23:3). Here, the servant has sealed a covenant with God, followed by the sealing of a covenant with the people. Thus, the servant would still act as a mediator, but even more than a mediator, since he is ‘given’ as a covenant for the people. 11 The servant’s covenant is not only related to Israel, but it is extended to the other nations also. The servant appears to fulfill the mission that was given to Abraham where God promised to Abraham (Gen 12:1–3) that all the nations of the world would be blessed because of him. 12 God made a new start with Abraham after the downward spiral of Gen 3–11. Now the servant gives to both Israel and the nations a new start. Servant and Judgment Another prominent theme in the first servant poem is the dual directionality of judgment in which the servant is involved. First, there is the concept that the servant brings judgment to Israel— See Gane, ‘“Bread of the Presence” and Creator-in-Residence’, 179–203. 10 See Helmer Ringgren, The Messiah in the Old Testament (SBT 18; Chicago: A. R. Allenson, 1956), 41. 11 See ch. 2 of this work, the section on ‘verse 6’. 12 See Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 247–248; Walter C. Kaiser Jr., Mission in the Old Testament: Israel as a Light to the Nations (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), 58. 9

254

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

judgment directed away from the servant; second, the servant receives judgment—judgment directed to the servant himself. The context in which the first servant poem is found clearly reveals that judgment is inevitable. Isaiah 40–48 illustrates the controversy between God and the idols that the Israelites worship. It is against this scenario that God brings the judgment. In Isaiah, the theme of judgment is often linked with the term ‘the day of the Lord’. Odendaal argues that while this terminus technicus is absent from Isa 40–66, ‘day’ often refers to judgment (for example, Isa 47:9; 49:8; 52:6; 61:2; 63:4). 13 Robinson focuses on ‘judgment, universality, supernatural intervention, and proximity’ 14 as the four characteristics of that day. The ‘day’ also suggests a day of salvation or a redemption theme. 15 While the first servant poem does not contain the term ‘day’, it uses the term ‘justice/judgment’ (‫)מ ְשׁ ָפּט‬ ִ three times, pointing to the aspect of judgment (Isa 42:1, 3, 4). It is evident that ‘day’ is used with reference to the ‘day of the Lord’ in the context of Isa 40–48, which surrounds the first servant poem; once such occurrence is in Isa 43:12–13, ‘I am God, and also from today (‫ם־מיּוֹם‬ ִ ַ‫ )גּ‬I am He’. Again, Isaiah states ‘in a moment, in one day (‫’)בּיוֹם ֶא ָחד‬ ְ (47:9) in the context of judgment. Therefore, the fact that the poem includes ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬with a meaning of ‘justice’ indicates that it refers to judgment. Moreover, Isa 42:1–4 contrasts the servant’s judgment with Israel’s worship in Isa 41:21–29; these two passages are related by the term ‘behold’ (‫)הֵן‬. Both of these passages are surrounded by royal courtroom imagery. 16 If Isa 42:1–4 is part of a courtroom 659F

Dirk H. Odendaal, The Eschatological Expectation of Isaiah 40–66 with Special Reference to Israel and the Nations (Biblical and Theological Studies; ed. Robert L. Reymond; Phillipsberg, N.J.: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1970), 97–98. 14 H. Wheeler Robinson, Inspiration and Revelation in the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1946), 137. 15 See also Odendaal, The Eschatological Expectation of Isaiah 40–66, 96– 97. 16 See ch. 2 of this work for additional explanation on the use of this terminology and imagery. 13

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 255 setting, then the ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬that the servant brings has to be of a divine nature because God normally acts as judge in the HB (see Gen 6; 15:16; 18:20–33; Isa 3:14; 26:8, 9), but here he gives to his servant the role of judging. The author points out that the ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬clearly belongs to God alone in Isa 40:14, which means that in Isa 42:1–4 the servant who brings the ‘judgment’ would clearly fit in the divine realm. Again, Leclerc states, ‘From a purely descriptive point of view, mišpāṭ is a mission that originates in the command of God and that is entrusted to the Servant who is addressed in 42:1–4.’ 17 60F

God and the Future Isaiah 42 reveals a theology not limited to past events or the present; it suggests a theology of a God who knows the future. This concept may appear to come only at the end of the first servant poem (v. 9); however, there are hints earlier in the passage suggesting that God foreknows the future. The first indication is the use of the imperfect verb governing this pericope (�‫)א ְת ָמ‬ ֶ (v. 1). While the first verb is translated in the present, it really has a future tone as I pointed out in ch. 2 of this work. The next two verbs are perfect (‫ ָר ְצ ָתה‬and ‫ )נָ ַת ִתּי‬and are translated in the past tense, but following these verbs, the tone of this servant poem is projected as a future event, even though it can be argued that the perfect verbs (v. 1) refer to a past event. 18 The perfect verbs serve to strengthen the foreknowledge of God, that God had already chosen and placed his Spirit on the servant in the past, but yet the servant events are to occur in the future (Isa 42:6; also Gen 3:15; Col 1:15–18). 19 61F

62F

According to Leclerc, Isa 40:1–11, which sets the tone for the following chapters, ‘opens magisterially in the Divine Council (40:1–11)’. He further states, ‘In Isaiah 40–55, the idiom of the courtroom moves to center stage (for example, 41:1–5, 21–29; 43:8–15, 26; 45:20–25; 50:1–3, 8).’ Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice, 92, 95. Also Watts, Isaiah 34–66, 119. 17 Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice, 105. 18 See the expanded explanation in ch. 2 of this work. 19 See T. Desmond Alexander, The Servant King: The Bible's Portrait of the Messiah (Leicester, England: IVP, 1998), 111. Also Doukhan, On the Way to Emmaus, 17, 20.

256

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Thus, Isa 42:1d–4 strongly implies that the servant’s mission is in the future. The previous chapter also points in the same direction regarding the judgment coming upon Israel (Isa 41:21–29). God is announcing what will be taking place in the future if Israel does not change its behavior. For this reason, Isa 42:9 bridges what God has done and what he will do. 20 However, the author’s perspective regarding the chronological fulfillment of all the events that God is showing him is also limited. He sees only the top of the ‘divinely revealed mountain peaks of the future events’; 21 the details found in the valleys are not perceived. Thus, he outlines some of the details about the first servant’s work but remains ambiguous regarding whether the servant’s work includes a one-phase event or a two-phase event, that is, whether it will occur in the near future, in the distant future, or even whether it is an eschatological event. As Schultz states, ‘The sending of the Messiah is first and foremost a demonstration of God’s sovereignty.’ 22 In light of v. 8, where it begins with the words ‘I am YHWH’, Ulrich Simon comments: ‘This Name points to revelation. In prophecy YHWH predicts the future as an authentic sign of Lordship, now to be further manifested by the call of the Servant and the operation of the new Covenant.’ 23 While the author leaves the first servant poem ambiguous about eschatology, there are enough details both in this pericope and in the context of this passage for the reader to discern its true meaning. I would suggest that the first servant poem encompasses a local historical fulfillment of the distant future coming of the Lindsey states: ‘Isaiah’s view of “things to come” demonstrates his view of the incomparable, holy God who through judgment and deliverance/restoration establishes His sovereign rule through all the earth, and over Israel in particular.’ Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 23. 21 Ibid. 22 Richard Schultz, ‘The King in the Book of Isaiah’, in The Lord's Anointed: Interpretation of Old Testament Messianic Texts (ed. Philip E. Satterthwaite et al.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 164. 23 Ulrich E. Simon, A Theology of Salvation: A Commentary on Isaiah 40– 55 (London: SPCK, 1961), 89–90. 20

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 257 servant yet also hints of an eschatological completion of the servant’s work, using the word ‘new things’ (Isa 42:9) to refer to what the servant will do at his distant future coming (see Isa 53) as well as to a new creation (see Isa 65–66). Servant as King The concept of the servant of the Lord in Isa 40–55 as king is linked with the Davidic king concept. 24 The servant of Isa 42:1–9

Saul might have been the first king of Israel in terms of chronology, but he did not qualify as the first king of Israel. While God appointed Saul, he did not choose him for himself; the people chose Saul as their king (see 1 Sam 8:18). First, Saul was not called ‘after God’s own heart’ (1 Sam 13:14). Second, the people chose a fleshly king, based on his appearance: tall and a good warrior (1 Sam 8:20; 9:1–2; also Judg 20, 21). Third, there is no description of Saul that emphasizes his godliness, courage, and his learning; rather the OT stresses his appearance (see 1 Sam 16:7). Even though Saul was the first king of Israel, in reality David was essentially the first king chosen by God to represent him as the king on earth. David was not selected for his appearance, but rather because of who he was, a devoted individual (1 Sam 16:7–12). See Bergen, 1, 2 Samuel, 179–180; Klein, 1 Samuel, 161–162. Second, unlike the case of Saul, the Spirit of God rushing on David is connected with the anointing (1 Sam 16:13). Third, David was obedient (1 Sam 17:17–18). Fourth, David was courageous (1 Sam 17:32, 34–37). Fifth, David trusted in God, thus making him a spiritual man (1 Sam 17:45–47). Sixth, David was called ‘a man after God’s own heart’ (1 Sam 13:14). Seventh, David is the first king with whom God made a covenant, making David the model for all kings coming after him. This is not to say that David was perfect. David was a type of the King who would come and fulfill what was promised to David (see 2 Sam 7). The Davidic covenant includes both a personal promise to David (2 Sam 7:8–11a) and a dynastic promise (2 Sam 7:11b). From the dynastic promise, ‘The LORD declares to you that the LORD himself will establish a house for you’ (v. 11b), there are four outcomes: (1) the promise of an eternal seed (vv. 12, 16), (2) the promise of an eternal kingdom (v. 16), (3) the promise of rulership (vv. 13, 16), and (4) a Father-son relationship between God and the king (v. 14). See Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 29. The concept of eternal promise can be fulfilled only in the Son of David—the 24

258

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

reveals a theology of kingship that can be seen first in the following words: ‫רוּחי ָﬠ ָליו‬ ִ ‫‘ נָ ַת ִתּי‬I will place my Spirit upon him’ (v. 1); this is a clause often related to the Israelite kings being anointed (see 1 Sam 16:13). Particularly, the Davidic king, called ‘Yahweh’s anointed’, 25 ‘describes the intimate relationship between Yahweh and the king whom He has chosen as His servant (2 Sam 3:18; 7:5), [and] adopted as His son (1 Chron. 22:10; 28:6)’. 26 Furthermore, the term ‫‘ ָבּ ִחיר‬my chosen’ (Isa 42:1) is used also to describe the king (see Ps 89:4). 27 Other terms also suggest a theological view of kingship in Isa 42:1; ‘servant’ (see 1 Sam 17:32, 34; 2 Sam 7:5, 8, 20, and so on), ‘support’ (see Ps 16:5; 63:9 [Eng. Ps 63:8]), ‘delight’ (see 1 Chr 28:4), and ‘well pleased’ (see Ps 41:11) are used to describe David as king. While Israel was set apart to be a holy nation (Ex 19:6), the servant of the Lord is set apart as a king to bring judgment upon both Israel and the nations. Furthermore, the author distinguishes the rulers of Israel, who were often self-appointed or elected by the people, from the servant of Isa 42:1–9, who is not self-appointed or elected by people but is chosen by God himself (see Deut 17:14–20). 28 670F

ideal Davidic king (see Lk 1:31–33). ‘Thus in the narrower sense the Old Testament concept of Messiah denoted the ideal Davidic king in whom would be fulfilled all the promises of the Davidic covenant (2 Sam 7:5– 16).’ Ibid., 30. See also G. Coleman Luck, ‘First Glimpse of the First King of Israel’, BSac 123, no. 489 (1966): 66. 25 The Hebrew word ‫ח‬ ַ ‫‘ ָמ ִשׁי‬anointed’ is where the term ‘messiah’ comes from. The Greek translation of the Hebrew term ‫ ָמ ִשׁי ַח‬is Χριστός ‘Christ’, which is often used in the LXX and the NT. ‫ ָמ ִשׁי ַח‬occurs thirtynine times in the HB, four times about the high priest (Lev 4:3, 5, 16; 6:22), twice of the patriarchs (Ps 105:15; 1 Chr 16:22), and all the other times of a king, normally of Israel, although Cyrus is also called ‘anointed’ and lifted to the stature of a king (Isa 45:1). 26 Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 28. 27 See ch. 2 of this work (v. 1, ‘my chosen’) for more information. Also see Paul, Devrei Shalom, 12–13. 28 It is important to note that Jeremiah and Ezekiel also refer to Israel as a theocracy-based kingdom.

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 259 In Isaiah, God is the King (6:5; 33:17, 22; 41:21; 43:15; 44:6), and there are many implications of his divine rule. For example, the term ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬justice’ is also related to what the king is supposed to do (Ps 72:1–4). ‘In the ANE the king was responsible for the administration of justice.’ 29 Hammurabi certainly perceived himself as a ‘King of Justice’, 30 ‘to make justice prevail in the land, to abolish the wicked and the evil’. 31 A king has the responsibility to judge with righteousness and analyze with keen judgment. In Isa 42 ‘justice/judgment’ is contrasted with the injustice of Israel, where God calls for a ‫‘ ריב‬lawsuit, legal case’ (41:21), because they have chosen ‫תּוֹﬠ ָבה‬ ֵ ‘abomination’ (v. 24). The servant of Isa 42:1–9 illustrates a faithful king who will not break a crushed reed (‫( ) ָקנֶ ה ָרצוּץ לֹא יִ ְשׁבּוֹר‬v. 3) nor quench a dim wick (v. 3), which the kings of Israel and Judah failed to accomplish (see Isa 7; 1 Sam 8:11–18). The servant, instead of stealing from the poor, delivers them by healing them (v. 7). The servant, instead of killing his people, gives life by freeing them from prison (v. 7). 32 The servant, instead of breaking promises, makes a 675F

Robin L. Routledge, Old Testament Theology: A Thematic Approach (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2008), 236. 30 Paul, Studies in the Book of the Covenant, 22. 31 Bill T. Arnold and Bryan E. Beyer, eds., Readings from the Ancient Near East: Primary Sources for Old Testament Study (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), 112. 32 Shalom M. Paul observes: ‘In the royal inscriptions, after the king is called and selected by the gods he is then given a task to fulfill. A similar sequence of events is found in Deutero-Isaiah, where the designated servant is called upon to fulfill his unique twofold mission (42:6). Then, in 42:7, he is bidden: “to open blind eyes, to liberated prisoners from confinement, (and) dwellers in darkness from prison”.’ Paul, Devrei Shalom, 14. A similarity can be found in the cuneiform inscriptions about Sargon I, where he declared: mārē Sippar Nippur Bābili ù Barsippa ša ina la annišunu ina qirbišu kamû ṣibittašunu ābutma ukallimšunūti nūru, ‘(The) [sons]/people of Sippar, Nippur, Babylon, and Borsippa who, through no fault of their own, have been kept imprisoned in it, I destroyed their prison and let them see the light.’ Hugo Winckler, Die Keilschrifttexte Sargons, I (Leipzig: E. Pfeiffer, 1889), 122–124, 134–135. Also see Paul, Devrei Shalom, 14. 29

260

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

promise that he keeps through a covenant (v. 6). The servant is faithful not only to his people but to God (vv. 5–9), whereas the kings were unfaithful because of worshiping or trusting other gods and nations (see Isa 7:1–9; 1 Kings; 2 Kings). The servant brings true justice, while the kings brought injustice to their people. Thus, the servant of Isa 42:1–9 is the ideal Davidic king, a perfect king in the image of God who leads his people on earth. 33 ָ ‘his law’ (42:4) suggests that this In addition, the term ‫תוֹרתוֹ‬ servant has the same law as God. The servant will reign with God’s law in mind. The Israelite kings, upon coming to the throne, were required to copy for themselves the Law of Moses into a book (see Deut 17:14–20; 2 Kings 11:12; Rev 5). 34 This method of writing the law into a book also symbolized that the king was making a commitment/covenant to be faithful to God and the people he would serve. 35 The king had a responsibility to keep the written law by his side ‘to read and study it constantly and adhere diligently to all its instructions’. 36 This idea is expressed by the Hittite king Muwatalish, ‘Whatever I find written in the tablets … I will do’. 37 Thus, the servant of Isa 42:1–9 makes a commitment to live by the law of God and serve the people faithfully as a good king of Israel. The author further explains the concept that the servant of the Lord is interlocked with development of the Davidic king con67F

678F

679F

680F

See J. Alec Motyer, Look to the Rock: An Old Testament Background to Our Understanding of Christ (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2004), 23–38. 34 ‘Deuteronomy is the only book of the Pentateuch which refers to a written Torah as comprising the divine will.’ Moshe Weinfeld, ‘The Emergence of the Deuteronomic Movement: The Historical Antecedents’, in Das Deuteronomium: Entstehung, Gestalt und Botschaft (ed. Norbert Lohfink; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1985), 96. 35 See Ranko Stefanović, ‘The Background and Meaning of the Sealed Book of Revelation 5’ (unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 1995), 234–246. 36 Patrick D. Miller, Deuteronomy (IBC; Louisville: John Knox, 1990), 148. 37 Quoted in Weinfeld, ‘The Emergence of the Deuteronomic Movement’, 97. 33

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 261 cept and the Davidic promises (Isa 55:3). 38 In addition, he demonstrates that the anointed conqueror, like a king, works to bring salvation and vengeance (59:20–21) as well as ‘fathers of a family’. 39 Thus, the servant of Isa 42:1–9 is not only related to the Davidic covenant as a king but also to Abraham (Gen 12:1–3) and Adam who represented the image of God (Gen 1:26–27), and, therefore, adds ‘to the compound picture the dimension of the new or second Adam as the Davidic king in the new Eden’. 40 W. A. M. Beuken has shown that Isa 42:1–4 is similar to God’s designation of kings in the early appointment of Israel’s monarchy. Saul (1 Sam 9:17), David (1 Sam 16:12–13), and even Zerubbabel (Zech 3:8; 6:12) could be considered as following the same model. 41 The following are common characteristics by which God elected his king: ‘(1) The designation is by Yahweh and is mostly expressed with “behold”, (2) Yahweh endows the chosen one with his Spirit, and (3) ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬is the characteristic task of the royal figure.’ 42 Thus, there is little doubt that the first servant poem contains the concept of divine kingship or at least a royal figure (see Ps 89). 43 As table 27 outlines, this servant-king relationship reveals, from an Isaianic perspective, that the servant is going to 685F

68F

See Alexander, The Servant King, 97–106; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 445–446. 39 Motyer, Look to the Rock, 35. 40 Ibid. 41 Beuken, ‘Mišpāṭ’, 3. Also see Eaton, Festal Drama in Deutero-Isaiah, 47–48. Westermann acknowledges a royal designation in Isa 42:1–4, as does Beuken, but he adds further criteria in his observation. ‘One feature makes a clear distinction between the designation of the Servant here [Isa 42:1–4] and that of a prophet—the very nature of the latter means that there can be no witnesses to it. All the passages which describe a prophet’s call leave this in no doubt. On the other hand, as evidenced also in 1 Sam. 9:15–17, at a king’s designation the presence of witnesses to whom it is said, “Behold this is …” is essential. Confirmation of this is given by the account of Jesus’ baptism, Mark 1:11 par., where Isa. 42:2 is combined with Ps. 2:7.’ Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 94. 42 Beuken, ‘Mišpāṭ’, 3. Also see Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 38. 43 See Williamson, Variations on a Theme, 132–135. 38

262

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

come with the same characteristics of a king to deliver his people and the nations from their condition of sin. God directed the historical king David and made a covenant with him to rule over Israel. In the same manner, Isa 42:1–9 portrays God working through the servant, the ideal king David, who rules over both Israelites and Gentiles. Because the servant has many parallels with king David (servant, support, delight, well pleased, Spirit upon him, judging, law of God), these attributes reveal a likelihood of the servant being someone other than Israel itself, because the servant here is the ideal Davidic king who is yet to come. Thus, table 27 shows the parallels between Isa 42:1–9 and David as king. Table 27. Historical King of 2 Samuel 7 and Eschatological King of Isaiah 42:1–9 Historical King of 2 Samuel 7 God, the ultimate King King David Israelites

Eschatological King of Isaiah 42:1–9 God, the ultimate King

Ideal king David/servant of Isa 42:1–9

God’s people (including Israelites and Gentiles)

Exodus Motif The exodus motif is found in the Isaianic concept of salvation history. The author of Isaiah alludes to God’s past salvific act and he also looks forward to God’s coming salvific acts. The motif that portrays God’s actions in this matter is found in the exodus, 44 The exodus reveals the power and sovereignty of the Creator (see Ex 7–11); similar language is used in the creation pericope of Gen 1–2. See Victor P. Hamilton, Handbook on the Pentateuch: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982), 164–166. Also see Zimmerli, ‘Le nouvel “Exode” dans le message des deux grands prophètes de l'exil’, 216–227. 44

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 263 which the OT often refers to as the act of God’s deliverance, and the eschatological dimension depicted by a ‘new’ exodus. Anderson underscores, from the first, exodus elements that are used to project a new salvation. 45 He determines the new exodus of Isaiah based on the linguistic and thematic echoes that recurred in the exodus. 46 Yet, while Anderson does not supply indications of a new exodus in the first servant poem, 47 this does not mean that it is not found there. Fanwar lists connections with exodus theology in Isa 40–55: (1) The deliverance of Israel by God’s outstretched arms will be repeated in the new deliverance [Isa 40:10; 51:9; and 52:10]; (2) the divine glory seen by Israel will be observed by all flesh [Compare Exod 16:7 and Isa 40:5]; (3) Israel’s ‘rearguard’ and ‘vanguard’ will reappear [Compare Isa 52:12 with Exod 13:21– 22 and 14:19–20]; (4) the divine warrior who fought for Israel will once again fight to deliver his people [Compare Exod 15:3 and Isa 42:13]; (5) the victory chant that accompanied the Exodus will also accompany the new one [See Exod 15:21 and Isa 42:13]. Besides these, the new Exodus also shares elements drawn from Israel’s wilderness sojourn. God prepares a way through the wilderness (Isa 40:3–5; 42:16), he promises to supply food and drink (Isa 41:17–20; 43:19–21), and to transform the wilderness (Isa 49:9–11; 55:13). 48

Some of these characteristics may well be found in connection with the first servant poem: for example, the divine glory (Isa 42:8), the servant delivering people from prison, which could reveal a divine warrior, and the victory chant that comes immediately after the first Anderson, ‘Exodus Typology in Second Isaiah’, 181. For Anderson, this would be the eschatological message of Isa 40–55. 46 Ibid., 181–184. Anderson sees the following passages as the new exodus: Isa 40:3–5; 41:17–20; 42:14–16; 43:14–21; 48:20–21; 49:8–12; 51:9–10; 52:11–12; and 55:12–13. 47 However, R. E. Watts points out that, according to the Targum, the first servant poem, Isa 42:1–7, would refer to the messianic agent of the new exodus. Watts, ‘Consolation or Confrontation’, 52 n. 85. 48 Fanwar, ‘Creation in Isaiah’, 172. 45

264

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

servant poem. Furthermore, Israel is delivered by the servant whom God holds by his ‘grasp[ed] hand’ (Isa 42:6), which could be synonymous with Isa 40:10, 51:9, and 52:10, where Israel is delivered by God’s outstretched arms (see Ex 6:6). The victory song, which has been recognized as celebrating a new exodus victory from Egypt (see Ex 15), is found immediately after the servant poem (42:10–13). 49 Isaiah 42:8 points out the ‘glory’ of God, which was also seen by the Israelites in Ex 16:7 (see Isa 40:5). Isaiah also alludes to the term ‘law’ (Isa 42:4), for which the coastlands wait, and to Mount Sinai (Ex 19–24), where God directed the Israelites to go after they came out of Egypt and where his law was given to the people. The author continues the idea of the exodus in connection to Mount Sinai by adding the parallel of ‘covenant’ (Isa 42:6). In the first exodus, God made a covenant with Israel after they came out of Egypt through the mediation of Moses (Ex 19–24), while in Isaiah the servant is given by God as a mediator for a covenant (Isa 42:6) of the people before they come out of Babylon. 50 G. P. Hugenberger has studied the interpretation of the servant’s kingly and prophetic roles in relation to a second Moses who would be in the future. 51 He concludes that many terms revealing a second exodus in Isa 40–55 are connected to the prophetic and leadership roles of the servant of Isaiah in a future second Moses figure. 52 Smith also points out that the reference to the Moses figure does not ‘directly identify Moses with the servant’, since Moses never died for the sins of the people. 53 Nevertheless, Moses was a See Zimmerli, ‘Le nouvel ”Exode” dans le message des deux grands prophètes de l'exil’, 225. Also Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 45. 50 Waldow, ‘Message of Deutero-Isaiah’, 259–287. For Waldow, the second exodus is portrayed by the figure of the ‘servant of the Lord’ in Isa 40–55. 51 Gordon Hugenberger, ‘The Servant of the Lord in the “Servant Songs” of Isaiah: A Second Moses Figure’, in The Lord’s Anointed: Interpretation of Old Testament Messianic Texts (ed. Philip E. Satterthwaite et al.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 119–139. 52 Ibid., 119. 53 Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 155. 49

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 265 type to reveal what Isaiah’s prophetic antitype would actually be: the servant who would save his people from slavery in the new exodus. Stuhlmueller, who focuses primarily on the concept of the new exodus, emphasizes that the author of Isaiah connotes the exodus motif with reference to ‘re-creation’ in his usage of creation vocabulary. Stuhlmueller does not refer to Isa 42:1–9 as using the exodus motif, yet if the ‘re-creation’ is part of the new exodus as he points out, ‘this new and wondrous type of exodus now awaiting Israel is what Dt-Is means by creative redemption’. 54 The first servant poem may suggest this analogy. First, the first servant poem is about creative redemption, seen in v. 5, where God is revealed as the Creator. Second, another creative redemption is seen in the opening of blind eyes and the freeing of people from prison (v. 7), which was seen in Exodus when Israel left their Egyptian bondage (see Ex 2:23; 6:5–6; 13:3, 14; 20:2). Third, the term ‘my glory’ is also a reference to both creation and the exodus; in creation God’s glory is revealed by what he made, in the exodus God’s glory is revealed by the plagues that he brings upon Egypt (see Ex 14:17– 18; Num 14:22). 55 Finally, in v. 9 ‘the former things [that] have come to pass’ also reveal God’s creativity in history. Hill also recognizes the abundance of exodus motifs in Isaiah, particularly in Isa 40–66. He sees exodus imagery in places that would be perceived as untraditional. 56 He further sees the exodus motif in Isaiah as coming out from ‘historical reference to a full blown eschatological model’, 57 which can be seen in Isa 65–66 as well as in the ‘new things’ (Isa 42:9). The new exodus does not have a cyclical repetition; ‘the new exodus is not a return to the old in a great historical cycle. It is a new event, a new creation.’ 58 ‘Yet, Stuhlmueller, Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah, 94. See ibid., 95–98. 56 Linzy H. Hill, ‘Reading Isaiah as a Theological Unity Based on an Exegetical Investigation of the Exodus Motif’ (unpubl. diss., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1993), 185. 57 Ibid. 58 Anderson, ‘Exodus Typology in Second Isaiah’, 192. 54 55

266

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

it is not in contrast in principle to the former; it is a renewal that surpasses the old.’ 59 The author uses the exodus motif to connect historical events with new events—with a future redemption. ‘He [the servant] functions as a prophetic connecting link between history and future.’ 60 The servant is like Moses 61 delivering the people from the Pharaoh, except that the servant here delivers from idolatry and the Babylonian kingdom that will later come to take over Israel’s land (see Isa 30:1–6; 36:6). ‘With the new Exodus and covenant a new messianic king will appear’, as promised earlier: ‘The shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse’ (Isa 11:1–2), ‘my chosen … I have placed my Spirit upon him’ (Isa 42:1). ‘This hope of a new deliverance, of a new Exodus to be accomplished under the direction of the Messiah, remained a hope.’ 62 There is no indication by the author that this eschatological hope, the new exodus that was anticipated, was ever fulfilled. 63 The hope to which the prophet refers was only partially fulfilled, in a limited sense, when Cyrus came. The first servant poem reveals, by the new exodus motif, a servant who is yet to come. Thus, the eschatological redemption in the first servant poem will be fulfilled in the new exodus motif.

Ninow, ‘Indicators of Typology within the Old Testament’, 233. Ibid., 234. 61 Ex 4:10; 14:31; Num 11:11; 12:7, 8; Deut 34:5; Josh 1:1, 2, 7, 13, 15; 8:31, 33; 9:24; 11:12, 15; 12:6; 13:8; 14:7; 18:7; 22:2, 4, 5; 1 Kings 8:53, 56; 2 Kings 18:12; 21:8; Mal 4:4; Dan 9:11; Neh 1:7, 8; 9:14; 10:29; 1 Chr 6:49; 2 Chr 1:3; 24:6, 9. 62 Ninow, ‘Indicators of Typology within the Old Testament’, 234. 63 Richard C. Oudersluys, ‘Exodus in the Letter to the Hebrews’, in Grace Upon Grace: Essays in Honor of Lester J. Kuyper (ed. James I. Cook; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 145. 59 60

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 267

DEVELOPMENT/THEOLOGY OF THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN LIGHT OF THE OTHER ISAIANIC SERVANT POEMS Isaiah 49:1–12; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12 Servanthood The second, third, and fourth servant poems’ theology will focus on the attributes, the ‘being’ of the servant, meaning how the servant behaves and acts in response to God’s directions. In these poems, the servant’s attributes may be related to specific historical individuals, yet they also may reveal divine characteristics, and often both are found in the same passage. Also, because these poems are poetic in genre, their wording cannot always be linked to other servant passages. Thus, the context of these servant poems also determines their meaning and theology. Isaiah 49:1–12, the second servant passage, marks servanthood by introducing how God calls the servant from the womb of his mother (vv. 1, 5), and gives him a name (v. 1). Those whom God calls are often perceived as God’s servants and a name is given to them (Abraham, Moses, Joshua, and so on; Gen 12:1–3; 17:5; Ex 3:4; Num 12:7; Josh 24:29). The description of the servant also reveals the type of servant that he is; he has a ‘mouth like a sharp sword’ (v. 2; also Ex 4:12, 15; Num 22:38; 23:12, 16; Deut 18:18; Josh 1:8), and he is made like a ‘polished shaft’ (v. 2). God forms the servant for a special task: to bring light to and be a covenant for people (vv. 6, 8; also Ex 19–24; Josh 24). The servant’s humility is ultimately ‘honorable’ in the eyes of God (v. 5; also Judg 13:17) and to ‘glorify’ God (v. 3; also Judg 7:2; Isa 4:2). God is the ‘strength’ of the servant (v. 5; also Ex 15:2; Isa 12:2; Jer 16:19; Pss 21:2 [Eng. v. 1]; 28:7; 118:14), and for this reason he brings ‘salvation’ to the ends of the earth (v. 6). Kings and princes ‘worship’ (v. 7; also Gen 18:2; Josh 5:14; 1 Sam 20:41; 25:23, 41) the servant because he is called the servant ‘ruler’ (v. 7). The servant also will feed the ‘hungry’ and give drink to the ‘thirsty’ (v. 10; Ps 63:2 [Eng. v. 1]). The servant appears to be a winner against enemies (v. 9), suggested by the poetic words ‘level out the mountain’ (v. 11) and his highway will be ‘exalted’ (v. 11; also Isa 52:14–15).

268

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The third servant’s theology is introduced through the servant’s having an ‘instructed tongue’ (50:4; Moses taught Israel, Deut 4: 1, 5, 10, 14; 5:1; and so on) from God, to help those who are ‘weary’ (v. 4; also Isa 5:27). The servant’s obedience is revealed by the words ‘woken up’ and ‘listen’, as in being ‘taught’ (v. 4; also Zech 4:1; Deut 6:4; Isa 8:16); he is not being ‘rebellious’ (v. 5; also Isa 1:20, where Israel rebels) or ‘turn[ing]’ his back on God (v. 5). The Lord also helps the servant to accomplish his task (vv. 7, 9), revealing teamwork between God and the servant in an effort to save God’s people. In the fourth servant poem, the servant is a humble being who appears as an important person (52:13–15) and has great wisdom to bring to the nations (vv. 13, 15). The servant’s task is to bring redemption; he does that by giving himself as a ‘offering’ (v. 10), ‘smitten by God’ (v. 4), ‘wounded for transgressions’ (v. 5), and led like a ‘sheep to the slaughterhouse’ (vv. 6–7). This picture describes a willing person with a humble spirit. The servant does not live for himself but for others. The focus of the servant is on the ‘you’; there is no selfish focus on ‘I’. These three servant poem passages reveal that the servant serves by bringing redemption or salvation to people. This task is done with a humble, strong, courageous, willing, kind, and serving attitude. These servants reveal a close and admirable relationship with God while bringing justice and ruling on his behalf. These servants are not ashamed to be obedient to God’s demands, and they are willing to do their task with confidence that God is faithful, thus trusting in his promises. Each servant progressively moves to a more serious and tragic tone than in the first servant poem, but each complements the other in characterizing the servant. These servants have one goal, one task, one calling to achieve: to please God in redeeming his people. Because of their singular goal, task, and calling, these servants are happy to implement God’s plan. The life of the servant, lived according to the will of God, is portrayed in the servant passages. The servant reveals the sovereignty of God in how he works both in history and in the future. The Character of God Revealed in the Servant That God is revealed through the individual servant is further emphasized in the three other servant poems. The second servant po-

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 269 em portrays God as being called to (‫)ל ָה ִקים‬ ְ ‘raise up’ the ( ‫ת־שׁ ְב ֵטי‬ ִ ‫ֶא‬ ‫‘ )יַ ֲﬠקֹב‬tribes of Jacob’ from their circumstances; the servant will also ‘restore’ (‫)ל ָה ִשׁיב‬ ְ 64 ‘the preserved Israel’, the restoration in Isa 49:5, 6 being moral, spiritual, and political. Furthermore, the servant in the second servant poem, like the first servant, is given to be a ‘light to the Gentiles’ and a ‘covenant of the people’ (49:6, 8). The servant’s mission is to save Israel and the nations from their condition of spiritual darkness. Again, this is done by the introduction of God as the subject, meaning that God is behind the servant’s mission (49:1–3, 7). Finally, the concept of God being the Creator and restorer of Israel comes to light in the introduction, where God is the Life Giver (vv. 1, 5). In the third servant poem, the same aspect of the servant glorifying God appears. The third servant refers to God as the one who gives him the ability and the skills to accomplish his mission. The servant does not do anything on his own. Instead, God (‫)יָ ִﬠיר‬ ‘wakes up’ the servant every morning; the servant’s ears are (‫)יָ ִﬠיר‬ ‘woken up’ to hear from God (50:4). In v. 5 the subject is God, who (‫)פּ ַתח‬ ָ ‘open[s]’ the ears of the servant. God is the one who (‫‘ )יַ ֲﬠזָ ר‬help[s]’ the servant in everything he does (see v. 9). Thus God directs the servant in accomplishing his mission. God is the one in charge of what the servant does, and this particular mission is to save Israel and the nations (v. 6). The fourth servant poem further reveals, in the introduction of that poem, how the servant glorifies God: ‘Behold, My Servant shall deal wisely; He shall be exalted and highly placed and will be very high’ (52:13). These terms introduce the servant’s glorification through his own death (52:14–53:12), which pleases God (‫)ח ֵפץ‬ ָ (53:10), since the death of the servant serves the divine purpose of saving his people and the nations. Thus, the author reveals why God is so insistent on his own uniqueness, because he is the only one who can save people from their sinful condition. He reveals his uniqueness through the servant poems by predicating what he will do for humanity (see 10:13; 43:13; 46:5). 70F

The form of ‫ שׁוֹב‬in Isa 49:6 is a Hiph’il infinitive, and this Hebrew term is often used in the context of covenant (see Jer 15:19). This term would refer to bringing Israel back. See North, The Second Isaiah, 189. 64

270

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

No other deities can sacrifice themselves on behalf of their people (see 46:9). God is both the Creator and the redeemer of his creatures (Isa 42:5–7; 49:1, 5, 6–8; 50:5, 6; 53). Humanity does not make its Creator; the divine Creator makes humanity. Thus, any gods that humans make cannot save them. Isaiah 44:9 claims that all those who make idols are nothing. 65 The irony is that humans make gods in their own likeness, suggesting that these gods are also nothing, and therefore idols are unable to help humanity when they are called upon (44:17–20; 57:13; also 48:5). On the other hand, the servant of the Lord is portrayed as God by the demonstration that God’s praise is not given to idols (42:8) but to his servant. Servant as Redeemer The second servant poem develops the concept of the servant of the Lord as a redeemer. In Isa 49:1–12, the same two phrases that are found in Isa 42:1–9 are used to highlight the fact that the servant is definitely a deliverer. 66 Isaiah 49:6, 8 is parallel to Isa 42:6 with a reverse order of the phrases ‘I will give you for a light of nations’ and ‘give you for a covenant of the people’. The second servant poem solidifies the reason why the servant is a redeemer by placing v. 7 as the center of these two phrases, revealing that as God is the Redeemer of Israel (‫ )גּ ֵֹאל יִ ְשׂ ָר ֵאל‬so is the servant. Furthermore, the servant, like God, is worshipped (‫ )יִ ְשׁ ַתּ ֲחוּוּ‬by kings, rulers, and princes of the earth (49:7; also 42:5). This apex focuses The use of the term ‘nothing’ (‫( )תֹּהוּ‬Isa 44:9) about those who make idols references Gen 1 where the earth was nothingness before being created. This may strongly suggest here that those who make idols are compared to the nothingness of the earth before creation. Oswalt suggests a similar view that this term (‫ )תֹּהוּ‬connotes ‘element chaos’ as it does in 40:17, 23; 41:29; 44:9; 45:18, 19; 49:4; 59:4. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, 176 n. 43. 66 Jiří Moskala suggests that the servant of the Lord in Isa 49:6 not only acts as a redeemer, but he is also given by God to be ‘salvation’; ‘I will also give you for a light to the Gentiles [nations] to be [not only to “proclaim” or “announce” but “be”!] my salvation to the ends of the earth.’ Jiří Moskala, ‘Toward Trinitarian Thinking in the Hebrew Scriptures’, JATS 21, no. 1–2 (2010): 271 n. 52. 65

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 271 on the servant, as in v. 7 the direct object ‘you’ ( ָ‫)ךּ‬, whom God ‘has chosen’ (‫)יִּב ָח ֶר‬ ְ (v. 7) is in the second person masculine singular. Goldingay and Payne state: ‘“Steadfastness” and “choosing” develop the title “restorer”, suggesting two facets of the background of this latter notion.’ 67 Moreover, Isaiah 49 reaffirms, in the last part of v. 7, that the promise given is founded in the person of God, the holy one. Such is found in the particle ‫‘ ְל ַמ ַﬠן‬for the sake of’, suggesting that ‘Yhwh’s act will testify to Yhwh’s faithfulness’ 68 and linking to the next verse where the servant is given for a covenant of the people. Lessing also sees v. 7 as being the ‘designation of Yahweh as ‫קדוֹשׁ‬,ָ the “Holy One”, the Servant’s ministry is enveloped by the one and only God’. 69 The wording in v. 7 highlights the divine titles; ‘this is what the LORD says, the Redeemer and Holy One of Israel’ is an expansion to the salvific message introduced in the first servant poem (42:5). Thus, as God is the Redeemer, so is the servant of these poems (Isa 42 and 49), because the servant is the one redeeming God’s people. It is not by accident that the author uses the term ‫‘ גּ ֵֹאל‬redeemer’ in the second servant poem (49:7), when the first and second servant poems are strongly related by the two phrases ‘covenant of the people’ and ‘light of the Gentiles’ (42:6; 49:6, 8). He clearly suggests that the servant poems are demonstrating God as the Redeemer, and the same God is the one who calls the servant to be his representative on earth as a divine redeemer and not simply a political deliverer. Thus, the servant not only acts as a redeemer, but in the second servant poem he is portrayed like God, being the redeemer of Israel and other nations. This is not the first time that the author uses ‫ גּ ֵֹאל‬70 to denote God as the Redeemer of Israel. The theme of God as Redeemer is 712F

F

Goldingay and Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 172. 68 Ibid. 69 Lessing, Isaiah 40–55, 481. 70 The term ‫ֹאל‬ ֵ ‫‘ גּ‬redeemer’ also refers to a near kinsman who protects and continues the seed lineage (for example, Lev 25:47–49; Num 35:19; Ruth 3:11–13). Here is where this term is found in Isaiah: 41:14; 43:1, 14; 44:6, 22–23, 24; 47:4; 48:17, 20; 49:7, 26; 51:10; 52:3, 9; 54:5, 8 67

272

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

very significant for Isaiah. Isaiah uses the verb ‫ גאל‬for two-thirds (23 of 33) of the OT occurrences referring to God’s action in redeeming his people. Thus, all of the servant poems are surrounded by this theological concept. In Isa 40–55 alone, this verb is found seventeen times, revealing God’s action of redeeming Israel. Now, if God is the subject of this verb and he is also the one who calls his servant, the two of them are compatible for redeeming Israel. A servant can do the same type of work that God does if the biblical author intends to point to someone greater (see Joshua). 71 If the second servant poem reveals the servant as the redeemer (v. 7), the first servant would also be, based on the two key phrases as seen above. 72 The next servant poem (Isa 50:4–9) also theologically supports the first servant poem in terms of the servant being a redeemer. This can be seen in three ways. First, Isaiah 50:2 uses a key term to refer to the redeemer, although this term differs from that which appears in the second servant poem. This term ‫‘ ְפּדוּת‬redemption’, from the verb ‫‘ פדה‬redeem’, refers to God redeeming the nation, 73 and is found in a series of questions regarding what God can or cannot do for Israel. This particular verse amplifies the curiosity of the audience about how God will redeem them, the theme elaborated in vv. 4–10. Even though the term ‫ ְפּדוּת‬is different from the term ‫גּ ֵֹאל‬, both refer to a redeemer. Both terms refer to a juridical sphere, yet they have different applications. The term ‫ פדה‬refers to a business relationship (see Deut 15:15; 21:8), while 714F

715F

(earlier 35:9; and later 59:20; 60:16; 62:12; 63:9, 16). See ibid., 59. Also, Tryggve Mettinger, In Search of God: The Meaning and Message of the Everlasting Names (trans. Frederick H. Cryer; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 162–167; Stuhlmueller, Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah, 99. 71 See Davidson, In the Footsteps of Joshua, 24–35. 72 Lindsey points out that these two servant poems have four characteristics in common: ‘(1) they picture the Servant in terms of an individual; (2) they view the Servant as distinct from Israel; (3) they describe the Servant’s mission to Israel; and (4) they affirm the Servant’s broader worldwide mission to the Gentiles’. Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 62, n. 7. 73 Koehler and Baumgartner, ‘‫’פדה‬, HALOT 3:911–912.

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 273 ‫ גאל‬is specific to family law in the realm of redemption. 74 While the second servant poem emphasizes ‫( גּ ֵֹאל‬Isa 49:7), underlining ‘the blood tie linking the redeemer and the redeemed’, Isa 50:2 portrays ‫ ְפּדוּת‬as emphasizing the ‘price being paid in the course of a given transaction (see 1 Sam 14:45)’. 75 Thus, the author completes the idea of a redeemer as including both God and the servant. He brings both the business and blood concepts of redemption together with what the servant is doing in redeeming Israel. Hence the third servant poem enlarges the role of the servant and explains in depth the process of redeeming Israel. Second, with the servant being implied in both the ‫ גּ ֵֹאל‬and the ‫ ְפּדוּת‬as the redeemer, the author now supplies further details about the servant’s self-sacrifice as the redeemer. The servant is not a redeemer who is removed from action; the servant gives himself physically as a redeemer. This is introduced in the third servant poem with the words, ‘I gave my back to those who struck me, and my cheeks to those who plucked out the beard; I did not hide my face from shame and spitting’ (50:6). The fourth servant poem paints an even more elaborate view of the redeemer as the substitute for Israel. Third, the servant is perceived in vv. 4–9 as exhibiting a lament motif, yet obedient in sufferings (vv. 4–6); he has full confidence in God who will vindicate him (vv. 7–9). The servant here reveals further the aspect of salvation that was introduced in the first servant poem through his rejection. For Israel to be healed (42:7), the servant has to be rejected (50:4–9). Lindsey importantly states that the ‘rejected Servant indicates that Yahweh who has disciplined Him will also vindicate Him, and implies that through His rejection He has learned to comfort the weary’. 76 Furthermore, the servant is given words so that he can sustain the weary (v. 4). The servant of Isa 42:1–4 was given the Spirit of God to justly judge Israel that they may not be crushed (v. 3). While the third servant poem reveals the servant as being rejected, the servant in the first servant poem has not rejected Israel even though he judges them. See Mettinger, In Search of God, 162–167. Ibid., 163. 76 Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 82. 74 75

274

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The servant of Isa 50 is also obedient (v. 5) like the first servant (42:2). In both passages, the servant is to redeem Israel, the difference being that the third servant poem shares more details regarding his mission. The last servant poem (Isa 52:13–53:12) is the culmination of the previous servant poems, coming to the apex of the salvific mission of the servant, acted out for his people Israel. The first servant poem reveals the introduction of the servant’s mission, while the fourth servant poem is the conclusion of the servant’s mission in redeeming Israel. The statement in Isa 42:7 that the servant is going ‘to open the blind eyes, and bring out the prisoners from the dungeon and those who sit in darkness will be free from their prison house’ is now fully explained in Isa 52:13–53:12. The servant is the redeemer and substitute for Israel’s sinfulness (see 53:6). 77 The Some scholars disregard the view that a substitutionary atonement is found in Isa 52:13–53:12. For example, Orlinsky argues that ‘the concept of vicarious suffering and atonement is not to be found here or anywhere else in the Bible’. Harry M. Orlinsky, The So-Called ‘Servant of the LORD’ and ‘Suffering Servant’ in Second Isaiah (VTSup 14; Leiden: Brill, 1967), 54. George Knight identifies the servant’s sufferings as ‘participative’ but neither substitutionary nor penal, ‘endured, not instead of the other party, but on his account’. George A. F. Knight, Deutero-Isaiah: A Theological Commentary on Isaiah 40–55 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1965), 273. Whybray goes further by stating, ‘The fact that he chose instead the particle min indicates that he regarded the Servant’s ill treatment as the result of the people’s sin but not as a substitute for the punishment which they had deserved.’ Whybray, Isaiah 40–66, 175. Scholars who support that substitutionary atonement is found in Isa 52:13–53:12 include Averbeck, ‘Christian Interpretations of Isaiah 53’, 33–60; Richard M. Davidson, ‘Salvation and Forgiveness’, JATS 3, no. 1 (1992): 7–21; Charles E. Hill and Frank A. James, III, The Glory of the Atonement: Biblical, Historical and Practical Perspectives: Essays in Honor of Roger R. Nicole (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2004); Steve Jeffery, Michael Ovey, and Andrew Sach, Pierced for Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2007), 52–67; Leon Morris, The Atonement, Its Meaning and Significance (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 1983), 56; James I. Packer, In My Place Condemned He Stood: Celebrating the Glory of the 77

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 275 servant is led like a lamb to the slaughterhouse (53:7). God laid the iniquity (‫)ﬠוֹן‬ ָ of the people upon his servant and it pleased God to crush (‫ ַ)דּ ְכּאוֹ‬him (v. 10). 78 This description is what the first servant poem encapsulated when professing that the servant in righteousness is called, his hand held, and he is given for a covenant of the people and for a light for the Gentiles (42:6). He was chosen (v. 1) for this task, for this mission, to redeem humanity. In the last three servant poems, God’s actions through the servant are stressed as being pure, holy, and redemptive; the sins of Israel are no longer the primary focus. This shows that the sins of Israel are being moved away from Israel and toward the servant, highlighted in the first part of Isa 40–44, and demonstrates that the first servant poem, being at the center, is redemptive in the sense of consolation toward Israel and the nations. Then the sins of Israel are transferred to the servant in the later servant poems, concluding in the fourth servant poem where the servant bears their sins, revealing a full redemptive concept. 79 For this reason, the fourth servant poem is the apex of the redemptive image, moving from sin to redemption. 721F

Atonement (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2008); James I. Packer, What Did the Cross Achieve? The Logic of Penal Substitution (N.p., 1974); Ángel Manuel Rodríguez, ‘Substitution in the Hebrew Cultus and in Cultic-Related Texts’ (unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 1979), 276–301; David A. Sapp, ‘The LXX, 1QIsa, and MT Versions of Isaiah 53 and the Christian Doctrine of Atonement’, in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (ed. William H. Bellinger Jr. and William R. Farmer; Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press International, 1998), 170–192; John R. W. Stott, The Cross of Christ (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 1986), 133–162. 78 Pieper also concurs: ‘Before all others, the Servant was the object of suffering, sought out, so to speak, by suffering as the one object on earth to whom suffering pertained. All the suffering that pertained to this cursed world, He attracted to Himself, v. 6b. This suffering and these sorrows are not physical infirmity; they are the guilt of sin, wrath, curse, and punishment, taken from us and laid upon Him.’ August Pieper, Isaiah II: An Exposition of Isaiah 40–66 (Milwaukee: Northwestern, 1979), 437– 438. See also Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66, 346. 79 See Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 437–441.

276

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

In summary, the servant as a redeemer is clearly a theme in the servant poems. Furthermore, Isaiah’s theology is vitally embedded in chs 40–55, and more particularly in the servant’s salvific mission. God is the subject for saving his people, but he uses the servant as part of God’s plan. Thus, the servant can accomplish a divinely planned mission by being the ‫ גּ ֵֹאל‬of Israel (Isa 49:7). Covenant In the second servant poem, covenant theology is prominent and continues to build from the first servant poem. The same wording ‘give you for a covenant of the people’ (Isa 49:8) suggests the center of the servant’s task. The servant is to reconcile the people to God by bringing the ‘day of salvation’ (v. 8), denoting that the servant is the ‘Redeemer’ (v. 7). This covenant is to free people from ‘hunger and thirst’ (v. 10), to guide them (v. 10), and to free the people from darkness (v. 9). In the third servant poem, the covenant takes the view of the servant’s giving his ‘back to those who smite’ (Isa 50:6) and his ‘cheeks to beard-pullers’ (v. 6). 80 That the servant is pictured as being abused brings to mind a helpless animal brought to the temple for sacrifice. The fourth servant poem further clarifies this point. The mention of the servant’s back, coupled with Hezekiah’s image of sin being cast behind his back (Isa 38:17; 51:23) meaning that Hezekiah’s sins are forgiven and forgotten, may suggest that the servant is now giving his back to be smitten because of sin (see Deut 25:3; 27:25). 81 This imagery is covenant language because the Pentateuch concept of covenant is found in the blood-covenant of Ex 24. However, the imagery here could also be simply a humiliation and abuse of the servant, since scourging, beard pulling, and spitting in the face were all acts of humiliation in the OT: Num 12:14; Deut 25:9; 2 Sam 10:4; Neh 13:25; Isa 7:20; 15:2; Jer 7:29; Jer 20:2, 37:15; Job 30:10; the same imagery is used in the NT in Mt 26:67; 27:30; Jn 18:22. 81 In Proverbs the back that is smitten by a rod is that of one who is devoid of understanding (Prov 10:13); and stripes are also used on the back of the foolish individual (Prov 19:29). The context of the latter text 80

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 277 The fourth servant poem is the apex of covenant theology be53:10) for cause here the servant is the reparation offering (‫;אָשׁם‬ ָ the sin of the people, meaning that the responsibility for breaking divine law, which constitutes covenant stipulation, is on the servant (see Lev 5:14–26 [Engl. 5:14–6:7]). 82 The servant is self-sacrificing his life so that someone else can have life. Terms like ‘sheep, ewe sheep, shearers’ portray an image of the temple ceremony where reconciliation between God and people took place. This is the covenant concept of a legal binding relationship between two parties. 83 725F

726F

is regarding judgment. Furthermore, the context of the third servant poem is related to a legal covenant. 82 The question may arise, how can the servant of Isa 53 have a priestly function when he is the victim? The priest also was a mediator by bearing the culpabilities of the people (Lev 10:17, although this Leviticus passage is in the context of a purification offering rather than a reparation offering), ministering in the sanctuary between God and the people. Yet the victims are also a means of bearing the culpabilities of the people by their blood between God and the people (Lev 4–5). Yet both the victims and priests were insufficient to bring a complete justice. Thus, there is a need for a better victim and priest to bear our sins. In the book of Hebrews, the author suggests that Christ is both the victim and the priest (see Heb 7:16, 23–28; 9:11–14, 24–26, 28; 10:1–4). Christ was able to bear our sins as a priest and he also died as our victim, which would suggest that Christ is our substitute. Thus, the OT is limited in portraying all the images under one individual, but if the types of these images are connected in the NT to one person, we can relate the complete picture of the OT teaching. This is what Isa 53 is doing. See, for more information on this subject, Roy Gane, Altar Call (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Diadem, 1999), 42– 43; Roy Gane, Cult and Character: Purification Offerings, Day of Atonement, and Theodicy (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2005), 91–105; Roy Gane, Leviticus, Numbers (NIVAC; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004), 132–135; Ha, ‘Cultic Allusions in the Suffering Servant Poem (Isaiah 52:13–53:12)’, 93–120. 83 See Gane, ‘Covenant, Law, Sabbath’, 13–29.

278

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Servant and Judgment The judgment theme occurs in more than just the first servant poem. According to Odendaal, Isa 49:8 would also fit the criterion of a judgment theme. 84 Although it refers to the ‘day of salvation’, this would include the ‘day of judgment’ for those who have rejected God. 85 The second servant poem is preceded by a passage outlining what God did for Israel, but Isa 48 reveals how Israel has stubbornly rejected God as its Redeemer. The last verse of ch. 48 ends with little hope: ‫אָמר יְ הוָ ה ָל ְר ָשׁ ִﬠים‬ ַ ‫‘ ֵאין ָשׁלוֹם‬there is no peace says the Lord for the wicked’ (48:22). Hence the ‘day of salvation’, as promised in Isa 49:8, also brings a day of reckoning for those who reject the servant’s sacrifice. 86 However, the judgment affects not only God’s people; the second servant poem introduces the concept that the judgment will also be on the servant. Isaiah 49:4 reveals this notion by using the same term that is found in Isa 42:1–4, ‫אָכן ִמ ְשׁ ָפּ ִטי ֶאת־יְ הוָ ה‬ ֵ ‘surely my justice/judgment [is] with the Lord’. In other words, the judgment on the servant is a vindication or reward for his work. 87 This parallels the following term ‫‘ ְפּ ֻﬠ ָלּה‬reward’. Because the servant’s service is favorable to God, the outcome is positive; nevertheless, the term ‫ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬also brings a judicial motive, 88 suggesting juxtaposition between ‘reward’ and ‘judgment’, with the servant experiencing both of them. Lindsey concurs by stating: ‘In contrast with the apparent failure of His mission, the Servant voices His deepest trust that Yahweh will confirm and vindicate His work by granting His Servant ultimate success (cf. Isa. 50:8; 53:11–22).’ 89 729F

731F

732F

See Odendaal, The Eschatological Expectation of Isaiah 40–66, 98. See Jiří Moskala, ‘The Gospel According to God's Judgment: Judgment as Salvation’, JATS 22, no. 1 (2011): 28–49. 86 See Knight, Servant Theology: A Commentary on the Book of Isaiah 40– 55, 133. 87 North, The Second Isaiah, 188–189; Scott Rae, ‘An Exegetical and Theological Study of Isaiah 49:1–13’ (unpubl. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1981), 37. 88 Rae, ‘An Exegetical and Theological Study of Isaiah 49:1–13’, 37. 89 Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 68. 84 85

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 279 The third servant poem elaborates on the judgment theme, but this time the judgment is directed to the servant instead of to the people. This clause exhibits this idea of judgment on the servant: ‫וּל ָחיַ י ְלמ ְֹר ִטים‬ ְ ‫‘ גֵּ וִ י נָ ַת ִתּי ְל ַמ ִכּים‬I gave my back to the smiters and my cheeks to be rubbed raw’ (50:6). The servant in this case voluntarily accepts this treatment; nevertheless, it remains a judgment. Judgment in the third servant poem serves as a link between the previous two servant poems and the fourth one, which presents a full view of judgment on the servant. In Isa 50:8 the questions asked also reveal the judgment theme: ‫י־ב ַﬠל ִמ ְשׁ ָפּ ִטי יִ גַּ שׁ ֵא ָלי‬ ַ ‫יקי ִמי־יָ ִריב ִא ִתּי נַ ַﬠ ְמ ָדה יָּ ַחד ִמ‬ ִ ‫ָקרוֹב ַמ ְצ ִדּ‬ ‘who is near to obtain right for me? 90 (see 2 Sam 15:4; Ps 82:3; Dan 12:3; Job 27:5), who will contend/strive with me? Let us stand together; who is the master of my judgment (who is my accuser)? Let him approach/draw close to me (confront me)!’ This verse unveils a covenant lawsuit (see Mic 6:1–13), which includes a judgment for God’s people but more particularly a judgment about God and his servant. The first servant poem’s ministry of freeing the captives from prison and opening blind eyes (42:7) continues through these servant poems (second and third), and now the servant will reveal to people that God the Creator is not an unjust God. Instead, God has provided a way of escape through the servant’s being the mode of salvation and revealing the love of God toward his people (50:6; also 53). Isaiah 50:10 brings this type of reassurance by outlining key words, ‫‘ יְ ֵרא יְ הוָ ה‬fear the LORD’, ‫‘ שׁ ֵֹמ ַ� ְבּקוֹל ַﬠ ְבדּוֹ‬obey the word/voice of his servant’, ‫‘ לוֹ ְיִב ַטח ְבּ ֵשׁם יְ הוָ ה‬let him trust in the name of YHWH’, and ‫א�היו‬ ָ ‫‘ וְ יִ ָשּׁ ֵﬠן ֵבּ‬let him lean upon his God’. The people need to fear, obey, trust, and lean on God and the servant. It is important to note that several divine designations are used in this verse: ‘LORD, servant, God’. The last servant poem most clearly reveals the judgment theme. The judgment is not directed to Israel and other nations, but rather it is fully directed to the servant of the Lord for the sins of the people. What began in the first servant poem as a view of Shalom Paul points out Rabbi Samuel Luzzatto’s statement: ‘My advocate, He who makes the righteousness of my cause shine forth is none other than God.’ Paul, Isaiah 40–66, 353. 90

280

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

judgment coming upon Israel and the nations turns out in the fourth servant poem as the apex of judgment, but placed on the servant. Hence the judgment is a bittersweet experience as a whole (53:10). The judgment appears to be bitter for Israel, since they are condemned for their sins (v. 6). However, the judgment turns out to be sweet for them, since their condemnation is placed on the servant of the Lord (53:4, 11–12). The bitterness of Israel is placed on the servant, and because of the stripes he receives, Israel can be healed (v. 5). Therefore, the judgment is mixed with God’s mercy (see Jas 2:13). 91 To understand fully the judgment that is revealed in the first servant poem, it must be studied with the three other servant poems for a full comprehension of its message. The culmination of the full view of judgment does not appear until the fourth servant poem. Hence the first servant poem needs to be viewed in light of the fourth servant poem. This is not the first time that Isaiah interweaves concepts of judgment and hope, grace, and redemption together. For example, in Isa 5:1–13, the judgment theme appears against Israel, followed by ch. 7 where the Assyrians come to attack Israel and execute judgment. Yet, hope is restored by the giving of a child (Isa 7:10– 14; 9:6) and by the coming of a ‘shoot’ from Jesse (11:1–10). The hope of a rescuer reveals in the earlier part of Isaiah the same theological integration of hope and judgment. Thus, judgment is just as much an act of God’s salvation 92 as hope looks forward to an act of God’s salvation. John Oswalt sees the judgment theme mixed with the hope theme. See his article, John N. Oswalt, ‘Judgment and Hope: The Full-Orbed Gospel’, TJ 17, no. 2 (1996): 191–202. Also, see Bernhard W. Anderson, ‘“God with Us”—In Judgment and in Mercy: The Editorial Structure of Isaiah 5–10 (11)’, in Canon, Theology, and Old Testament Interpretation: Essays in Honor of Brevard S. Childs (ed. Gene M. Tucker et al.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 243. 92 Moskala, ‘The Gospel According to God's Judgment’, 28–49; Hugh G. M. Williamson, ‘Hope under Judgment: The Prophets of the Eighth Century BCE’, EvQ 72, no. 4 ‘O’ (2000): 291–306. 91

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 281 God and the Future This is further exhibited by the fact that God is not only unique but also sovereign. He is in control of events in history, and he is able to predict the future that will affect the course of individual nations (7:18–25). God’s purpose is immovable (46:10–11) in affecting judgment and salvation (46:12–13). In the servant poems, the purpose of God is to bring both judgment and salvation to Israel and the nations (42:1–7; 49:2, 6–8; 53:1,4, 8). God, unlike other deities, predicts 93 who will bring judgment and salvation and when they will do it (42:9; 49:1, 5; 50:1–3). God proclaims the servant of the Lord for the purpose of bringing judgment and salvation (42:1–4). This contrasts with Israel, who cannot save itself, nor can other gods save it. Servant as King The second servant poem reveals a link to kingship (40:11; 49:8– 10). 94 The key terms that suggest kingship, which are often used in the context of the Israelite kings, particularly related to David as king and also in relation to God as king, are ‘inherit’ (‫( )נחל‬Ex 23:30; Deut 4:38; Josh 12:1; 1 Sam 10:1) and ‘lead’ (‫( )נהג‬Deut 28:37; Pss 48:14; 78:52), where God is the leader. This servant poem attributes these terms to the servant, who would now represent the image of a king on earth, combining both divinity and humanity. In the third servant poem (50:4–11), the kingship idea is found mainly in v. 8. The author briefly alludes to the servant’s work being in contest with that of his opponents, as at a trial in a court. The terms ‘judgment’ and ‘contend or lawsuit’ suggest the idea of court. Furthermore, ‘face each other’ emphatically suggests a meeting in court; the servant is being accused. The king, under normal circumstances, did the judging (see 1 Kings 3:16–28), but here the role has changed; the king is being judged. 95 However, the See Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 321. Lindsey, A Study in Isaiah, 21. 95 The words ‫ריב‬, ‫עמד‬, and ‫שׁ ָפּט‬ ְ ‫ ִמ‬occur together in the same verse in five passages: 2 Sam 15:2; Isa 50:8; Ezek 44:24; Job 31:13; 2 Chr 19:8. 93 94

282

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

servant is confident that the verdict is going in his favor; since God is his helper (v. 9), no charges against him can stand. 96 In the fourth servant poem, kingship theology can be observed first with the term ‫‘ רוּם‬exalted, be high’ (52:13), another term often related to God in the context of kingship (Ex 15:2; 1 Sam 2:10; 2 Sam 22:47–49; Isa 30:18). 97 The kingship theme continues with the idea that the servant is buried in a ‘rich’ grave; 98 often kings are buried in royal graves (see 2 Kings 15:7; 2 Chr 26:23). 99 In the parable that Nathan spoke to king David about the rich and poor man, the rich man represented David (2 Sam 12:1–4; also 1 Kings 3:13; 10:23), implying that kings were rich men. 740F

741F

742F

Exodus Motif The second servant poem contains theology regarding the new exodus. Several scholars have observed that Isa 49:8–12 portrays this concept of the new exodus. 100 The promise is that God will bring In all these passages there is an element of court ideology. In 2 Sam 15:2 Absalom rises up against the king of Israel, his own father David. 96 See Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 400. 97 The ‘exalt’ in v. 13 is related to the ANE concept of the substitutionary king, where a person was chosen to be sacrificed as a representative king. Bottéro, Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods, 150; Walton, ‘The Imagery of the Substitute King Ritual in Isaiah's Fourth Servant Song’, 736–738. 98 See Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 417. 99 See, for example, Norma Franklin, ‘The Tombs of the Kings of Israel: Two Recently Identified 9th-Century Tombs from Omride Samaria’, ZDPV 119, no. 1 (2003): 1–11; Wolfram Grajetzki, Burial Customs in Ancient Egypt: Life in Death for Rich and Poor (London: Duckworth, 2003); Eric M. Meyers, ‘The Theological Implications of an Ancient Jewish Burial Custom’, JQR 62, no. 2 (1971): 95–119; Julian Reade, ‘Assyrian King-lists, the Royal Tombs of Ur, and Indus Origins’, JNES 60, no. 1 (2001): 17–23. 100 See Anderson, ‘Exodus Typology in Second Isaiah’, 177–195; Baltzer and Machinist, Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55, 314; Hill, ‘Reading Isaiah as a Theological Unity’, 141–148; Ninow, ‘Indicators

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 283 his people to a new land. The author does not confuse the general characterization of the servant by linking the servant to Israel (Isa 49:3); instead, he (the author) reveals the servant as a greater person (that is, a messianic servant). Thus, the depiction that God will deliver his people in connection with the new and greater exodus, by the servant’s mediation of a covenant for the people, may point beyond the concept of the Babylonian exile to an eschatological fulfillment. 101 While the third servant poem reveals exodus theology in a limited way, nevertheless it is still revealed. In Isa 50:10 the prophet concludes the poem with a call to the audience to ‘fear’ and ‘obey’ the servant, a parallel found in Ex 20:18–20 after the Israelites left Egypt. As Motyer states, ‘the place and status of the Servant is such that it is now by listening to him that reverence to God is displayed and passes into action’. 102 ‘Those who walk in darkness’ (Isa 50:10) also echoes the time when the Egyptian army that pursued the Israelites was in darkness (see Ex 3:13–15; 14:19–20). Yet ‘fire’ was the guide for the Israelites, and now Isaiah 50:10 admonishes God’s people, who have no light, to ‘trust in the name of the Lord’, depending upon God and not upon self. The fourth servant poem points to a servant who is given as a sacrifice. As in the death of the firstborn son in Egypt and the night in which the Israelites ate the lamb and placed its blood on the doorpost, now the servant gives himself for the same cause—to deliver the people (Isa 53:4–10). Pharaoh wanted to be exalted by controlling the people of God, but in the end God was exalted (Ex 14:17; Isa 52:13). This servant delivers from bondage the people of Typology within the Old Testament’, 218–223; Westermann, Isaiah 40– 66, 215–216. 101 Ninow, ‘Indicators of Typology within the Old Testament’, 223. Because Isa 49:8–12 is considered to reveal part of the ‘new exodus’, the parallel between the second servant poem and the first servant poem is intentional, suggesting that especially Isa 49:8 and Isa 42:6 would also be connected to the ‘new exodus’ motif. In Isa 42:6, the servant is also given for a covenant of the people, which is part of the Sinai covenant (Ex 19– 24). 102 Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 401.

284

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

who are trapped in sin (Isa 53:5). This is the ultimate plan of God through his servant, but this time it is not accomplished by the hand of Moses, but by a better servant—the Messiah. Parallel Structure in the Development of Theological Motifs Structurally, the first servant poem provides theological insight in light of the three other servant poems. The first servant poem begins with the calling of the servant followed by his mission. The next three poems also have this parallel structure of the call of the servant followed by his mission. 103 That all of the servant poems in Isa 40–55 have the same structure of two parts in the individual servant poems, followed by a hymn, suggests a deliberate theological effort on the part of the author. See table 28. Since the servant poems exhibit similar structures, it appears that they are related, which strengthens the idea of the unity of that individual’s mission. Furthermore, there appears to be a continuity of thought about what the servant was going to do at each stage, but at each stage more details are given about his mission. Differences between the Servant Poems There is a difference in the sections of the third servant poem in contrast to the first two servant poems. First, Isa 50:4–9 includes new and more detailed information regarding the servant’s ministry, emphasizing his suffering. Isaiah 42 only refers to the servant’s calling and mission in a broad way, without specifying his suffering. The second poem contains only one hint of the servant’s being frustrated about unproductive toil (Isa 49:4); 104 however, because of the ‘servant’s obedience to God, he suffered both a physical and emotional suffering (vv. 5–6)’. 105 Thus, while the third servant poem has connections to the second servant poem, it is connected even more closely to the fourth servant poem. This paints a clear progression in the servant’s ministry, both in his relationship to his See my related comments on p. 184 fn. 47. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, 322. 105 Ibid. 103 104

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 285 God and how the salvific plan develops to a more complete and transparent mission. Table 28. Structural Similarities among the Four Servant Poems Isaiah 42:1–9

Isaiah 49:1–12

Call of the servant in Isaiah 42:1–4

Call of the servant in Isaiah 49:1–6

Call of the servant in Isaiah 50:4–9

Call of the servant in Isaiah 52:13–15

Hymn after poem in Isaiah 42:10–13

Hymn after poem in Isaiah 49:13

Hymn after poem in Isaiah 51:3 (possibly?); Isaiah 52:7–10

Hymn after poem in Isaiah 54:1–17

Mission of the servant in Isaiah 42:5–9

Mission of the servant in Isaiah 49:8–12

Isaiah 50:4–11

Mission of the servant in Isaiah 50:10–11

Isaiah 52:13– 53:12

Mission of the servant in Isaiah 53:1–12

THEOLOGY OF THE SERVANT IN THE CONTEXT OF ISAIAH 40–55 Introduction I will briefly explore the theology of the servant(s) in Isa 40–55. The concept of servant is separated into two groups: the individual servant, which includes the four servant poems, and the corporate servant (Isa 41:8–9; 42:19; 43:10; 44:1–2, 21, 26; 45:4; 48:20; 54:17) and its context. The similarities and differences between these two groups are compared in two tables below to determine the theological concepts, and these are followed by a brief explanation. Similarities between the Individual and the Corporate Servant Table 29 reveals the similarities between the individual servant and the corporate servant in Isa 40–55. This table reveals a surface continuity between the individual servant and the corporate servant, but upon closer inspection of each of these surface parallels, a lack of complete continuity becomes apparent. The individual servant has some characteristics found in the corporate servant when the context of the corporate servant is included; however, observing all

286

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

the corporate servant passages as a whole suggests a rather weak theological connection between the individual and corporate servants. For example, the descendant of Abraham is revealed in the first servant poem with the concept of covenant, while the two corporate servants (41:8–9; 48:19) refer to Abraham in light of a blood lineage. Table 29. Similarities between the Individual and Corporate Servant in Isaiah 40–55 Individual Servant in Isaiah 40– 55

Similarities

Corporate Servant in Isaiah 40–55

Isa 42:1–9

Descendant of Abraham

Isa 41:8–9; 48:19

Isa 42:1

Chosen by God

Isa 41:8–9; 44:1–2; 45:4

Isa 42:1–9; 49:1– 12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12

Not forgotten

Isa 44:21

Isa 42:1

Spirit upon him

Isa 44:3

Called

Isa 45:4

Isa 42:1–4, 6; 49:6, 8; 50:6; 53:4–7

Isa 53:11–12

Isa 42:1–9; 49:1– 12 Isa 42:6 Isa 49:3

Witness for God

Isa 43:10; 44:1, 21; 45:4; 54:17

Victorious accomplishment

Isa 45:17; 54:17

Leader

Isa 45:1

Proper name

Isa 41:8–9; 44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20

The theology of ‘chosen by God’ reveals a partial similarity. First, the individual is ‘chosen’ by God, an idea that is also found in a few passages where the corporate servant is ‘chosen’ by God. On the other hand, the reason why they are chosen reveals a different purpose theologically. The individual servant is ‘chosen’ for a special

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 287 task at hand, while the corporate servant is ‘chosen’ in the sense of selection or set apart for relationship. It is true with Isa 45:4 that the servant is chosen for a task also, but this is the only exception in all the corporate servant passages. Perhaps, in Isa 45:4 this particular servant partially fulfills the individual servant’s role in terms of being ‘chosen’ for deliverance of God’s people. The same concept is seen with the phrase ‘witness for God’. Both the individual and corporate servants witness for God but for different reasons; their witness’s application is different. The individual servant witnesses on behalf of God, while the corporate servant witnesses what God has done for him so that he may believe and know God better. Theologically, God has not ‘forgotten’ either the individual or the corporate servant. When the individual servant is going through hardship or is in a deep valley, God is there for him (Isa 42:6). On the other hand, the corporate servant is not forgotten when in a deep valley, but the reason he ended up in hardship was because of his disobedience (Isa 41:8–10; 42:17–19). Even then, however, God does not leave his people fully on their own; he has a solution to rescue them from the hardship in which they put themselves. This solution is found in the mission of the individual servant. Both the individual and corporate servants are victorious. Again, the ‘victory’ the individual servant experiences is enveloped by the idea of completing the sacrifice for sinners, while the victory the corporate servant experiences is due to what the individual servant has accomplished. The corporate servant is victorious, not in itself, but because of the victory belonging to God (Isa 45:17). However, both servants are ultimately victorious. The ‘spirit upon him’ follows a similar idea, where the individual servant receives the ‘spirit’ for his task and because of being called for that task. On the other hand, the corporate servant receives the ‘spirit’ as a blessing. The individual servant has skills of a good leader in how he brings ‘justice’ and handles the ‘reed’ (Isa 42:1–4). He speaks words of comfort (49:2) and ‘leads’ by the strength of God (v. 5). On the other hand, the corporate servant (45:4) in this context is being guided by a leader of war, Cyrus, ‘to subdue nations’ and ‘to loose the loins of kings’ (45:1). Thus, in Isa 42 the individual servant leads, while in Isa 45 Cyrus is leading the corporate servant. In reality, someone other than the corporate servant provides leadership.

288

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Both leaders are ‘called’, but for different reasons. The individual servant is called ‘in righteousness’ (42:6), bringing a spiritual tone to his calling, while the corporate servant is called ‘by name’ (45:4), suggesting a servant of stature, more like a political figure. Thus, while having a different purpose, the call is important for both servants. As I pointed out in ch. 3 of this work, the term ‘Israel’ is used only in the second servant poem (Isa 49:3), but not to reveal a corporate servant, since v. 6 suggests that the servant is to ‘restore’ Israel. 106 Furthermore, the servant of Isa 49:1–12 reveals a positive mission, while the other servant passages in which the proper name ‘Israel’ or ‘Jacob’ is used (Isa 41:8–9; 44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20) describe a servant who does negative actions. The servant in the second servant poem reveals a better Israel and succeeds where the corporate servant fails. Finally, the author uses the term ‘servant’ to refer to both the individual and the corporate servant and does not differentiate between the Messiah and Israel for a simple reason. He is looking forward to the individual servant’s coming, who will be the perfect embodiment of the ideal representation of God’s people. 107 Thus, the term ‘servant’ refers to both the collective group as well as an individual person who represents the whole of the group. 108 As Walter Kaiser Jr. states: See ch. 3 for more information on the second servant poem. See William Dyrness, Themes in Old Testament Theology (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 1979), 232. 108 See Kaiser, Toward an Old Testament Theology, 215. ‘Corporate’ is the term employed especially by Jean de Fraine, Adam et son lignage: études sur la notion de ‘personnalité corporative’ dans la Bible (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1959), translated in Jean de Fraine, Adam and the Family of Man (trans. Daniel Raible; Staten Island, N.Y.: Alba House, 1965). This term is also utilized by H. Ridderbos in his discussion of the solidarity phenomena in Rom 5; and by Gerrit C. Berkouwer (Sin [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971], 512–523) in discussing the nature of original sin. Also see Richard Davidson where he uses the term ‘corporate solidarity’. Richard M. Davidson, ‘Corporate Solidarity in the Old Testament’ (Unpublished manuscript: Andrews University, 2004); Fraine, Adam and the Family of 106 107

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 289 The apparent ambivalence is the same type of oscillation found in all the collective terms previously observed in the promise doctrine. They were all-inclusive of all Israel, but they were simultaneously always focused on one representative who depicted the fortunes of the whole group for that present time and the climactic future. 109

Differences between the Individual and the Corporate Servant I will synthesize in table 30 the differences between the individual and corporate servants. The characterization of the corporate servant reveals that Israel has sinned and is in need of a redeemer (Isa 42:18–25). There is no call extended to the corporate servant, although he is ‘chosen’ (‫)בחר‬, like Abraham who was chosen (Isa 41:8) for a covenant (see Gen 12:1–3); however, the corporate servant is not given as a covenant for people (Isa 42:6). Israel’s sin would suggest that the corporate servant loses his office, while the servant in ‘chaps. 52–53 makes possible a new exodus’. 110 The corporate servant does not exhibit the trust that the individual servant has nor does he live a just and kind life. The individual servant brings redemption to the corporate servant who is in need of redemption. The individual servant bears the sin of the corporate servant. The individual servant is healing the corporate servant, thus revealing the mission of the individual servant: to save the unsaved (see 45:17, 25). The corporate servant passages, except for Isa 45:1, do not structurally reveal a call or a mission given to Israel. In the case of Isa 45:1, God is really the one accomplishing the mission; Cyrus is not the primary focus of the mission (vv. 2–3). No hymn of praise or rejoicing follows what the corporate servant does, which is ex753F

Man. The concept of corporate solidarity in these Pauline passages is widely recognized. For a succinct and insightful summary of Paul’s usage, see, for example, Charles H. Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1954), 78–83; Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 57–64. 109 Kaiser, Toward an Old Testament Theology, 216. 110 Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 154. See also Watts, ‘Consolation or Confrontation’, 31–59.

290

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

plainable for the simple reason that the corporate servant receives the action instead of performing the action. The individual servant, on the other hand, performs the action; therefore, one would expect to hear something about the deliverance that he has accomplished. Table 30. Differences between the Individual and Corporate Servant in Isaiah 40–55 Individual Servant in Isaiah 40–55

Differences

Corporate Servant in Isaiah 40– 55

Isa 42:1–9; 49:1– 12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12

Trust in God

Distrust in God

Isa 41:8–10; 42:17–19

Isa 42:6; 49:8; 53:5–8

Isa 42:1–9; 49:1– 12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12

Is a covenant to people Redeemer

Receives a covenant

Isa 41:8–10; 42:16–25

Isa 50:5–6; 53:1– 9, 11–12

Sin-bearer

Sinful

Isa 42:1–4;

Kind

Unkind

Isa 42:16–25; 43:10, 22–28; 48:22

Isa 42:6; 49:6; 50:4–9; 52:13

Is a light to nations

Fails to be a light

Isa 42:17–19; 48:1–8

Isa 42:5–9; 49:8– 12; 50:10–11

Has a mission

Isa 41:8–9; 42:16– 19; 42:26; 48:20

Isa 42:1–9; 49:6– 12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12

No proper name given

Does not have a mission

Isa 42:1–4; 49:1– 4 Isa 42:7; 53:5

Just

Healer

Being redeemed

Unjust

Being healed

Proper name Jacob and Israel

Isa 42:17–25; 43:1; 44:22, 26; 45:17; 48:17–20

Isa 45:1–2

Isa 42:16–25

Isa 42:16–19; 43:8–9

Isa 41:8–9; 44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 291 These servant passages (41:8–9; 45:4) also use the apposition Israel or Jacob. Even though some characteristics of the individual and the corporate servants overlap, the actions of the corporate servant are opposite to that of the individual servant, and the actions received by these servants are also dissimilar. Furthermore, although the servant of Isa 42:1–9—like the servant of Isa 41:8–9, for example—comes from the same root, or tribe, of Judah, the servant of Isa 42:1–9 is third masculine singular while the corporate servant is either second masculine singular or feminine singular. Thus the author makes a clear distinction between the individual servant and the corporate servant. In summary, the individual servant and the corporate servant are not the same servant. The servanthood in Isa 42 is contrasted to Israel’s servanthood. The two have starkly contrasting characters and missions. The servant of Isa 42:1–9 is about to save Israel from its sinful condition, while the corporate servant is in need of redemption. The servant of Isa 42:1–9, contrasted with the servant/Israel, is true, faithful, reliable, trustworthy, and in good standing with God. This servant of the Lord can bring redemption (42:6–7) to the servant of the Lord identified as Israel (41:8–9). Although the two servants are not the same, they are also parallel enough to show that the individual servant is the representative of the corporate servant, with a mission to save the corporate servant.

WHO IS THE SERVANT OF THE FIRST SERVANT POEM?

The first servant poem can have more than one application. 111 The servant in Isa 42:1–9 is partially fulfilled in Cyrus. 112 Cyrus was called to deliver God’s people from the Babylonian empire. He was the king of Persia, which also fulfills the kingship theme of the first servant poem. Cyrus was used by God to bring judgment, or at least an aspect of judgment, upon Babylon. Finally, Cyrus brought political stability to Israel. While Cyrus has several similar characteristics in common with the first servant poem, Cyrus has also many characteristics 111 112

See pp. 38–43 of this work regarding the hermeneutical approach. Ibid.

292

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

different from the first servant poem. First, Cyrus is not called a servant of the Lord. Second, Cyrus is not a covenant between God and Israel and he is not a light to the nations. Third, Cyrus does not judge the sins of Israel and he brings only a political kingship; no spiritual kingship is built. Fourth, Cyrus does not reflect the name of God. Fifth, Cyrus is subordinate to God. God does all the actions, and the initiative comes from him and not from Cyrus (45:3–13). Sixth, God’s sovereignty is over Cyrus and ‘Cyrus is the executive officer whose task is to act as “shepherd” (44:28)’. 113 Seventh, God called Cyrus, but Cyrus does not know God (Isa 45:4– 5). While Cyrus is called ‘his anointed’ (Isa 45:1), it is clear that Cyrus did not restore the Davidic kingship, although he was considered as an agent of deliverance for Israel. 114 It is essential to briefly point out that Cyrus also has characteristics patterned after the Pharaoh of the exodus, which would contribute to the understanding that Cyrus is not the ultimate, complete fulfillment of the first servant poem. Under the new exodus motif, Cyrus would be considered the second Pharaoh for several reasons. First, in Ex 5:2, Pharaoh rejected Moses’ request to allow Israel to go sacrifice to God by stating, ‘I do not know God’. In contrast to the individual servant (Isa 49:1–5; 50:4–10), Cyrus professes twice that he ‘does not know God’ (Isa 45:4, 5; also 19:21). Second, in Ex 7:5, God states the reason why he will deliver his people: so that ‘the Egyptians will know that I am the LORD’ (see Ex 7:17; 8:10; 14:18). The same observation is made and reiterated in God’s contacts with Cyrus: ‘that you may know that I am the LORD’ (Isa 45:3). Third, Ex 7:11 again points out that God overcomes the ‘wise men’ of Egypt; in Isaiah, God’s power is revealed Paul D. Brassey, Metaphor and the Incomparable God in Isaiah 40–55: A Thesis (BDS 9; North Richland Hills, Tex.: BIBAL Press, 2001), 111. 114 John J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star: Messianism in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls (2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 33, 36. Even though Antti Laato argues that the servant of Lord in Isa 40–55 refers to Cyrus, he states in passing that ‘Isa 40–55 does not place all of its messianic hopes upon Cyrus’, although he continues to support his thesis. See Laato, The Servant of YHWH and Cyrus: A Reinterpretation of the Exilic Messianic Programme in Isaiah 40–55, 244. 113

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 293 and glory is given to God for the reason that he ‘overthrows the wise’ (Isa 44:25). Fourth, Pharaoh finally lets the people go free (Ex 3:20; 6:1; 14:5); Isa 45:13 declares, ‘I have aroused him [Cyrus] in righteousness, and I will make all his paths straight; he will build my city and set my exiles free, not for price or reward, says the LORD of hosts.’ 115 Thus, there must be an eschatological person who completely fulfills Isa 42:1–9. Even though Cyrus fulfills some historical aspects, he does not completely portray the entire first servant poem image. Perhaps, the author is pointing to a greater servant by using typology. The OT uses typology to point to a person, event, or institution in the future that has greater significance in accomplishing what was intended by the typology. G. K. Beale defines typology as follows: ‘the study of analogical correspondences among revealed truths about persons, events, institutions, and other things within the historical framework of God’s special revelation, which, from a retrospective view, are of a prophetic nature and are escalated in their meaning’. 116 ‘According to this definition, the essential characteristics of a type are (1) analogical correspondence, (2) historicity, (3) a pointing-forwardness (i.e., an aspect of foreshadowing or presignification), (4) escalation, and (5) retrospection.’ 117 Beale observes that the typologies that the prophets used in the OT ‘were to be fulfilled in the short term’, 118 during the time of the OT. However, he observes that even ‘when the prophecy is fulfilled, it is clear that the full contours of the prophecy have not been conFor all these points, I am indebted to Hugenberger, ‘The Servant of the Lord’, 126. 116 Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 14. While Beale perceives typology as ultimately retrospective, yet he recognizes that usually (if not always) there are hints in the OT itself of the typological nature of a person, event, or institution. See also Davidson, ‘Typological Structures in the Old and New Testaments’; Goppelt, Typos. 117 Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 14. 118 Ibid., 16. It is not always true that typology is fulfilled in the short term. For example, the fourth oracle of Balaam was not fulfilled in the short term (Num 24). 115

294

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

summately fulfilled’. 119 There is from that prophecy a historical fulfillment in itself, which will be foreshowed at a later point to complete its fulfillment. 120 Using the typological approach as described above, the first servant poem would have been fulfilled during the time of the OT, with its greater fulfillment foreshowing an eschatological person. The fulfillment during the time of the OT, a time that the author may strongly suggest, would be by the person and event of Cyrus. Isaiah 45 describes Cyrus as an ‘anointed’ for the purpose of delivering God’s people. While Isa 45 has many connections with Isa 42:1–9, there are many limitations also, which would suggest that Cyrus only partially fulfilled Isa 42:1–9. It is important to note that this is not the first time that this device may have been used in giving a typological prophecy, which would have been fulfilled during the time of Isaiah but yet also had an eschatological fulfillment. For example, Isa 7:14 contains Isaiah’s prophecy about a child being born of a woman; Isa 8 appears to be the short-term fulfillment, Isaiah’s son being that child. Yet Isa 9 and 11 continue the prophecy of Isa 7:14, revealing a divine aspect of this prophecy. 121 A similar scenario is traced with Isa 42:1–9, where it is fulfilled with Cyrus in Isa 45, yet the greater fulfillment of this servant will be at a later time in the unknown future. Yet, even though the first servant poem is distanced by many chapters from the other three servant poems, 122 allowing the short-term prophecy of the first servant poem to be revealed, these poems continue to develop and reveal an eschatological concept of the first servant poem as well as Ibid. Ibid. See also Smith, Isaiah 40–66, 353. 121 See Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic?, 146–163. 122 Peter J. Gentry and Stephen J. Wellum also acknowledge that the first servant poem (Isa 42:1–9) is distanced from the next three servant poems (Isa 49:1–13; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12), but their reasoning is based on the perspective of covenant. For them, Isaiah 40:1–42:17 is steeped in the Abrahamic covenant, while the last three servant poems focus on redemption from sin. See Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 438–439. 119 120

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 295 its mission in connection to God. 123 A future fulfillment has to be more precise and accurate in relation to Isa 42:1–9.

See Davidson, ‘The Messianic Hope in Isaiah 7:14’, 85–96. Richard Davidson observes: ‘The messianic nature of Isa 7–12 is further highlighted as one visualizes the Volume of Immanuel within the larger context of the chiastic structure of the entire book of Isaiah (see Figure 2). ‘In my tentative analysis of the chiastic structure of Isaiah, members A and A’ represent early and late oracles, with common themes such as ruin and restoration. Member B, the Volume of Immanuel, is placed in chiastic parallel with member B’, the other major section of messianic prophecy in the book of Isaiah, namely, the Book of the Suffering Servant (Isa 49–55). Members C and C’ deal with foreign nations, especially Babylon. Members’ [sic] D and D’ move to the universal realm, describing on one hand universal desolation, and on the other hand, universal restoration. Members E and E’ are the Volume of Woes and Volume of Comfort respectively, both with another minor section dealing with the messiah (33:17–24 and 42). Finally, the center of the book, Member F (chs. 36– 39), is the only sustained section of the book in prose. Here Isaiah presents an example of a time in history when Israel dared to take God at his word, and the resultant deliverance from the Assyrians by the mighty hand of God. It demonstrates the nature of trust that God is seeking of his people. ‘Within the overall literary structure of Isaiah, the messianic passages play a major role, and within the messianic passages, the Volume of Immanuel takes a significant place beside its chiastic counterpart, the Songs of the Suffering Servant, in detailing the identity and work of the coming Messiah. The messianic hope burns brightly in Isaiah, particularly in Isa 7:14 and its larger context of the Volume of Immanuel!’ Ibid., 95–96. 123

296

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

This servant fulfills more than just a physical and political accomplishment as represented by Cyrus; the servant of Isa 42 fulfills a spiritual duty. The Holy Spirit is upon him to guide him in his task (v. 1). The servant as king brings justice by pointing out the sin of Israel and the people (vv. 1–4). While he brings justice, he does it according to the ‘law’ (v. 4). Yet, he also provides salvation by giving himself as an embodied covenant to Israel and a light to the nations (v. 6). The servant is introduced by God and supported by him (v. 1), yet the servant glorifies God as Creator by what he does (vv. 6–8). Thus, the servant is working equally with God, not as inferior or superior to God (v. 8). The servant is called ‘servant’ and he is ‘chosen,’ both covenantal terms (v. 1). The servant also not only delivers people physically from prison and darkness, but he restores people spiritually (vv. 6–7). The servant is called in ‘righteousness’, which reveals the attributes of God relating to his covenant (v. 6).

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 297 ‘The faith of the returned exiles therefore was constantly looking forward to the coming Consolation of Israel. When He would come, He would achieve the Messianic gathering and restore Israel to all her covenant blessings.’ 124 Thus, the servant of Isa 42 is typologically anticipating, as shown in table 31, a better servant/king, David, and a better prophet/servant, Moses, in the person of the Messiah. 125 The only individual who fits all these characteristics of the first servant poem is the Messiah. The OT expectation of the Messiah was a king-like figure who would bring justice. He was going to deliver his people both politically and spiritually. He was going to restore health and unity among nations. This Messiah was going to make a covenant and therefore glorify God in all his doing. Thus, the complete fulfillment of the first servant poem is a future individual who would come and fulfill all these characteristics.

Hans K. LaRondelle, ‘The Sensus Plenior of Israel’s Restoration Promises: The New Testament Typology of Israel’s Exodi from Egypt and Babylon’ (paper presented at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Toronto, December 28, 1981). See also, for more information, Roland Beaudet, ‘La typologie de l'Exode dans le SecondIsaïe’, in Études théologiques: Tricentennaire du Seminaire de Quebec (ed. Roy Lorenzo; Quebec: Les Presses de l'Université Laval, 1963), 11–21; Ninow, ‘Indicators of Typology within the Old Testament’, 232–236; Watts, ‘Consolation or Confrontation’, 31–59. 125 See Beale, Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 100–102; Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 24–30. While Isa 42 refers to a messianic prophecy, I do not classify Isa 42 as limited only to servanthood. Motyer separates the messianic prophesies in Isaiah into three basic portraits: as King, as Servant, and as anointed Conqueror. See Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 3–16. In this poem, for example, other criteria point out that the servant is also a king. See chs 2 and 3 of this work. 124

298

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Table 31. Historical and Eschatological Fulfillment of the First Servant Poem Historical Fulfillment of the First Servant Poem

Eschatological Fulfillment of the First Servant Poem

Literal, Local, Partial Fulfillment

Literal, Local, Complete Fulfillment

Political Servant/King

Spiritual Servant/Lamb/ Prophet/Priest/King

Cyrus

Coming of Messiahi

Isa 44:28; 45:1–4; also 2 Chr 36:22–23

Isa 42:1–9; 49:1–12; 50:4–11; 52:13– 53:12; also Isa 61:1–3; Dan 9:24–27; also Mt 12:18–21; Lk 4:18–19; Acts 8:32–33

‘The idea of divine kingship is the background and the necessary condition of the belief in the coming Messiah; it is the soil from which the messianic hope has grown.’ Helmer Ringgren, The Messiah in the Old Testament (SBT 18; Chicago: A. R. Allenson, 1956), 21.

i

Furthermore, the servant poem falls under a long list of previous messianic prophecies, beginning with Gen 3:15, 126 and extending all the way to Isaiah (see Gen 12:1–3; 49:8–12; Num 24:15–19; Deut 18:15, 18; 1 Sam 2:1–10; 2 Sam 7:13–19; Pss 2; 22; 72; 89; 110; 118; 132; Isa 4:2; 7:10–16; 9:1–7; 11:1–10; 14:28–32; 24:21–25; 32:1–8; Charles A. Briggs, Messianic Prophecy: The Prediction of the Fulfillment of Redemption Through the Messiah; A Critical Study of the Messianic Passages of the Old Testament in the Order of Their Development (New York: C. Scribner's Sons, 1886); Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 37–38; Afolarin O. Ojewole, ‘The Seed in Genesis 3:15: An Exegetical and Intertextual Study’ (unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 2002); Robertson, The Christ of the Covenants, 93–103; Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic?, 129–145; James E. Smith, What the Bible Teaches about the Promised Messiah (Nashville: Nelson, 1993), 38. 126

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 299 33:17–24; 55:3–5). 127 This servant is seen as a singular individual who is called ‘servant of the Lord’, receives the Holy Spirit of God, is chosen by God, who delights in and supports the servant’s mission. The servant is someone who brings judgment, like previous kings, but is also there to serve the people by leading them to a better condition of life, like Moses. The servant is given for a covenant and a light to people for the cause of redeeming people from the slavery of sin. The servant’s purpose is not to get rid of people but rather to reveal to them a better plan. In brief, similarities to previous messianic prophecies include, for example, Gen 3:15, where the seed is to ‘crush the head’ and the serpent’s seed will ‘bruise the heel’, indicating war, judgment, and thus a place of redemption, and covenant through the ‘seed’. The ‘seed’ suggests singularity by the pronoun ‘he’; 128 the Seed is a ‘Victor, Conquerer, Overcomer, and Leader’, according to Afolarin O. Ojewole. 129 Furthermore, the Seed is ‘gracious, sacrificial and vicarious. … He is royal and priestly while remaining servant-like.’ 130 As in the first servant poem, the Seed of Gen 3:15 delivers the people from the enmity of Satan. Thus, Isa 42:1–9 is parallel to previous messianic prophecies such as Gen 3:15. Both texts unveil the salvation that the Messiah offers to humanity, both in the present and in the future. Similarities appear to be inevitable because of the recurring concept of ‘corporate solidarity’. 131

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Servanthood in the first servant poem has historically been categorized as either an individual or a corporate servant. That this term is used often in these chapters suggests that servanthood impacts Isaiah’s theology. The author uses the term ‫ ֶﬠ ֶבד‬to communicate

See Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament; Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 3–16. 128 See Doukhan, On the Way to Emmaus, 18, 28–29; Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 37–42; Ojewole, ‘The Seed in Genesis 3:15’, 183–220. 129 Ojewole, ‘The Seed in Genesis 3:15’, 430. 130 Ibid. 131 See nn. 1 and 108 of this chapter for further explanation. 127

300

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

his theology of a sinful servant versus a redemptive servant. There is no question that both the individual and corporate servants belong to God, but the real question always has been ‘who is the servant’ in a particular passage. The individual servant becomes representative of corporate Israel, succeeding on Israel’s behalf for the redemption of His people. 132 The servanthood of the first servant demonstrates the actions of the servant in relation to his God and to his people. God works through the servant to bring redemption, thus unveiling the servant as a redeemer. God uses the servant, who ultimately judges. In turn the servant is, therefore, an ideal king in a court where the judgment and covenant take place. The covenant is the servant’s means to rebuild a relationship with his people. God reveals that the covenant is given in the form of a servant in the future, which unfolds like the exodus regarding salvation and freedom from slavery. This theology is then expanded with the next three servant poems, where servanthood is further developed and the servant continues to be God’s servant. The servant in these passages reveals more of the aspect of his role as a redeemer. The judgment continues to happen, but it moves from the people to the servant himself. The covenant theology more clearly reveals how the servant himself is the covenant sacrifice. However, the servant also remains the king. Although this theology of kingship is not as prominent, the language nonetheless still points to kingship. The exodus motif comes to an actual completion with the fourth poem, where the servant is the sacrifice. The characterization of the servant in the fourth poem reveals much the same as the first servant This is the role of the Messiah in Dan 9 and the role of Christ in Rom 5:12–17. An interesting analogy in the OT is Samson, who functioned as a one-man army in place of the national army, and God gave him water from a rock (Judg 15) as he gave the entire nation water from a rock. So Samson representatively replaced Israel in a functional sense in order to begin delivering God’s people. See Roy Gane, God’s Faulty Heroes (Hagerstown, Md.: Review & Herald, 1996), 101. See also Mark Greene, ‘Enigma Variations: Aspects of the Samson Story, Judges 13–16’, VE 21 (1991): 53–79. 132

4. THE FIRST SERVANT POEM IN CANONICAL CONTEXT 301 poem: he is obedient, humble, and kind to the point of giving himself. The theology of the individual versus the corporate servant reveals some important similarities and differences that shape Isaiah’s theology. Significantly, the corporate servant is an image of the individual servant, where the purpose of the individual servant truly reveals a trust, belief, and obedience to his God. The corporate servant is called to trust, believe, and obey God, but has not yet succeeded. Finally, while Cyrus partially fulfills some of the characteristics of the individual servant, the full aggregate of characteristics can only be fulfilled by the Messiah, and thus the identity of the servant of Isa 42 is ultimately the Messiah. 133

133

Refer to pp. 38–43 of this work.

CHAPTER 5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION SUMMARY

The purpose of this study was to investigate the identity of the servant in the first servant poem and its role among the other servant poems in Isa 40–55. There have been conflicting opinions regarding the servant’s identity through the years, and many of those conclusions came about from faulty assumptions or misinterpretation of the biblical text. The study of servant poems in the book of Isaiah has been greatly influenced by views of Jewish exegetes such as Rashi and critical scholars such as Duhm. Rashi’s identification of the servant in the first servant poem involved moving away from the plain sense of the biblical text to a historical sense, that is, identifying the prophecies as applying to a historical person prior to Christ. Rashi’s interpretation influenced medieval Jewish commentators and eventually found its way into Christian commentaries. Thus, Rashi concluded that the servant in the first servant poem, indeed all of the servant poems in Isa 40–55, referred to Israel. During the Enlightenment years, critical scholars continued the same hermeneutical approach that Rashi had introduced, also using the reference to Israel and Jacob in Isa 41:8–9 to conclude that the servant was Israel. Furthermore, the LXX also suggested that the servant in Isa 42:1–9 was Jacob and Israel. Modern scholars characterize the servant poems in Isa 40–55 in continuation of what has been claimed by their predecessors and carry these views into their conclusions about the identity of the servant. Thus, modern scholars have regarded the servant of Isa 42:1–9 as a variety of persons, including, among others, Isaiah, Zerubbabel, Ezekiel, Israel, Moses, Cyrus, the Messiah, and Jeremiah. After the introduction in ch. 1, ch. 2 of this study explored the literary structure of Isa 40–55, noting where the individual and corporate servants are found. Then an exegetical survey of Isa 42:1–9 303

304

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

presented analyses of terminology and literary structure that helped to determine the calling and mission of the servant in this pericope. The first servant poem has two chiastic structures in vv. 1–4 and 5–9, respectively, that are complementary to each other and form one unit. The centers of these chiasms reveal the calling of the servant in terms of how he is to behave (vv. 2–3a) and the mission of the servant (vv. 6b–7). In Isa 42:1–4 the servant is introduced first by God in how he calls the servant to bring ‫‘ ִמ ְשׁ ָפּט‬judgment’. However, while the servant brings judgment, he is characterized as a meek and loving individual. The servant also ‘pleases’ God because of the task that is at hand, and he receives the ‘spirit’ of God. I argued in ch. 2 that the ‘spirit’ is the ‘Holy Spirit’, with v. 1 referring to members of the divine Trinity: God who chose the servant and the Holy Spirit who is upon the servant. The servant descriptions in vv. 1–4 also reveal that the judgment upon God’s people, Israel, is not a judgment of complete destruction, but rather a judgment that the servant takes upon himself in order to reveal to Israel their sinful condition. The servant is willing to become what Israel has not been. Then vv. 5–9 delineate the servant’s task: to be given as a covenant for the people and a light to the nations. God ‘shakes’ the servant’s hand (v. 6), revealing the sealing of this covenant with him (see 2 Kings 23:3). The servant’s task is to deliver those who are ‘blind’ and are in ‘prison’, circumstances that are identified with the spiritual condition of Israel (Isa 42:7). Because the servant brings reconciliation between God and his people, the servant is considered to ‘glorify’ God (v. 8). God is the giver by giving the servant, but in exchange the servant glorifies the giver (see Lk 24:26; Jn 12:27–28; 17:1, 22, 24). The servant glorifies God (Isa 42:5) because God is the Creator and knows best how to re-create a relationship with his people. Chapter 3 furnished an intratextual study with the three other Isaianic servant poems (Isa 49:1–12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12), selected corporate servant passages (41:8–9; 42:16–25; 45:1–8), and selected messianic passages in Isaiah (9:1–6; 11:1–10; 61:1–9; 63:1– 6). These latter passages were selected beause they are crucial for determining whether the servant in the first servant poem is individual or corporate.

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

305

The first servant poem was compared linguistically with the three other servant poems in Isa 40–55. These poems were chosen because most scholars have seen Isa 49:1–12; 50:4–11; and 52:13– 53:12 as being related to each other and portraying an individual character, while Isa 42:1–9 has been set apart from them. My study shows that there is much in common among these four poems and therefore the first servant poem is not unrelated to the other three. The words and structure reveal a greater affinity among these four servant poems than any other servant passages in Isa 40–55, suggesting that the servant in the first servant poem would be the same individual as the servant in the three other poems. The intervening chapters that separate the first servant poem from the three other servant poems should not interfere with its interpretation, since Isaiah had already used a similar approach between the messianic prophecy in Isa 7:12–16 and Isa 9 and 11, where a more conclusive answer is given regarding the prophecy of Isa 7. 1 The second, third, and fourth servant poems function in the same manner by revealing a more conclusive image about the identity of the servant in the first servant poem. A linguistic, structural, and thematic comparison of three other servant passages (Isa 41:8–9; 42:16–25; 45:1–8) with the first servant poem reveals surface linguistic similarities, but the usages of these terms do not suggest an individual person. The servant in these passages is corporate for several reasons. First, no mission is found in these passages. Second, the corporate texts do not have a structural similarity with the servant poems and no hymn follows each passage. Third, they also reveal a negative tone or sinful component, meaning that the corporate servant needs to be redeemed from his condition. Fourth, while the corporate servant may need deliverance, the individual servant never does. God is sovereign, particularly in Isa 45:1–8, where an individual servant— Cyrus (although he is not called servant)—delivers the corporate servant—Israel. Even though Cyrus is ‘called’ and he is ‘anointed’, he is not the servant of God. In Isa 45:4 it is clear that the servant is Israel who needs deliverance. Fifth, judgment is upon the corporate servant of these passages. 1

See ch. 4 of this work for more details.

306

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

The remaining servant passages found in Isa 40–55 (Isa 43:10; 44:1, 2, 21, 26; 48:20; 54:17), which I only briefly examined (noting their differences in tables), do not contain any resemblance to the first servant poem. First, the corporate servant—God’s people—in these passages represents God negatively, and God redeems them from their condition. Second, in Isa 43:10 God is the Savior while Israel is the witness of what God is doing. Therefore, the corporate servant does not save itself, but rather it witnesses about God’s deliverance. Third, in Isa 44:1, 2, God is the Creator and the corporate servant is the creature. Thus, the text reveals an inequality between God and the corporate servant. 2 Fourth, the servant receives judgment, except for Isa 54:17, where judgment is done by the ‘servants’. However, the servants (plural) of Isa 54:17 reveal a new Israel after the likeness of the individual servant, thus designating these passages as speaking of a corporate servant in contrast to the individual servant portrayed in Isa 42:1–9. Finally, four other passages (Isa 9:1–6; 11:1–10; 61:1–9; and 63:1–6) to which the first servant poem is compared contain significant similarities. Particularly, and surprisingly, an examination of Isaiah reveals that chs 9 and 11, which are considered messianic prophecies, are closely related to the first servant poem. Isaiah 61, also viewed as a messianic passage, is linked to the first servant poem. 3 Both Isa 61 and 63 have structural similarities to the first servant poem. Chapter 4 discussed the first servant poem’s theology, which is comprised of the following major themes/motifs/concepts: servanthood, God of the servant, servant as redeemer, covenant, servant and judgment, God and the future, servant as king, and exodus. The chapter also examined the connection between the In the first servant poem, there is no apparent inequality between the servant and his ‘maker’ (God). As demonstrated in ch. 2 of this work, the servant is equal to his maker because of the covenant that he is making (Isa 42:6) and because God gives his glory to the servant (Isa 42:8). 3 While it is not the purpose of this work to demonstrate the unity of the book of Isaiah, these passages from both the earlier and later parts of Isaiah support the idea that one Isaiah would have been in charge of this corpus. 2

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

307

first servant poem and the theology of the three other servant poems regarding these important themes, motifs, and concepts. Finally, I discussed the overarching theology of the servant passages in Isa 40–55, noting both the similarities and the differences between the first servant poem and the corporate servant passages, thus narrowing the possibilities for identifying the servant in the first servant poem.

CONCLUSION

Table 31 summarizes the historical and eschatological fulfillment of the first servant poem, comparing the historical king in the image of Cyrus with the future inaugurated messianic king. Although Cyrus partially fulfills the language of the first servant poem, he is not the primary messianic representation of the servant of Isa 42:1–9, since he is never called a ‘servant’. ‘Cyrus serves merely as an instrument of YHWH in a manner similar to the Assyrians and the Babylonians, but not as a Messiah.’ 4 Cyrus did not fulfill the promises to David in 2 Sam 7; thus he is not a representative of a Davidic king. He did bring liberation from the hand of Babylon; however, he was not a permanent liberator (see Neh 9:36). The term ‘his anointed’ implies that Cyrus assumes the role of deliverer (Isa 45:1–2) but never as a covenantal king (rather more like a common shepherd; Isa 44:28), since God is still called ‘king’ (Isa 43:15; 44:6; 45:5–6). I conclude that the first servant poem is primarily a messianic prophecy. This conclusion is supported by several characteristics of its servant, which contrast with the corporate servant passages in Isa 40–55. First, while the servant in the first servant poem represents Israel, this does not mean that the identity of the servant is limited to a nation (Isa 42:1–9; 49:1–12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12). 5 Second, the servant has both a call (42:1–4) and a mission (42:5–9), which is to save and redeem Israel and humanity as a whole. Third, the servant is chosen by God and directed by God to accomplish his plan of redemption (42:1–9; 49:1–12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12). 4 5

Heskett, Messianism Within the Scriptural Scroll of Isaiah, 37. See Davidson, ‘Leadership Language in the Old Testament’.

308

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Fourth, the servant is given as a covenant for God’s people (42:6; 49:7), and that covenant is first made between God and the servant (42:6), followed by a covenant between God the people (42:9), suggesting that the servant is an individual who mediates for the people. Fifth, the servant brings judgment upon the people (41:22– 42:8), but his judgment is to reveal the condition of the people so that they may see the need of a redeemer. Sixth, the servant has the characteristics of an ideal Davidic king (Isa 42:1–4; see 9:1–6 [Eng. 9:2–7]; 11:1–10). Seventh, the servant is eschatological, meaning that although the servant’s accomplishment may have appeared historically, after Isaiah’s time (45:1–8) but before the messianic fulfillment, this would be only a partial fulfillment of the servant. 6 The complete fulfillment of the servant was in the Messiah = Christ, as the NT calls Jesus (see Mt 8:17; 12:18–21; Mk 10:45; Lk 2:32; 4:16–30; 22:37). In contrast with the characteristics of the servant in the corporate servant texts, the servant in the first servant poem acts with maturity and dignity and is humble, self-sacrificing, and kingly (Isa 42:1–9). The corporate servant, on the other hand, is portrayed as a proud, immature, unwilling, and sinful nation (Isa 41:8–9; 42:16–25). Thus, the first servant poem, as suggested in table 31, is ultimately fulfilled only by the coming of a messianic individual. The nation never developed the character attributed to him. I propose that this fulfillment is the ideal Davidic king, who is represented by the Messiah—Jesus—at his first coming. The author’s purpose in the first servant poem is not to prove that the coming deliverer is messianic or that God’s servant is an ideal Davidic king. Rather, it assumes that the readers will readily recognize this identification, which serves as the foundation for his exhortation to the readers to hold on to their faith and hope for what is coming.

See ch. 1 of this work, pp. 38–43, where I discuss genre of biblical books and the typological fulfillment of prophecies. 6

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

309

APPLICATION

Isaiah 42:1–9 clearly reveals a prophetic message that includes hope for Israel in its time, and this hope was to come first through a pagan king—Cyrus. However, the first servant poem goes beyond the fulfillment in Cyrus to an ideal Davidic king even further in the future. This ruler, who is represented as the Messiah, is portrayed in the NT as being Jesus (Mt 12:18–21), fulfilling all the characteristics of Isa 42:1–9. This Messiah not only represents Jesus at his inaugurated eschatology, but, as shown in table 32, he is also portrayed in the context of consummated eschatology as representing Christ at his second coming at the end of the world (Rev 19:11–16; 20:11–15; 21:2–3, 22). 7 This same Messiah presented by the author of Isaiah reveals a divine-human being who would bring hope in the historical, linear timeline of this earth as the deliverer of this world. Thus the message of Isa 42:1–9 reveals a Messiah who is fighting for his people and will eventually bring an end to evil.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY

Additional servant passages in other prophetic books, such as those found in Ezek 34:23–24; 37:24, 25, evidence a narrowing movement from the corporate servant to the individual servant. These would require further research to determine whether there is a trend in relating the individual servant to a future messianic individual. In addition, there is need for more extensive study of all messianic texts—first in Isaiah, specifically the second and third servant poems (Isa 49:1–12; 50:4–11); second in the OT; and finally in the NT—in order to investigate the possibility of a common trend. George Eldon Ladd and others have worked out the inauguratedconsummated eschatological ground plan of NT eschatology, a wellrecognized NT substructure of eschatology. See, for example, the work of Dale C. Allison Jr., ‘Eschatology’, DJG 206–209; Oscar Cullmann, Salvation in History (London: SCM Press, 1967), 32, 40; Davidson, ‘Typological Structures in the Old and New Testaments’, 390–394; George E. Ladd, The Presence of the Future: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 30, 320–326. 7

310

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT” Table 32. Historical, Inaugurated, and Consummated Fulfillment of the First Servant Poem

Historical Fulfillment of the First Servant Poem

Inaugurated Eschatological Fulfillment of the First Servant Poem

Consummated Eschatological Fulfillment of the First Servant Poem

Literal, Local, Complete Fulfillment

Glorious, Final Literal Fulfillment

Cyrus

First Coming of Messiah/Christ

Second Coming of Christ

Isa 42:1–9; 49:1–12; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12; see Isa 61:1–3; Dan 9:24–27; Mt 12:18–21; Lk 4:18–19; Acts 8:32–33

Rev 19:11–16; 20:11–15; 21:2–3, 22

Literal, Local, Partial Fulfillment

Political King Isa 44:28; 45:1– 4; see 2 Chr 36:22–23

Spiritual Servant/ Lamb/Prophet/Priest /King

Spiritual and Political Servant/Lamb/ Prophet/Priest/King

Further study is particularly important in investigating the messianic texts used in the NT in connection to Isaiah and particularly Isa 42:1–9. Matthew 12:18–21, referring to Isa 42:1–4, and Acts 8:32– 33, referring to Isa 53, could certainly be the focus of other doctoral dissertations in NT exegesis and in systematic theology. Furthermore, as shown in table 32, the consummated eschatological king could be studied in more detail. The servant concept can be extended to the NT by exploring how the Isaianic servant poems are applied to the individual Christian life and ultimately to leaders in the body of Christ. The servant poems would provide a model of good servant leadership for

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

311

Christian leaders today (see Acts 13:47; 26:18; Rom 15:21; 2 Cor 6:2; Gal 2:2; Phil 2:16). 8

See, for more ideas, Davidson, ‘Leadership Language in the Old Testament’. 8

BIBLIOGRAPHY ‘A New Translation of the Cyrus Cylinder by the British Museum’. Cited 6 December 2012. Online: http://kavehfarrokh. com/iranica/achaemenid-era/a-new-translation-of-thecyrus-cylinder-by-the-british-museum/. Abravanel, Isaac. Perush al Neviim Ahronim. Tel Aviv: Alisha Press, 1955. Adams, Jim W. The Performative Nature and Function of Isaiah 40–55. New York: T&T Clark, 2006. Ådna, Jostein. ‘The Servant of Isaiah 53 as Triumphant and Interceding Messiah: The Reception of Isaiah 52:13–53:12 in the Targum of Isaiah with Special Attention to the Concept of the Messiah’. Pages 189–224 in The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources. Edited by Bernd Janowski and Peter Stuhlmacher. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004. Albertz, Rainer. Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century B.C.E. Edited by Dennis T. Olson and Sharon H. Ringe. Translated by David Green. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003. Alexander, Joseph Addison. Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1953. Alexander, T. Desmond. The Servant King: The Bible’s Portrait of the Messiah. Leicester, England: IVP, 1998. Allis, Oswald T., John H. Skilton, Milton C. Fisher, and Leslie W. Sloat. The Law and the Prophets: Old Testament Studies Prepared in Honor of Oswald Thompson Allis. Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1974. Andersen, Francis I. ‘Lo and Behold! Taxonomy and Translation of Biblical Hebrew hinnēh’. Pages 25–56 in Hamlet on a Hill: Semitic and Greek Studies Presented to Professor T. Muraoka on 313

314

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Edited by M. F. J. Bassten and W. Th. van Peursen. Leuven: Peeters, 2003. Anderson, Bernhard W. ‘Exodus Typology in Second Isaiah’. Pages 177–195 in Israel's Prophetic Heritage: Essays in Honor of James Muilenberg. Edited by Bernhard W. Anderson and Walter J. Harrelson. New York: Harper, 1962. ________. ‘“God with Us”—In Judgment and in Mercy: The Editorial Structure of Isaiah 5–10 (11)’. Pages 230–245 in Canon, Theology, and Old Testament Interpretation: Essays in Honor of Brevard S. Childs. Edited by Gene M. Tucker, David L. Petersen, and Robert R. Wilson. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988. Anthonioz, Stéphanie. ‘À qui me comparerez-vous?’ Is 40,25: La polémique contre l’idolȃtrie dans le Deutéro-Isaïe. Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 2011. Archer, Gleason L. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Chicago: Moody, 1994. Arnold, Bill T. 1 & 2 Samuel. The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003. Arnold, Bill T., and Bryan E. Beyer, eds. Readings from the Ancient Near East: Primary Sources for Old Testament Study. Encountering Biblical Studies. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002. Ascalone, Enrico, and Luca Peyronel. ‘Two Weights from Temple N at Tell Mardikh-Ebla, Syria: A Link between Metrology and Cultic Activities in the Second Millennium BC?’ Journal of Cuneiform Studies 53 (2001): 1–12. The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Edited by John A. Brinkman and others. 20 vols. Chicago: The Oriental Institute, 1980. The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Edited by A. Leo Oppenheim and others. 20 vols. Chicago: The Oriental Institute, 1971. Augusti, Johann C. W. Apologien und Parallelen theologischen Inhalts. Gera; Leipzig: Illgen, 1800. ________. Ueber den König Usia, nebst einer Erläuterung Jesaia 53. Magazin für Religionsphilosophie, Exegese und

BIBLIOGRAPHY

315

Kirchengeschichte. 6 vols. Helmstädt: C. G. Fleckeisen, 1795. Averbeck, Richard E. ‘Christian Interpretations of Isaiah 53’. Pages 33–60 in The Gospel According to Isaiah 53: Encountering the Suffering Servant in Jewish and Christian Theology. Edited by Darrell L. Bock and Mitch Glaser. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2012. Bahrdt, Karl F. Die Kleine Bibel, Erster Band; Geschichte von Erschaffung der Welt bis auf die Zerstörung Jerusalems durch die Römer. Berlin: n.p., 1780. Baltzer, Klaus, and Peter Machinist. Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55. Edited by Peter Machinist. Translated by Margaret Kohl. Hermenia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Edited by Frank Moore Cross et al. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001. Baron, David. Rays of Messiah's Glory: Christ in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1955. ________. The Servant of Jehovah: The Sufferings of the Messiah and the Glory That Should Follow: An Exposition of Isaiah LIII. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1954. Barstad, Hans M. ‘Isaiah 56–66 in Relation to Isaiah 40–55. Why a New Reading in Necessary’. Pages 41–62 in Continuity and Discontinuity: Chronological and Thematic Development in Isaiah 40-66. Bristol, Conn.: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014. Bauer, G. L. Scholia in Vetus Testamentum. 9 Posteriorem Iesaiae Partem Complectens. Norimbergae: Grattenauer, 1795. Beale, Gregory K. Handbook on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament: Exegesis and Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012. Beaudet, Roland. ‘La typologie de l’Exode dans le Second-Isaïe’. Pages 11–21 in Études théologiques: Tricentennaire du Seminaire de Quebec. Edited by Roy Lorenzo. Quebec City: Les Presses de l'Université Laval, 1963. Begrich, Joachim. Studien zu Deuterojesaja. 94 vols. Munich: C. Kaiser, 1963. Bentzen, Aage. ‘On the Ideas of “the Old” and “the New” in Deutero-Isaiah’. Studia theologica 1, no. 1–2 (1948): 183–187.

316

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Bergen, Robert D. 1, 2 Samuel. The New American Commentary 7. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1996. Berges, Ulrich. Jesaja 40–48 / übersetzt und ausgelegt. Herders theologischer Kommentar zum Alten Testament. Freiburg: Herder, 2008. ________. ‘Where Does Trito-Isaiah Start in the Book of Isaiah?’ Pages 63–76 in Continuity and Discontinuity: Chronological and Thematic Development in Isaiah 40–66. Bristol, Conn.: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014. Berkouwer, Gerrit C. Sin. Studies in Dogmatics. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971. Berlin, Adele. The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985. Berlin, Adele, and Marc Zvi Brettler, eds. The Jewish Study Bible. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Bertholet, Alfred. Zu Jesaja 53: ein Erklärungsversuch. Frieburg i. B.: J. C. B. Mohr, 1899. Beuken, Willem A. M. ‘Mišpāṭ: The First Servant Song and Its Context’. Vetus Testamentum 22, no. 1 (1972): 1–30. Bidmead, Julye. The Akītu Festival: Religious Continuity and Royal Legitimation in Mesopotamia. Gorgias Dissertations. Near Eastern Studies 2. Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, 2002. Birnbaum, Philip, ed. The Concise Jewish Bible. Translated by Philip Birnbaum. New York: Sanhedrin Press, 1976. Bjørndalen, Anders J. ‘Zu den Zeitstufen der Zitatformel … ‫אמר‬ ‫ כה‬im Botenverkehr’. Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 86, no. 4 (1974): 393–403. Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Isaiah 40–55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible 19A. 3 vols. New York: Doubleday, 2002. ________. Opening the Sealed Book: Interpretations of the Book of Isaiah in Late Antiquity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006. Block, Daniel I. ‘Empowered by the Spirit of God: The Holy Spirit in the Historiographic Writings of the Old Testament’. Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 1 (1997): 42–61.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

317

________. ‘My Servant David: Ancient Israel’s Vision of the Messiah’. Pages 17–56 in Israel’s Messiah in the Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by Richard S. Hess and R. M. Daniel Carroll. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003. Bock, Darrell L. ‘Scripture Citing Scripture: Use of the Old Testament in the New’. Pages 255–276 in Interpreting the New Testament Text: Introduction to the Art and Science of Exegesis. Edited by Darrell L. Bock and Buist M. Fanning. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2006. Bonnard, Pierre E. Le Second Isaïe, son disciple et leurs éditeurs: Isaïe 40– 66. Paris: J. Gabalda, 1972. Bonsirven, Joseph. Exégèse rabbinique et exégèse Paulinienne. Paris: Beauchesne et ses Fils, 1938. Bottéro, Jean. Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods. Translated by Zainab Bahrani and Marc Van De Mieroop. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995. Botterweck, G. Johannes, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, eds. Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Translated by David Green. 15 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974–2004. Bovati, Pietro. Re-Establishing Justice: Legal Terms, Concepts and Procedures in the Hebrew Bible. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 105. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994. Brassey, Paul D. Metaphor and the Incomparable God in Isaiah 40–55: A Thesis. BIBAL Dissertation Series 9. North Richland Hills, Tex.: BIBAL Press, 2001. Braude, William G. Midrash on the Psalms. Yale Judaica Series 13. Edited by Leon Nemoy. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959. Breuer, Edward. ‘Jewish Study of the Bible Before and During the Jewish Enlightenment’. Pages 1006–1023 in Hebrew Bible / Old Testament: The History of Its Interpretation. Edited by Magne Saebø. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008. Brierre-Narbonne, Jean-Joseph. Exégèse midrašique des prophéties messianiques. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1935.

318

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

________. Exégèse targumique des prophéties messianiques. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1935. ________. Le Messie souffrant dans la littérature rabbinique. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1910. Briggs, Charles A. Messianic Prophecy: The Prediction of the Fulfillment of Redemption Through the Messiah; A Critical Study of the Messianic Passages of the Old Testament in the Order of Their Development. New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1886. Brooks, Roger. ‘A Christological Suffering Servant? The Jewish Retreat into Historical Criticism’. Pages 207–210 in Hebrew Bible or Old Testament? Studying the Bible in Judaism and Christianity. Edited by Charles S. J. Kannengiesser. Vol. 5 of Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity. Edited by Roger Brooks and John J. Collins. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1990. Brown, Francis, Samuel R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, eds. The New Brown, Driver, and Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated by Edward Robinson. Lafayette, Ind.: Associated Publishers & Authors, 1981. Brown, Laurence E. The Messianic Hope in Its Historical Setting. London: SPCK, 1951. Brown, Michael L. Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003. ________. ‘Jewish Interpretations of Isaiah 53’. Pages 61–83 in The Gospel According to Isaiah 53: Encountering the Suffering Servant in Jewish and Christian Theology. Edited by Darrell L. Bock and Mitch Glaser. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2012. Brueggemann, Walter. Isaiah 40–66. Westminster Bible Companion 2. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 1998. Budde, Karl. ‘The So-Called “Ebed-Yahweh Songs” and the Meaning of the Term “Servant of Yahweh” in Isaiah, Chaps. 40–55’. The American Journal of Theology 3, no. 3 (1899): 499–540. Calvin, John. Isaiah. Calvin's Commentaries. 4 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

319

Canale, Fernando L. ‘Toward a Criticism of Theological Reason: Time and Timelessness as Primordial Presuppositions’. Unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 1983. Carr, David. ‘Reaching for Unity in Isaiah’. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 57 (March 1993): 61–80. ________. ‘Isaiah 40:1–11 in the Context of the Macrostucture of Second Isaiah’. Pages 51–74 in Discourse Analysis of Biblical Literature. Edited by Walter R. Bodine. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995. Ceresko, Anthony R. ‘The Rhetorical Strategy of the Fourth Servant Song (Isaiah 52:13–53:12): Poetry and the Exodus–New Exodus’. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 56, no. 1 (1994): 42–55. Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992. Childs, Brevard S. Exodus. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1974. ________. Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979. ________. Isaiah. Old Testament Library. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 2001. Chilton, Bruce D. The Isaiah Targum. The Aramaic Bible 11. Wilmington, Del.: M. Glazier, 1987. Chisholm, Robert B., Jr., Handbook on the Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Minor Prophets. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002. Churgin, Pinkhos. Targum Jonathan to the Prophets. Yale Oriental Series 14. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1927. Clements, Ronald E. ‘Beyond Tradition-History: Deutero-Isaianic Development of First Isaiah's Themes’. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 31 (Fall 1985): 95–113. ________. Jerusalem and the Nations: Studies in the Book of Isaiah. Hebrew Bible Monographs 16. Edited by David J. A. Clines, J. Cheryl Exum, Keith W. Whitelam. Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2011. Collins, Adela Y. ‘Introduction: Early Christian Apocalypticism’. Pages 1–11 in Early Christian Apocalypticism: Genre and Social

320

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Setting. Edited by Adele Y. Collins. Vol. 36 of Semeia: An Experimental Journal for Biblical Criticism. Edited by Adela Y. Collins. Decatur, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1986. Collins, John J. The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature. 2d ed. The Biblical Resource Series. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. ________. ‘Introduction: Towards the Morphology of a Genre’. Pages 1–20 in Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre. Edited by John J. Collins. Vol. 14 of Semeia: An Experimental Journal for Biblical Criticism. Edited by John J. Collins. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1979. ________. The Scepter and the Star: Messianism in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010. Corrodi, Heinrich. Freymüthige Versuche über verschiedene in Theologie und biblische Kritik einschlagende Materien. Berlin: Bey Friedrich Nicolai, 1783. Cullmann, Oscar. Salvation in History. The New Testament Library. London: SCM Press, 1967. Dahood, Mitchell. Proverbs and Northwest Semitic Philology. Scripta Pontificii Instituti Biblici 113. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1963. ________. Psalms I, 1–50. Vol. 1 of Psalms. Anchor Bible 16. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1965. Davidson, Andrew B. Hebrew Syntax. 3d ed. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1901. Davidson, Richard M. ‘Biblical Principles for Interpreting Old Testament Classical Prophecy’. Pages 5–42 in Prophetic Principles: Crucial Exegetical, Theological, Historical and Practical Insights. Edited by Ron du Preez. Berrien Springs, Mich.: LithoTech, 2007. ________. ‘Corporate Solidarity in the Old Testament’. Unpublished manuscript. Andrews University, 2004. ________. ‘The Eschatological Hermeneutic of Biblical Typology’. TheoRhēma 6.2, no. 2 (2011): 5–48. ________. ‘The Eschatological Literary Structure of the Old Testament’. Pages 349–366 in Creation, Life, and Hope: Essays in Honor of Jacques B. Doukhan. Edited by Jiří

BIBLIOGRAPHY

321

Moskala. Berrien Springs, Mich.: Old Testament Department, Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University, 2000. ________. In the Footsteps of Joshua. Hagerstown, Md.: Review & Herald, 1995. ________. ‘Leadership Language in the Old Testament’. Pages 11– 29 in Servants and Friends: A Biblical Theology of Leadership. Edited by Skip Bell. Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 2014. ________. ‘The Messianic Hope in Isaiah 7:14 and the Volume of Immanuel (Isaiah 7–12)’. Pages 85–96 in ‘For You Have Strengthened Me’: Biblical and Theological Studies in Honor of Gerhard Pfandl in Celebration of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Edited by Martin Pröbstle. St. Peter am Hart: Seminar Schloss Bogenhofen, 2007. ________. ‘Proverbs 8 and the Place of Christ in the Trinity’. Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 17, no. 1 (2006): 33– 54. ________. ‘Salvation and Forgiveness’. Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 3, no. 1 (1992): 7–21. ________. ‘Typological Structures in the Old and New Testaments’. Unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 1981. Deenick, Karl. ‘Priest and King or Priest-King in 1 Samuel 2:35’. Westminster Theological Journal 73, no. 2 (2011): 325–339. Dell, Katharine J. ‘The Suffering Servant of Deutero-Isaiah: Jeremiah Revisited’. Pages 119–134 in Genesis, Isaiah and Psalms: A Festschrift to Honour Professor John Emerton for His Eightieth Birthday. Edited by Katharine J. Dell, Graham Davies, and Yee Von Koh. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 135. Edited by H. M. Barstad et al. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Dodd, Charles H. The Epistle of Paul to the Romans. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1954. Dorn, Louis O. ‘“LO” and “BEHOLD”—Translating the Hebrew Word hinneh’. Bible Translator 52, no. 2 (2001): 222–229. Dorsey, David A. The Literary Structure of the Old Testament: A Commentary on Genesis-Malachi. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999.

322

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Douglas, James Dixon, ed. The Illustrated Bible Dictionary. 3 vols. Leicester, England: IVP, 1980. Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. London: ARK Paperbacks, 1984. Doukhan, Jacques B. On the Way to Emmaus: Five Major Messianic Prophecies Explained. Clarksville, Md.: Lederer, 2012. Driver, Godfrey Rolles. ‘The Hebrew Text of Sirach: A TextCritical and Historical Study’. Journal of Theological Studies 20, no. 2 (1969): 566–569. Driver, Samuel R., and Adolf Neubauer. The ‘Suffering Servant’ of Isaiah: According to the Jewish Interpreters. Translated by Samuel R. Driver and Adolf Neubauer. 2 vols. New York: Hermon Press, 1969. Duhm, Bernhard. Die Theologie der Propheten als Grundlage für die innere Entwicklungsgeschichte der israelitischen Religion. Bonn: Marcus, 1875. Dumbrell, William J. ‘The Purpose of the Book of Isaiah’. Tyndale Bulletin 36 (1985): 111–128. Dunn, James D. G. ‘Messianic Ideas and Their Influence on the Jesus of History’. Pages 365–381 in The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992. Dyrness, William. Themes in Old Testament Theology. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 1979. Eaton, John H. Festal Drama in Deutero-Isaiah. London: SPCK, 1979. Eddinger, Terry W. ‘An Analysis of Isaiah 40:1–11 (17)’. Bulletin for Biblical Research 9 (1999): 119–135. Edersheim, Alfred. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. 2 vols. New York: E. R. Herrick & Co., 1890. ________. Prophecy and History in Relation to the Messiah: The Warburton Lectures for 1880–1884. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1955. Ekblad, Eugene R., Jr. Isaiah’s Servant Poems According to the Septuagint: An Exegetical and Theological Study. Contribution to Biblical Exegesis and Theology 23. Leuven: Peeters, 1999.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

323

Elliger, Karl. Deuterojesaja. Biblischer Kommentar: Altes und Neues Testament 11. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1978. Engnell, Ivan. ‘The Ebed Yahweh Songs and the Suffering Messiah in “Deutero-Isaiah”’. Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 31, no. 1 (January 1948): 54–93. ________. Studies in Divine Kingship in the Ancient Near East. Oxford: Blackwell, 1967. Erbt, Wilhelm von. ‘Die Chronologie des ersten nachexilischen Jahrhunderts’. Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 21, no. 2 (1918): 33–41. Esh, Shaul. ‘Note on ‫’יצא‬. Vetus Testamentum 4, no. 3 (1954): 305– 307. Euler, Karl Friedrich. Die Verkündigung vom Leidenden Gottesknecht aus Jes 53 in der Griechischen Bibel. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1934. Evans, Craig A. ‘On the Unity and Parallel Structure of Isaiah’. Vetus Testamentum 38 (1988): 129–147. Fanwar, Wann M. ‘Creation in Isaiah’. Unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 2001. Fischer, Johann. Isaias 40–55 und die Perikopen vom Gottesknecht: ein Krtisch-Exegetisch Studie. Alttestamentliche Abhandlungen 6. Munich: Aschendorff, 1916. Fishbane, Michael. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989. Fraine, Jean de. Adam and the Family of Man. Translated by Daniel Raible. Staten Island, N.Y.: Alba House, 1965. ________. Adam et son lignage: études sur la notion de ‘personnalité corporative’ dans la Bible. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1959. Franke, Chris. Isaiah 46, 47, and 48: A New Literary-Critical Reading. Biblical and Judaic Studies From the University of California, San Diego, 3. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1994. Frankfort, Henri. Kingship and the Gods: A Study of Ancient Near Eastern Religion as the Integration of Society and Nature. Oriental Institute Essay. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948.

324

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Franklin, Norma. ‘The Tombs of the Kings of Israel: Two Recently Identified 9th-Century Tombs from Omride Samaria’. Zeitschrift des deutschen Palästina-Vereins (1953–) 119, no. 1 (2003): 1–11. Freedman, David Noel, ed. Anchor Bible Dictionary. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992. Freedman, Harry, and Maurice Simon, eds. Midrash Rabbah: Ruth. Translated by L. Rabinowitz. London: Soncino, 1983. Freehof, Solomon B. Book of Isaiah. New York: Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1972. Friedrich, Gerhard, ed. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977. Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. Messianic Christology: A Study of the Old Testament Prophecy Concerning the First Coming of the Messiah. Tustin, Calif.: Ariel Ministries, 1998. Frydland, Rachmiel. What the Rabbis Know About the Messiah. Edited by Elliot Klayman. Cincinnati: Messianic Publishing, 1993. Gage, W. A. The Gospel of Genesis: Studies in Protology and Eschatology. Winona Lake, Ind.: Carpenter Books, 1984. Gane, Roy. Altar Call. Berrien Springs, Mich.: Diadem, 1999. ________. ‘“Bread of the Presence” and Creator-in-Residence’. Vetus Testamentum 42, no. 2 (1992): 179–203. ________. ‘Covenant, Law, Sabbath’. Class syllabus. Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University, 1997. ________. Cult and Character: Purification Offerings, Day of Atonement, and Theodicy. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2005. ________. ‘Genre Awareness and Interpretation of the Book of Daniel’. Pages 137–148 in To Understand the Scriptures: Essays in Honor of William H. Shea. Edited by David Merling. Berrien Springs, Mich.: Institute of Archaeology, Siegfried H. Horn Archaeological Museum, Andrews University, 1997. ________. God’s Faulty Heroes. Hagerstown, Md.: Review & Herald, 1996.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

325

________. Leviticus, Numbers. The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004. Gentry, Peter J., and Stephen J. Wellum. Kingdom through Covenant: A Biblical-Theological Understanding of the Covenants. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2012. Gentry, Peter John. ‘The Atonement in Isaiah’s Fourth Servant Song (Isaiah 52:13–53:12)’. Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 11, no. 2 (2007): 20–47. Gesenius, H. William F. Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures. Translated by Samuel Prideaux Tregelles. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979. Gesenius, Wilhelm. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. Edited by Emil Kautzsch. Translated by Arthur E. Cowley. Oxford: Clarendon, 1910. Gibson, John C. L. Davidson’s Introductory Hebrew Grammar: Syntax. Edinburgh, Scotland: T&T Clark, 1994. Gillet, Lev. Communion in the Messiah: Studies in the Relationship Between Judaism and Christianity. London: Lutterworth, 1942. Glassner, Jean-Jacques. ‘Le roi prêtre en Mésopotamie, au milieu du 3ᵉ millénaire’. Pages 9–19 in L’Ancien Proche-Orient et les Indes: parallélismes interculturels religieux: colloque franco-finlandais les 10 et 11 novembre 1990 à l’Institut finlandais, Paris. Edited by Finnish Oriental Society. Vol. 70 of Studia Orientalia. Edited by Heikki Palva, Tapani Harviainen, and Asko Parpola. Helsinki, Finland: Finnish Oriental Society, 1993. Goldingay, John. ‘The Arrangement of Isaiah XLI-XLV’. Vetus Testamentum 29, no. 3 (1979): 289–299. ________. God’s Prophet, God’s Servant: A Study in Jeremiah and Isaiah 40–55. Exeter: Paternoster, 1984. ________. Isaiah. New International Biblical Commentary 13. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2001. ________. The Message of Isaiah 40–55: A Literary-Theological Commentary. New York: T&T Clark, 2005. Goldingay, John, and David F. Payne. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40–55. The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scripture of the Old and New Testaments. 2 vols. London: T&T Clark, 2006.

326

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Goppelt, Leonhard. Typos: The Typological Interpretation of the Old Testament in the New. Translated by D. H. Madvig. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982. Gossai, Hemchand. Social Critique by Israel’s Eighth-Century Prophets: Justice and Righteousness in Context. Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf & Stock, 2006. Gosse, Bernard. ‘Isa 63,1–6 en relation à la synthèse du livre d’Isaïe en mšpṭ ṣdqh/yšwʻh ṣdqh, et la place d’Isa 34–35 dans la rédaction du livre’. Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 113, no. 4 (2001): 535–552. Grajetzki, Wolfram. Burial Customs in Ancient Egypt: Life in Death for Rich and Poor. London: Duckworth, 2003. Gray, Bennison. ‘Repetition in Oral Literature’. The Journal of American Folklore 84, no. 333 (1971): 289–303. Greenberg, Gillian. ‘Indications of the Faith of the Translator in the Peshitta to the “Servant Songs” of Deutero-Isaiah’. Aramaic Studies 2, no. 2 (2004): 175–192. Greenberg, Moshe. Ezekiel 1–20. Anchor Bible 22. New York: Doubleday, 1983. Green, Joel B., Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall, eds. Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 1992. Greene, Mark. ‘Enigma Variations: Aspects of the Samson Story, Judges 13–16’. Vox evangelica 21 (1991): 53–79. Gregory, Bradley C., ‘Wisdom and Apocalyptic’. Pages 847–853 of Dictionary of the Old Testament: Wisdom, Poetry and Writings. Edited by Tremper Longman III and Peter Enns. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2008. Grelot, Pierre. ‘L’exégèse Messianique d’Isaie 63:1–6’. Revue biblique 70, no. 3 (1963): 371–380. ________. What Are the Targums? Selected Texts. Old Testament Studies 7. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1992. Grisanti, Michael A., and Willem A. VanGemeren, eds. New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis. 5 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997. Groningen, Gerard van. Messianic Revelation in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

327

Gürkan, S. Leyla. The Jews as a Chosen People: Tradition and Transformation. Routledge Jewish Studies Series. New York: Routledge, 2009. Ha, KyeSang. ‘Cultic Allusions in the Suffering Servant Poem (Isaiah 52:13–53:12)’. Unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 2009. Haag, Herbert. Der Gottesknecht bei Deuterojesaja. Erträge der Forschung 233. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1985. Hagner, Donald A. The Jewish Reclamation of Jesus: An Analysis and Critique of Modern Jewish Study of Jesus. Grand Rapids: Academie, 1984. Hailperin, Herman. Rashi and the Christian Scholars. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh, 1963. Hamilton, Victor P. Handbook on the Pentateuch: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982. Hanson, Paul D. The Dawn of Apocalyptic: The Historical and Sociological Roots of Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology. Rev. ed. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979. ________. Isaiah 40–66. Edited by James Luther. Louisville: John Knox, 1995. Haran, Menahem. ‘The Literary Structure and Chronological Framework of the Prophecies in Is. XL-XLVIII’. Pages 127–155 in Congress Volume: Bonn 1962. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 9. Edited by G. W. Anderson et al. Leiden: Brill, 1963. Hartley, John E. Leviticus. Word Biblical Commentary 4. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1992. Hasel, Gerhard. Old Testament Theology: Basic Issues in the Current Debate. 4th ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991. Hegermann, Harald. Jesaja 53 in Hexapla, Targum und Peschitta. Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie 56. Gütersloh: C. Bertelsmann, 1954. Heschel, Abraham Joshua. The Prophets. 2 vols. New York: Harper & Row, 1969. Heskett, Randall. Messianism Within the Scriptural Scroll of Isaiah. Old Testament Studies 456. New York: T&T Clark, 2007.

328

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Hessler, Eva. ‘Die Struktur der Bilder bei Deuterojesaja’. Evangelische Theologie 25, no. 7 (1965): 349–469. Hill, Charles E., and Frank A. James, III. The Glory of the Atonement: Biblical, Historical and Practical Perspectives: Essays in Honor of Roger R. Nicole. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2004. Hill, Linzy H. ‘Reading Isaiah as a Theological Unity Based on an Exegetical Investigation of the Exodus Motif’. Unpubl. diss., Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1993. Hoftijzer, Jacob, and Karel Jongeling. Dictionary of the North-West Semitic Inscriptions. New York: Brill, 1995. Honeycutt, Roy L. ‘Introducing Isaiah’. Southwestern Journal of Theology 11 (Fall 1968): 9–28. Hoonacker, Albin van. The Servant of the Lord in Isaiah XL ff. Expositor 11. Edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1916. Horbury, William. Jewish Messianism and the Cult of Christ. London: SCM Press, 1998. Hugenberger, Gordon. ‘The Servant of the Lord in the “Servant Songs” of Isaiah: A Second Moses Figure’. Pages 105–140 in The Lord’s Anointed: Interpretation of Old Testament Messianic Texts. Edited by Philip E. Satterthwaite, Richard S. Hess, and Gordon J. Wenham. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995. Ibn Ezra, Abraham ben Meïr. The Commentary of Ibn Ezra on Isaiah. Translated by Michael Friedländer. New York: P. Feldheim, 1960. ________. The Commentary of Ibn Ezra on Isaiah: Edited from Mss. and Translated, with Notes, Introductions, and Indexes, by M. Friedländer. Publications of the Society of Hebrew Literature 1. London: Society of Hebrew Literature, 1873. James, Fleming. Personalities of the Old Testament. London: C. Scribner's Sons, 1939. Jeffery, Steve, Michael Ovey, and Andrew Sach. Pierced for Our Transgressions: Rediscovering the Glory of Penal Substitution. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2007. Jenni, Ernst, and Claus Westermann, eds. Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated by Mark E. Biddle. 3 vols. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1997.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

329

Jones, Douglas. ‘Tradition of the Oracles of Isaiah of Jerusalem’. Zeitschrift Fur Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 67, no. 3–4 (1955): 226–246. Joüon, Paul, and T. Muraoka. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Subsidia biblica 27. Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2006. Joyce, Paul. ‘The Individual and the Community’. Pages 74–89 in Beginning Old Testament Study. Edited by John Rogerson. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1982. Kaiser, Otto. Der königliche Knecht: eine traditionsgeschichtlich-exegetische Studie über die Ebed-Jahwe-Lieder bei Deuterojesaja. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 70. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1962. Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. The Messiah in the Old Testament. Old Testament Biblical Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995. ________. Mission in the Old Testament: Israel as a Light to the Nations. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000. ________. Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Exegesis for Preaching and Teaching. 8th ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989. ________. Toward an Old Testament Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991. Kaizer, Ted. ‘Kingly Priests in the Roman Near East?’ Pages 177– 192 in Imaginary Kings: Royal Images in the Ancient Near East, Greece and Rome. Edited by Olivier Hekster and Richard Fowler. Vol. 11 of Oriens et Occidens. Edited by Richard Fowler. Munich, Germany: Decker & Bokor, 2005. Kaufmann, Yehezkel. The Babylonian Captivity and Deutero-Isaiah. New York: Union of American Congregations, 1970. Keel, Othmar. The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms. Translated by Timothy J. Hallett. New York: Seabury, 1978. Keil, Carl F., and Franz Delitzsch. Biblical Commentary on the Books of Samuel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952. ________. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament: The Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952. ________. Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949.

330

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Kelley, Page H. Judgment and Redemption in Isaiah. Nashville: Broadman, 1968. Kim, Hyun Chul Paul. ‘An Intertextual Reading of a “Crushed Reed” and “A Dim Wick” in Isaiah 42:3’. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 83 (1999): 113–124. ________. ‘The Spider-Poet: Signs and Symbols in Isaiah 41’. Pages 159–180 in The Desert Will Bloom: Poetic Visions in Isaiah. Edited by A. Joseph Everson and Hyun Chul Paul Kim. Vol. 4 of Ancient Israel and Its Literature. Edited by Steven L. McKenzie. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1999. Kimhi, David, and Louis Finkelstein. The Commentary of David Kimhi on Isaiah. Oriental Studies 19. New York: Columbia University Press, 1926. Kiraz, George A., and Joseph Bali. The Syriac Peshiṭta Bible with English Translation: Isaiah. Edited by George A. Kiraz and Andreas Juckel. Translated by Gillian Greenberg and Donald M. Walter. Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, 2012. Kissane, Edward J. The Book of Isaiah, Translated from a Critically Revised Hebrew Text with Commentary. 2 vols. Dublin: Browne & Nolan, 1943. Klausner, Joseph. The Messianic Idea in Israel: From Its Beginning to the Completion of the Mishnah. Edited by W. F. Stinespring. New York: Macmillan, 1955. Klein, Ralph W. 1 Samuel. Word Biblical Commentary 10. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1983. Knight, George A. F. Deutero-Isaiah: A Theological Commentary on Isaiah 40–55. Nashville: Abingdon, 1965. ________. Servant Theology: A Commentary on the Book of Isaiah 40–55. International Theological Commentary. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984. Köhler, Ludwig, and Walter Baumgartner. Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti libros. 2d ed.; Leiden: Brill; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958. Koole, Jan L. Isaiah III. Historical Commentary on the Old Testament. 3 vols. Leuven: Peeters, 1998.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

331

Korpel, Marjo C. A., and Johannes C. de Moor. The Structure of Classical Hebrew Poetry: Isaiah 40–55. Leiden: Brill, 1998. Kosmala, Hans. ‘Form and Structure in Ancient Hebrew Poetry’. Vetus Testamentum 16, no. 2 (April 1966): 152–180. Kraetzschmar, Richard. Das Buch Ezechiel, übersetzt und erklärt. Handkommentar zum Alten Testament 3. Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1900. Laato, Antti. ‘The Composition of Isaiah 40–55’. Journal of Biblical Literature 109, no. 2 (1990): 207–228. ________. The Servant of YHWH and Cyrus: A Reinterpretation of the Exilic Messianic Programme in Isaiah 40–55. Coniectanea biblica: Old Testament Series 35. Stockholm, Sweden: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1992. ________. A Star Is Rising: The Historical Development of the Old Testament Royal Ideology and the Rise of the Jewish Messianic Expectations. University of South Florida International Studies in Formative Christianity and Judaism 5. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997. Labat, René. Le caractère religieux de la royauté Assyro-Babylonienne. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1939. Ladd, George E. The Presence of the Future: The Eschatology of Biblical Realism. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974. Lampe, Geoffrey William H., and Kenneth J. Woollcombe. Essays on Typology. Studies in Biblical Theology 22. Napierville, Ill.: A. R. Allenson, 1957. Lange, Johann Peter. The Prophet Isaiah. A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical, with Special Reference to Ministers and Students, vol. 11. New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1906. LaRondelle, Hans K. ‘The Sensus Plenior of Israel’s Restoration Promises: The New Testament Typology of Israel’s Exodi from Egypt and Babylon’. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society. Toronto, December 28, 1981. Leclerc, Thomas L. Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice: Solidarity and Conflict in Isaiah. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001.

332

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Leene, Henk. Newness in Old Testament Prophecy: An Intertextual Study. Oudtestamentische Studiën 64. Edited by B. Becking. Boston: Brill, 2014. Lessing, Reed. Isaiah 40–55. Edited by Dean O. Wenthe. St. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 2011. Leupold, Herbert C. Exposition of Isaiah. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979. Levey, Samson H. The Messiah: An Aramaic Interpretation; the Messianic Exegesis of the Targum. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union CollegeJewish Institute of Religion, 1974. Liddell, Henry George, et al., eds. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon, 1973. Liedke, G. Ernst Jenni, and Claus Westermann, eds. Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated by Mark E. Biddle. 3 vols. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1997. Lindblom, Johannes. The Servant Songs in Deutero-Isaiah: A New Attempt to Solve an Old Problem. Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1951. Lindsey, F. Duane. ‘Isaiah’s Songs of the Servant: Part 1’. Bibliotheca Sacra 139, no. 553 (1982): 12–31. ________. A Study in Isaiah: The Servant Songs. Chicago: Moody, 1985. Lods, Adolphe. Les prophètes d’Israël et les débuts du Judaïsme. Paris: A. Michel, 1969. Luck, G. Coleman. ‘First Glimpse of the First King of Israel’. Bibliotheca Sacra 123, no. 489 (1966): 60–66. Luther, Martin. Lectures on Isaiah: Chapters 40–66. Edited by Hilton C. Oswald. Translated by Herbert J. A. Bouman. St. Louis, Mo.: Concordia, 1972. Ma, Wonsuk. ‘Isaiah’. Pages 34–45 in A Biblical Theology of the Holy Spirit. Edited by Trevor J. Burke and Keith Warrington. Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade, 2014. Marcus, Ralph. ‘The “Plain Meaning” of Isaiah 42:1–4’. Harvard Theological Review 30, no. 4 (1937): 249–259. Margalioth, Rachel. The Indivisible Isaiah: Evidence for the Single Authorship of the Prophetic Book. New York: Yeshiva University, 1964.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

333

Matthews, Victor H. ‘The King’s Call to Justice’. Biblische Zeitschrift 35, no. 2 (1991): 204–216. McAllister, Ray W. ‘Theology of Blindness in the Hebrew Scriptures’. Unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 2010. McCarter, P. Kyle, Jr. 1 Samuel: A New Translation with Introduction, Notes & Commentary. Anchor Bible 8. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1980. McConville, J. Gordon. Deuteronomy. Apollos Old Testament Commentary 5. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2002. McKenzie, John L. Second Isaiah. Anchor Bible 20. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1968. Meier, Samuel A. Speaking of Speaking: Marking Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Bible. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 46. New York: Brill, 1992. Melugin, Roy F. The Formation of Isaiah 40–55. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 141. New York: W. de Gruyter, 1976. Mercer, Samuel. ‘Divine Service in Ur’. Journal of the Society of Oriental Research 5, no. 1 (1921): 1–17. Merrill, Eugene H. ‘Rashi, Nicholas de Lyra, and Christian Exegesis’. Westminster Theological Journal 38, no. 1 (1975): 66–79. Mettinger, Tryggve. In Search of God: The Meaning and Message of the Everlasting Names. Translated by Frederick H. Cryer. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988. Meyers, Eric M. ‘The Theological Implications of an Ancient Jewish Burial Custom’. The Jewish Quarterly Review 62, no. 2 (1971): 95–119. Michaelis, Johann David. Deutsche Uebersetzung des Alten Testaments, mit Anmerkungen für Ungelehrte. Göttingen: Dieterich, 1769– 1785. Middlemas, Jill. ‘Did Second Isaiah Write Lamentations III?’ Vetus Testamentum 56, no. 4 (2006): 505–525. Milgrom, Jacob. Leviticus 23–27: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible 3B. New York: Doubleday, 2001.

334 Miller,

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Patrick D. Deuteronomy. Interpretation: A Biblical Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. Louisville: John Knox, 1990. Miller, Stephen Roy. ‘The Literary Style of the Book of Isaiah and the Unity Question’. Unpubl. diss., Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary, 1982. Moran, W. L. ‘Early Canaanite yaqtula’. Orientalia 29 (1960): 1–19. Morris, Leon. Apocalyptic. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972. ________. The Atonement, Its Meaning and Significance. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 1983. Moskala, Jiří. ‘The Gospel According to God’s Judgment: Judgment as Salvation’. Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 22, no. 1 (2011): 28–49. ________. ‘Mission in the Old Testament’. Pages 61–79 in Message, Mission, and Unity of the Church. Edited by Ángel Manuel Rodríguez. Silver Spring, Md.: Biblical Research Institute, 2013. ________. ‘Toward Trinitarian Thinking in the Hebrew Scriptures’. Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 21, no. 1–2 (2010): 245–275. Motyer, J. Alec. Look to the Rock: An Old Testament Background to Our Understanding of Christ. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2004. ________. The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction & Commentary. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 1993. Mowinckel, Sigmund. He That Cometh. Edited by G. W. Anderson. New York: Abingdon, 1956. Muilenburg, James. The Book of Isaiah. Interpreter’s Bible. 12 vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 1980. ________. ‘A Study in Hebrew Rhetoric: Repetition and Style’. Pages 97–111 in Congress Volume: Copenhagen, 1953. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 1. Leiden: Brill, 1953. Muskita, Hudyard. ‘The Meaning of “ḥāpeṣ” in Isaiah 58:13: A Study of the Concept of Sabbath Observance’. Unpubl. thesis, Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies, 1995.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

335

Mutua, James. ‘The Spirit of the Lord and Obedience to God’s Laws: An Exegetical, Intertextual, and Theological Study of Ezekiel 36:27’. Unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 2014. Neusner, Jacob. Judaism and Christianity in the Age of Constantine: History, Messiah, Israel, and the Initial Confrontation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987. The New JPS Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text. New York: Jewish Publication Society, 1985. Ninow, Friedbert. ‘Indicators of Typology within the Old Testament: The Exodus Motif’. Unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 1999. North, Christopher R. The Second Isaiah: Introduction, Translation and Commentary to Chapters XL-LV. Oxford: Clarendon, 1964. ________. The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah: An Historical and Critical Study. London: Oxford University Press, 1950. Odendaal, Dirk H. The Eschatological Expectation of Isaiah 40–66 with Special Reference to Israel and the Nations. Biblical and Theological Studies. Edited by Robert L. Reymond. Phillipsberg, N.J.: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1970. Ojewole, Afolarin O. ‘The Seed in Genesis 3:15: An Exegetical and Intertextual Study’. Unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 2002. Origen. Origen: Contra Celsum. Edited by Henry Chadwick. Translated by Henry Chadwick. Cambridge: University Press, 1965. Orlinsky, Harry M. The So-Called ‘Servant of the LORD’ and ‘Suffering Servant’ in Second Isaiah. Studies on the Second Part of the Book of Isaiah, Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 14. Leiden: Brill, 1967. Orr, James, ed. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. 4 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984. Osborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2006. Oswalt, John N. The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1–39. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament. 2 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986.

336

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

________. The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament. 2 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. ________. ‘Judgment and Hope: The Full-Orbed Gospel’. Trinity Journal 17, no. 2 (1996): 191–202. Oudersluys, Richard C. ‘Exodus in the Letter to the Hebrews’. Pages 143–152 in Grace Upon Grace: Essays in Honor of Lester J. Kuyper. Edited by James I. Cook. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975. Packer, James I. In My Place Condemned He Stood: Celebrating the Glory of the Atonement. Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2008. ________. What Did the Cross Achieve? The Logic of Penal Substitution. N.p., 1974. Page, Sydney H. T. ‘The Suffering Servant Between the Testaments’. New Testament Studies 31, no. 4 (1985): 481– 497. ‘Parallelism in Hebrew Poetry’. Jewish Encyclopedia. Cited 4 December 2012. Online: http://jewishencyclopedia.com/ articles/11902-parallelism-in-hebrew-poetry. Parpola, Simo. Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars. State Archives of Assyria 10. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1993. Patai, Raphael. The Messiah Texts. New York: Avon, 1979. Paul, Shalom M. Devrei Shalom: Collected Studies of Shalom M. Paul on the Bible and the Ancient Near East 1967–2005. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 23. Leiden: Brill, 2005. ________. Isaiah 40–66: Translation and Commentary. Eerdmans Critical Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012. ________. Studies in the Book of the Covenant in the Light of Cuneiform and Biblical Law. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 18. Leiden: Brill, 1970. Payne, David F. Isaiah. The New Layman’s Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979. Peake, Arthur S. The Problem of Suffering in the Old Testament. London: R. Bryant, 1904.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

337

________. The Servant of Yahweh; Three Lectures Delivered at King’s College, London. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1931. Pfeiffer, Robert H. Introduction of the Old Testament. New York: Harper, 1941. Phillips, Morgan L. ‘Divine Self-Predication in Deutero-Isaiah’. Biblical Research 16 (1971): 32–51. Pieper, August. Isaiah II: An Exposition of Isaiah 40–66. Milwaukee: Northwestern, 1979. Ploeg, J. van der. ‘SĀPAT et MIŠPĀT’. Oudtestamentische Studiën 2 (1943): 144–155. Pope, Marvin H. El in the Ugaritic Texts. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 2. Leiden: Brill, 1955. Pritchard, James B., ed. The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures. Translated and annotated by W. F. Albright et al. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1958. Pyle, Douglas. What the Rabbonim Say About Moshiach. N.p., 2008. Rad, Gerhard von. Old Testament Theology. Translated by D. M. G. Stalker. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001. Rae, Scott. ‘An Exegetical and Theological Study of Isaiah 49:1– 13’. Unpubl. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1981. Rahlfs, Alfred. Septuaginta. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979. Rashi. ‘The Complete Jewish Bible with Rashi Commentary’. Cited 29 March 2012. Online: http://www.chabad.org/library/ bible_cdo/aid/15973/showrashi/true/jewish/Chapter42.htm. Reade, Julian. ‘Assyrian King-lists, the Royal Tombs of Ur, and Indus Origins’. Journal of Near Eastern Studies 60, no. 1 (2001): 1–29. Remaud, Michel. Israel, Servant of God. Translated by Margaret Ginzburg and Nicole Francois. London: T&T Clark, 2003. Rembaum, Joel Edward. ‘The Development of a Jewish Exegetical Tradition Regarding Isaiah 53’. Harvard Theological Review 75, no. 3 (1982): 289–311.

338

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Richardson, M. E. J., ed. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated by M. E. J. Richardson. 5 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1996–2000. Ridderbos, Herman. Paul: An Outline of His Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975. Rignell, Lars G. ‘Jesaja Kap. 50’. Svensk teologisk kvartalskrift 29 (1952): 108–119. ________. A Study of Isaiah, ch. 40–55. Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1956. Ringgren, Helmer. The Messiah in the Old Testament. Studies in Biblical Theology 18. Chicago: A. R. Allenson, 1956. Robertson, O. Palmer. The Christ of the Covenants. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980. Robinson, H. Wheeler. Inspiration and Revelation in the Old Testament. Oxford: Clarendon, 1946. Rodríguez, Ángel Manuel. ‘Substitution in the Hebrew Cultus and in Cultic-Related Texts’. Unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 1979. Rogland, Max. ‘“Striking a Hand” (TQ’ KP) in the Biblical Hebrew’. Vetus Testamentum 51, no. 1 (2001): 107–109. Rosenberg, A. J. Isaiah: A New English Translation. Translated by A. J. Rosenberg. 2 vols. New York: Judaica Press, 1982. Rosenthal, Erwin Isak Jakob. ‘Medieval Jewish Exegesis: Its Character and Significance’. Journal of Semitic Studies 9, no. 2 (1964): 265–281. ________. ‘Rashi and the English Bible’. Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 24, no. 1 (1940): 3–32. ________. The Study of the Bible in Medieval Judaism. The Cambridge History of the Bible 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969. Routledge, Robin L. ‘Is There a Narrative Substructure Underlying the Book of Isaiah?’ Tyndale Bulletin 55, no. 2 (2004): 183– 204. ________. Old Testament Theology: A Thematic Approach. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2008.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

339

Rowley, Harold Henry. The Servant of the Lord and Other Essays on the Old Testament. London: Lutterworth, 1952. Rydelnik, Michael. The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic? NAC Studies in Bible & Theology 9. Nashville: B & H, 2009. Sailhamer, John. Introduction to Old Testament Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995. Sakenfeld, Katharine Doob, ed. The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. 5 vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 2006. Sapp, David A. ‘The LXX, 1QIsa, and MT Versions of Isaiah 53 and the Christian Doctrine of Atonement’. Pages 170–192 in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins. Edited by William H. Bellinger Jr. and William R. Farmer. Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press International, 1998. Sarachek, Joseph. The Doctrine of the Messiah in Medieval Jewish Literature. New York: Hermon, 1968. Sawyer, John F. A. The Fifth Gospel: Isaiah in the History of Christianity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Say Pa, Anna May. ‘The Concept of Israel’s Role Regarding the Nations in Isaiah 40–55’. Unpubl. diss., Princeton Theological Seminary, 1989. Schoors, Antoon. ‘Les choses antérieures et les choses nouvelles dans les oracles Deutéro-Isaïens’. Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 40, no. 1 (1964): 19–47. Schreiner, Stefan. ‘Isaiah 53 in the Sefer Hizzuk Emunah (“Faith Strengthened”) of Rabbi Isaac ben Abraham of Troki’. Pages 418–461 in The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources. Edited by Bernd Janowski and Peter Stuhlmacher. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004. Schultz, Richard. ‘The King in the Book of Isaiah’. Pages 141–165 in The Lord's Anointed: Interpretation of Old Testament Messianic Texts. Edited by Philip E. Satterthwaite, Richard S. Hess, and Gordon J. Wenham. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995. Scott, Robert, et al., eds. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon, 1973.

340

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Seitz, Christopher R. Isaiah 1–39. Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching 10. 32 vols. Louisville: John Knox, 1993. ________. ‘The Book of Isaiah 40–66’. Pages 307–552 in The New Interpreter’s Bible 6. Edited by Leander E. Keck. Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon, 2001. Sellin, Ernst. Der Knecht Gottes bei Deuterojesaja. Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1901. ________. Mose und seine Bedeutung für die israelitisch-jüdische Religionsgeschichte. Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1922. ________. Serubbabel; ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der messianischen Erwartung und der Entstehung des Judentums. Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1898. ________. ‘Tritojesaja, Deuterojesaja und das Gottesknechtsproblem’. Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift 41 (1930): 73–93, 145– 173. ‘Servant of God’. Jewish Encyclopedia. Cited 18 December 2012. Online: http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13444servant-of-god. Shea, William H. Daniel: A Reader’s Guide. Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press, 2005. Silver, Abba Hillel. A History of Messianic Speculation in Israel: From the First Through the Seventeenth Centuries. Boston: Beacon, 1959. Simon, Ulrich E. A Theology of Salvation: A Commentary on Isaiah 40– 55. London: SPCK, 1961. Singgih, Emanuel G. ‘The Character of the Servant’s Mission in Isaiah 42’. Asia Journal of Theology 14, no. 1 (2000): 3–19. Slager, Donald. ‘The Use of “Behold” in the Old Testament’. Occasional Papers in Translation and Textlinguistics 3, no. 1 (1989): 50–79. Slotki, Israel W. Isaiah, Hebrew Text & English Translation with an Introduction and Commentary. Edited by A. Cohen. London: Soncino, 1949. Smalley, Beryl. The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages. Oxford: Blackwell, 1952.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

341

Smillie, Gene R. ‘Isaiah 42:1–4 in Its Rhetorical Context’. Bibliotheca Sacra 162, no. 645 (2005): 50–65. Smith, Gary V. Isaiah 40–66. The New American Commentary 15b. Nashville: B & H, 2009. Smith, James E. What the Bible Teaches about the Promised Messiah. Nashville: Nelson, 1993. Smith, John M. P. The Prophets and Their Times. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1925. Snaith, Norman H. Isaiah 40–66: A Study of the Teaching of the Second Isaiah and Its Consequences. Studies on the Second Part of the Book of Isaiah, Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 14. Leiden: Brill, 1967. Soloff, Rav Asher. ‘The Fifty-Third Chapter of Isaiah According to the Jewish Commentators, to the Sixteenth Century’. Unpubl. diss., Drew University, 1967. Sommer, Benjamin D. A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 40–66. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1998. ________. ‘Allusion and Illusions: the Unity of the Book of Isaiah in Light of Deutero-Isaiah’s Use of Prophetic Tradition’. Pages 156–186 in New Visions of Isaiah. Edited by Roy F. Melugin and Marvin A. Sweeney; Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 214. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996. Speiser, Ephraim A. ‘“People” and “Nation” of Israel’. Journal of Biblical Literature 79, no. 2 (1960): 157–163. Stansell, Gary. Lowth’s Isaiah Commentary and Romanticism. Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers 39. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000. Stäudlin, C. F. Neue Beiträge zur Erläuterung der biblischen Propheten. Göttingen, 1791. Stefanović, Ranko. ‘The Background and Meaning of the Sealed Book of Revelation 5’. Unpubl. diss., Andrews University, 1995. Stenning, John Frederick. The Targum of Isaiah. Edited by John Frederick Stenning. Translated by John F. Stenning. Oxford: Clarendon, 1949.

342

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Stern, Philip. ‘The “Blind Servant” Imagery of Deutero-Isaiah and Its Implications’. Biblica, vol. 75 no. 2 (1994): 224–232. Stone, Bebb W. ‘Second Isaiah: Prophet to Patriarchy’. Pages 219– 232 in The Prophets. Edited by Philip R. Davies. Sheffield: Sheffield Press, 1996. Stone, Michael E. Fourth Ezra: A Commentary on the Book of Fourth Ezra. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990. Story, Cullen I. K. ‘Another Look at the Fourth Servant Song of Second Isaiah’. Horizons in Biblical Theology 31, no. 2 (2009): 100–110. Stott, John R. W. The Cross of Christ. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 1986. Strand, Kenneth A. ‘Foundation Principle of Interpretation’. Pages 3–34 in Symposium on Revelation—Book I. Edited by Frank B. Holbrook. Vol. 6 of Daniel and Revelation Committee Series. Edited by Frank B. Holbrook. Silver Spring, Md.: Biblical Research Institute, 1992. Stromberg, Jacob. ‘An Inner-Isaianic Reading of Isaiah 61:1–3’. Pages 261–272 in Interpreting Isaiah: Issues and Approaches. Edited by David G. Firth and H. G. M. Williamson. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2009. Stuart, Douglas K. Old Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors. 3d ed. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001. Stuhlmueller, Carroll. Creative Redemption in Deutero-Isaiah. Analecta biblica 43. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970. ________. ‘“First and Last” and “Yahweh-Creator” in DeuteroIsaiah’. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 29, no. 3 (1967): 495–511. Thiselton, Anthony C. The Holy Spirit–In Biblical Teaching, through the Centuries, and Today. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013. Thomas, Robert L. The Mission of Israel and of the Messiah in the Plan of God. The Master’s Perspective on Biblical Prophecy 4. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2002. Thompson, Michael. Isaiah 40–66. Epworth Commentaries. Peterborough: Epworth, 2001. Tiemeyer, Lena-Sofia. ‘Continuity and Discontinuity in Isaiah 40– 66. History of Research’. Pages 13–40 in Continuity and Dis-

BIBLIOGRAPHY

343

continuity: Chronological and Thematic Development in Isaiah 40– 66. Bristol, Conn.: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014. ________. ‘Lamentations in Isaiah 40–55’. Pages 55–63 in Great Is Thy Faithfulness? Reading Lamentations as Sacred Scripture. Edited by Robin A. Parry and Heath A. Thomas. Eugene, Oreg.: Pickwick, 2011. ________. ‘The Lament in Isaiah 63:7–64:11 and Its Literary and Theological Place in Isaiah 40–66’. Pages 52–70 in The Book of Isaiah: Enduring Questions Answered Anew: Essay Honoring Joseph Blenkinsopp and His Contribution to the Study of Isaiah. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2014. Treiyer, Alberto R. ‘The Priest-King Role of the Messiah’. Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 7, no. 1 (1996): 64–80. Tsumura, David T. The First Book of Samuel. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament 1. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007. Uziel, Jonathan Ben. The Chaldee Paraphrase on the Prophet Isaiah. Translated by Christian William H. Pauli. London: London Society’s House, 1871. VanGemeren, Willem A. Interpreting the Prophetic Word. Grand Rapids: Academie, 1990. VanGemeren, Willem A., ed. New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis. 5 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997. Vaux, Roland de. Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions. Translated by John McHugh. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961. Waldow, Hans Eberhard von. ‘Message of Deutero-Isaiah’. Interpretation 22, no. 3 (1968): 259–287. Wallace, Daniel B. The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000. Waltke, Bruce K., and M. O’Connor. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990. Walton, John H. Covenant: God’s Purpose, God’s Plan. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994. ________. ‘The Imagery of the Substitute King Ritual in Isaiah’s Fourth Servant Song’. Journal of Biblical Literature 122, no. 4 (2003): 734–743.

344

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Ward, James M. ‘The Servant Songs in Isaiah’. Review & Expositor 65, no. 4 (1968): 433–446. Watts, J. Washington. A Survey of Syntax in the Hebrew Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964. Watts, John D. W. Isaiah 34–66. Word Biblical Commentary 25. Waco, Tex.: Word, 1987. ________. ‘The Heavenlies of Isaiah’. Unpubl. diss., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1948. Watts, Rikki E. ‘Consolation or Confrontation: Isaiah 40–55 and the Delay of the New Exodus’. Tyndale Bulletin 41, no. 1 (1990): 31–59. Wegner, Paul D. An Examination of Kingship and Messianic Expectation in Isaiah 1–35. Lewiston, N.Y.: Mellen Biblical Press, 1992. Weinfeld, Moshe. ‘Berit—Covenant vs. Obligation’. Biblica 56, no. 1 (1975): 120–128. ________. ‘The Emergence of the Deuteronomic Movement: The Historical Antecedents’. Pages 76–98 in Das Deuteronomium: Entstehung, Gestalt und Botschaft. Edited by Norbert Lohfink. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1985. ________. Social Justice in Ancient Israel and in the Ancient Near East. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995. Westermann, Claus. Isaiah 40–66. Translated by David M. G. Stalker. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969. ________. Sprache und Struktur der Prophetie Deuterojesajas. Stuttgart: Calwer, 1981. Whitley, Charles Francis. ‘Deutero-Isaiah’s Interpretation of Sedeq’. Vetus Testamentum 22, no. 4 (1972): 469–475. Whybray, Roger N. Isaiah 40–66. Edited by Ronald E. Clements and Matthew Black. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981. Wieringen, Archibald L. H. M. van. The Reader-Oriented Unity of the Book of Isaiah. Amsterdamse Cahiers voor Exegese van de Bijbel en zijn Tradities 6. Edited by J. W. Dyk et al. Vught: Skandalon, 2006.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

345

Williamson, Hugh G. M. ‘Hope under Judgment: The Prophets of the Eighth Century BCE’. Evangelical Quarterly 72, no. 4 ‘O’ (2000): 291–306. ________. Variations on a Theme: King, Messiah and Servant in the Book of the Isaiah. Didsbury Lectures 1997. Carlisle, Cumbria: Paternoster, 1998. Wilshire, Leland E. ‘The Servant-City: A New Interpretation of the “Servant of the Lord” in the Servant Songs of DeuteroIsaiah’. Journal of Biblical Literature 94, no. 3 (1975): 356– 367. Winckler, Hugo. Die Keilschrifttexte Sargons, I. Leipzig: E. Pfeiffer, 1889. Wolf, Herbert. Interpreting Isaiah: The Suffering and Glory of the Messiah. Grand Rapids: Academie, 1985. Wolff, Hans Walter. Anthropology of the Old Testament. Translated by Margaret Kohl. London: SCM Press, 1974. Young, Edward J. The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament 3. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979. ________. An Introduction to the Old Testament. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1950. ________. Studies in Isaiah. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954. Younker, Randall K., and Richard M. Davidson. ‘The Myth of the Solid Heavenly Dome: Another Look at the Hebrew �‫ָר ִק ַי‬ (Rāqîa‘)’. Andrews University Seminary Studies 49, no. 1 (2011): 125–147. Ziegler, Joseph, ed. Isaiah. Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum 14. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1939. Zimmerli, Walther. I Am Yahweh. Edited by Walter Brueggemann. Translated by Douglass W. Stott. Atlanta: John Knox, 1982. ________. ‘Le nouvel “Exode” dans le message des deux grands prophètes de l’exil’. Pages 216–227 in Maqqél shâqédh, la branche d'amandier: Hommage à Wilhelm Vischer. Edited by Wilhelm Vischer. Montpellier: Causse, Graille, Castelnau, 1960.

346

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Zimmerli, Walther, and Joachim Jeremias. The Servant of God. Studies in Biblical Theology 20. Naperville, Ill.: A. R. Allenson, 1957.

INDEX BIBLICAL REFERENCES Old Testament

Genesis 1 1:2 1:11–12 1:12, 24 1:21, 28 1:26–27 1:26–28 1:28 2 2:2–3 2:5 2:7 2:15–17 3 3–11 3:5, 7 3:6 3:15 3:16–17 4:10 6 6–8 9:1, 6–7 9:1–2 9:6 12

12:1–3

115, 120–121, 192, 213, 262, 270 175 159 192 144 261 214 214 115, 120, 262 108 158 123, 175 214 140 253 140 131 33, 43, 101, 143, 214, 255, 298–299 183 94 214, 255 134 43 214 101 250

347

12:2–3 12:3 15 15:1–21 15:16 17:2 17:2, 6 17:5 17:6, 20 18:2 18:7 18:20 18:20–33 19:9 19:12 21:19 22 22:17–18 27:1 40:14 41:6–23 45:28 49:8–12

101, 137, 157, 253, 261, 267, 289, 298 43, 174 8, 54 250 249 255 133 43 267 134 267 131 250 255 98 143 140 194 43 104 142 158 158 298

Exodus 1 1:8 2:23

143 156 265

348 2:23–25 2:23–7:7 3 3:1–17 3:4 3:10 3:13–15 3:15 3:20 4:10 4:10–12 4:11 4:12, 15 5:2 5:8, 15 5:14 6:1 6:2–8 6:3 6:5–6 6:6 6:12, 30 7–11 7:1 7:4 7:5 7:11 7:17 8:10 9:31 10:21 12 12:11 12:46 12:51 13:3, 14 13:21 13:21–22 14 14:5 14:17 14:17–18 14:18 14:19

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT” 60 95 146–147 146 267 248 283 146 182, 293 79, 266 95 141 267 292 94 79 293 249 147 265 264 95 262 134 248 292 292 292 292 100 185 214 176, 201 40–41 143 265 201 263 157, 185 176, 201, 293 283 265 292 201

14:19–20 14:31 15 15:2 15:3 15:21 15:22 15:27 16:6 16:7 17:1–3 17:9 18:25 19 19–24

19:1–25 19:5 19:5–6 19:6 20:1–3 20:2 20:4–5 20:5 20:18–20 21:12–14 23:24 23:28 23:30 24 24:3–11 24:8 25:30 31:12–18 32:13 32:19 33:18–19 33:19 34:5 34:6–7 34:7 34:10–16 34:13 35:13

283 79, 266 60, 264 267, 282 143, 263 263 60 60 143 263–264 60 83 83 132 189, 251, 264, 267, 283 132 248 84 132, 258 147 265 151 168 283 101 98 143 281 132, 137, 276 132 132, 253 133 108 79 99 148 174 174 148, 150, 251 130 84 99 133

INDEX 35:31–36:1 39:36

88, 194 133

Leviticus 1:3 1:4 4–5 4:3, 5, 16 5 5:14–6:7 6:5 6:22 7:18 10:17 13:6 13:21, 26, 28, 39 19:5 19:7 19:14 21:11 21:19 22 22:19–21, 29 22:23–27 22:25 23:11 24:5–9 24:7 24:8 25:25, 47–55 25:42 25:47–49 26:34, 43

86–87 86 277 258 111 137, 277 101 258 86 277 105 99, 105 87, 112 86 140 188 141 111, 141 87 86 86 87 133, 253 133 252 169 79 271 113

Numbers 6:6 9:12 11:2 11:11 11:16–30 11:17, 25, 29 12:3 12:7 12:7, 8

188 40–41 94 266 88, 194 88 95 267 266

349 12:14 14:21 14:22 22:38 23–24 23;12, 16 24 24:15–19 25:12 35:19 35:19–30 35:29–34

276 148 265 267 167 267 293 298 133 271 242 101

Deuteronomy 1:16, 17 4:1, 5, 10, 14 4:38 5:1 5:8–9 6:4 7–8 7:6 7:20 8:15 9:26 12:5 12:5, 21 14:2 14:24 15:15 15:21 17:8, 9 17:14–20

112 268 281 268 151 268 169 84, 248 143 176 169 108 108 84, 248 108 272 141 113 112, 196, 237, 258, 260 108 196 112 236 298 43 267 199 242 101

17:15 17:16–17 17:19 18:5 18:15, 18 18:15–16 18:18 19:6 19:6, 12 19:11–12

350

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

21:5 21:8 21:22 22:8 24:16 25:3 25:6 25:9 26:18 27:18 27:25 28:1–14 28:37 32 32:4 32:10 32:10–11 32:15 32:35 33:5–26 33:9 34:5 34:5–12 34:7 34:9 34:10

84, 236 272 199, 250 156 250 276 101 276 248 140 276 241 281 249 199 130 130 220 241 220 130 266 43 104 43 43

Joshua 1:1, 2, 7, 13, 15 1:8 5:14 6:22 7:19 8:31, 33 9:24 11:12, 15 12:1 12:6 13:8 14:7 18:7 20:3–9 22:2, 4, 5 24

266 267 267 143 149 266 266 266 281 266 266 266 266 242 266 267

24:12 24:29

143 267

Judges 7:2 13:17 14–16 15 20–21

267 267 129 300 257

Ruth 2:14 3:11–13 4:10

17 271 101

1 Samuel 2:1–10 2:10 2:27–30 3:2 6:5 8 8:1 8:7 8:18 8:11–18 8:20 9:1–2 9:15–17 9:17 9:20 9:27 10:1 10:6 10:6, 10 10:24 10:25 11:6 11:15 12:13 13:14 14:45 16:6, 8–10 16:7

298 282 84 99, 104 149 112 108 143 257 237, 259 257 257 261 261 198 159–160 194, 281 195 194 236 237 194 83 231 257 273 236 257

INDEX 16:7–12 16:8–10, 13 16:12 16:12–13 16:13

257 236 198, 236–237 261 88, 194–195, 257–258 257 258 257 83 143, 257 267 267

2 Samuel 3:18 5:8 6:21 7

258 188 83 101, 257, 262, 307 83, 258 258 258 257 257 257 298 231 79 257 195 276 282 101 242 281–282 279 83 101 100, 227 282 133, 159

17:17–18 17:32, 34 17:32, 34–37 17:40 17:45–47 20:41 25:23, 41

7:5 7:5–16 7:5, 8, 20 7:8–11 7:11 7:12–16 7:13–19 7:14 7:19 8–11 8:15 10:4 12:1–4 14:7 14:11 15:2 15:4 21:6 21:17 22:29 22:47–49 23:5

351 1 Kings 2:15 3 3:8 3:13 3:16–28 3:28 8:24 8:53, 56 9:3 10:23 14:18 15:29 18:12 18:20–40 18:35

88 112 84 282 281 113, 195 79 266 108 282 79 79 194 95 249

2 Kings 2:9 3:22 4:27 4:35 6:17, 20 11:12 11:18 14:6 15:7 18 18:4 18:12 18:21 19:16 21:4 21:8 23:3 23:14

194 242 188 140 140 260 99 250 282 98 99 266 97 140 108 266 253, 304 99

1 Chronicles 6:49 16:13 16:22 22:10 28:4 28:6

266 83 258 258 85, 258 258

352

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

29:22

88

2 Chronicles 1:3 17 19:8 24:6, 9 26:23 36:22–23

266 250 281 266 282 298, 310

Nehemiah 1:7, 8 9:14 9:36 10:29 13:25

266 266 307 266 276

Job 5:25 14:3 17:7 21:8 27:5 27:14 27:19 29:3 30:10 31:8 31:13 34:13 36:17

122 140 105 122 279 122 140 227 276 122–123 281 108 199

Psalms 2 2:7 2:8–9 9:17 16:5 17 17:2 19:11 21:1 22 22:7

298 12, 28, 261 195 199 258 91–92 91–92, 199 79 267 298 75

24:7, 9, 10 28:7 29:3 33:5 34:20 36:7 36:13 37:6 37:24 41:11 42:1 43:20 44:5 44:10, 19 45:4 45:18 48:12 48:14 50 51:16 51:18 60:12 63 63:1 63:8 63:9 65:9, 15, 22 67:2 71:16 72 72:1–4 72:19 76:10 78:52 78:70 80:19 81 82:3 85:9 89 89:3 89:4 89:14 89:34

148 267 148 199 40–41 199 75 91–92 75 258 83 83 241 75 83 243 199 281 249 86 113 241 82 267 258 82 83 174 243 298 259 148 199 281 83 75 249 279 118 261, 298 236 83, 258 170 75

INDEX 96:3 97:8 101:1 105:6 105:6, 43 105:15 106:5, 23 106:20 108:12 110 110:1 111:7 118 118:14 119 119:108 132 132:10 132:17 135:4 136:22 139:11, 12 142:8 145:11, 12 146:8 150

174 199 199 83 83 258 83 148 75 298 12 199 298 267 112 86, 113 298 83 159 248 23 227 142 148 140 151

Proverbs 6:1 8:12 10:13 19:29 20:13 26:20

127 147 276 276 140 101

Ecclesiastes 12:6

107

Song of Solomon 1:7 188 3:1–4 188 Isaiah 1–5

57

353 1–12 1–39

1:2–9 1:3 1:8 1:10 1:12 1:14 1:15–18 1:17 1:20 1:25 1:31 2:2–4 2:5 2:7 2:12 3:8 3:14 4:2

4:4 4:5 5 5:1–13 5:7 5:20 5:24 5:27 5:30 6 6–12 6:3 6:5 6:9–10 7

7–12

7:1–9 7:10–14 7:10–15 7:10–16

46, 161 2, 46, 57–58, 249 248 251 129 110 240 188 251 92 178, 268 182 101 195 174 175 251 178 255 159, 161, 197, 225, 267, 298 199 179 251 280 77 136, 174 110 268 77, 174 50, 112 50, 225 148 259 207 50, 196, 229, 259, 280, 305 57–59, 91, 295 260 280 224 298

354 7:12–16 7:14

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

305 43, 121, 161, 225, 294–295 7:18–25 281 7:20 276 8 225, 294 8–11 50 8:3 161 8:3–5 43 8:5–16 121 8:16 180, 268 8:16–20 110 8:22 77 8:23 161 9 225–229, 294, 305–306 9–12 46 9:1 227–228 9:1, 3 229 9:1, 15 161 9:1–6 43, 163, 225– 229, 231, 244, 304, 306, 308 9:1–7 195, 224–225, 298 9:1–20 121 9:2 161, 174 9:5 193, 226–227, 229 9:6 161, 193, 226, 229, 280 9:6–7 113 9:12, 17 182 10 231 10:4 143 10:5 212 10:10–11, 24–27 231 10:12–19 214 10:13 269 10:20 181 10:33 236 11 193, 225–226, 228–229, 231,

11:1 11:1–3 11:1–4 11:1–6 11:1–10 11:1–16 11:2 11:3 11:4 11:5 11:6 11:6–11 11:10

11:12 12 12:2 13–23 13:10 13:17 14:12–21 14:19 14:25 14:28–32 14:29, 30 15:2 16:5 16:10 17:1 19:20 19:21 20:3 21:9 22:2 22:5

235, 294, 305–306 123, 159, 193–195, 197, 231, 236, 266 123 161 43 123, 163, 225, 229–232, 244, 280, 298, 304, 306, 308 224 13, 88–89, 194–195, 229, 232, 238, 266 230 173, 229–231 230 193 47 13, 161, 193, 197 161 50–51 267 46, 58 174 77 143 241 99, 241 224, 298 197 276 92 241 77 94 292 79 99 166 241

INDEX 22:24 24–27 24:1 24:5 24:21–25 24:22 26 26:3 26:8–9 26:9 26:13 27 27:3 28–33 28:16 29:3 29:13 29:18 30:1 30:1–6 30:9 30:18 30:19–26 30:27 31:1–8 31:8 32:1 32:1–8 32:7 32:15–16 33:11 33:15 33:17, 22 33:17–24

33:42 34–35 34:1 34:5 34:8 34:10 35:5 35:9 36

122 46, 58 77 110 224, 298 143 130 129–130 255 88–89 243 234 129–130 46 77, 225 148 148 207 88–89 266 110 199, 282 225 77 224 166 77 298 92 232 88–89 82 259 224, 295, 298–299 295 46 122–123 199 241 101 140, 207 272 98

355 36–39

36:6 37–39 37:7 37:17 37:22–38 37:35 38:16 38:17 40 40–42 40–44 40–48

40–50 40–53 40–54 40–55

40–66 40:1–2 40:1–8 40:1–9 40:1–11

40:1–42:17

45–46, 56, 70, 295 97, 266 134 88 140 121 200 88–89 276 51, 190 50 51, 275 48–49, 212, 254 79 49–50 48 1–2, 4, 8–11, 34, 36–37, 45–52, 54–59, 72, 79, 86, 94, 110, 118–119, 121, 125–126, 134, 151, 154, 163, 167, 174, 185, 202, 215, 217–220, 224–225, 228, 244, 247, 249, 255, 257, 263–264, 272, 276, 284–286, 290, 292, 303, 305–307 2, 27, 46, 91, 103, 215, 249, 254, 265 49 59 48 47, 57, 59, 248, 255 62, 193, 294

356 40:1–44:23 40:1–48:22 40:2 40:3–5 40:3–8 40:3–42:17 40:5 40:6 40:7, 13 40:9–11 40:10 40:11 40:12–26 40:12–31 40:12–42:4 40:14 40:17, 23 40:18 40:19–20 40:20 40:25 40:26 40:27 40:27–31 40:31 41

41–45 41–48 41–49 41:1

41:1–5 41:1–7 41:1–42:9 41:–42:13 41:1–42:17

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT” 48 62 23, 86 263 50 49 263–264 94 88–89 50, 59 77, 263–264 281 50, 119 50, 57 47 255 270 119 152 83 168, 250 104, 250 169 50 81 50–51, 60–62, 70, 78, 92, 100, 108, 113–114, 129, 131, 140–141, 148, 150, 166, 178, 181, 190, 201, 203–205, 229, 250 46 59 234 81, 113, 181, 205 255 50 58–59 62 62–63

41:1–44:23 41:2 41:4 41:5–10 41:6 41:6–7 41:7 41:8 41:8–9

41:8–10

41:8–16 41:8–20 41:8–42:9 41:9 41:9, 13 41:10 41:13 41:13–23 41:14 41:16, 20 41:17–20 41:19–20 41:21 41:21, 24 41:21–23 41:21–24 41:21–29

41:22–29

58 125–126, 134 249 205 13 81 206 79–80, 134, 289 4, 9–10, 23, 52, 54, 79–80, 82, 163, 202– 203, 205–206, 244, 248, 285–286, 288, 290–291, 303–305, 308 50, 81, 203– 204, 287, 290 80 50 118 203–204 129 82, 126, 204 249 212 94, 168, 271 168 60, 263 121 155 61, 259 99 63, 147 50, 54, 58, 61, 63, 69, 112– 113, 122, 135, 137, 160, 178, 190, 212, 249–250, 254–256 178, 196, 206, 208, 212, 248

INDEX 41:22

41:22, 23 41:22–42:8 41:24, 29 41:25–29 41:26 41:27 41:28 41:29

42

42–53 42:1

149–150, 156, 160 149, 151 308 76–77, 81, 250 63, 98 124 77 61, 126, 128, 147 76, 80, 147, 150–151, 270 4, 11–17, 20, 26, 35–36, 45–46, 56–57, 59, 62, 70, 73, 78, 80, 87, 98, 100, 110, 112–114, 129, 146, 148, 159, 164, 166, 168–169, 171, 173–175, 177–178, 185, 187, 189–190, 192–195, 199–200, 203–206, 210, 213–214, 221–223, 225, 228–229, 231–232, 236–238, 240–243, 248, 250, 255, 259, 271, 284, 287, 291, 296–297, 301 51 6, 10, 12–13, 15–18, 21–22, 25, 27–28, 30, 33, 54, 61, 69,

357

42:1, 3 42:1–4

42:1–7 42:1–8

42:1–9

76–90, 92, 95, 113, 115, 118, 124, 126, 131, 147, 162, 164, 166, 168–169, 173, 177–178, 186–188, 194–195, 202–203, 210, 213, 216–217, 219–224, 229, 232, 245, 248, 250, 254–255, 258, 266, 286, 296, 304 91–92, 103, 142, 179, 226, 230, 232 26, 47, 50, 58, 62–70, 72–73, 76, 78, 82, 93, 109, 112– 115, 117, 122, 153, 161, 164, 166, 176, 181–183, 190, 196, 199, 205, 217, 223–224, 231, 238, 243, 248, 250, 254–256, 261, 273, 278, 281, 285–287, 290, 296, 304, 307–308, 310 16, 149, 263, 281 61, 216–218, 220–221, 224 1, 4–5, 9–11, 14, 17, 24, 29–30, 36–37, 45, 48, 51–52, 60–63, 67–72,

358

42:2

42:3

42:4

42:5

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT” 81, 115, 119, 135, 145, 149, 160–172, 175, 177–181, 183, 186–187, 196, 200–207–212, 214–230, 232–245, 247–252, 257–262, 265, 270, 285–286, 290–291, 293–295, 298–299, 303, 305–310 67, 82, 93–96, 103–104, 162, 173, 180, 196, 213, 216, 219, 223, 229–230, 248, 261, 274, 304 67, 82, 95, 96–107, 109, 162, 185, 213, 216, 229, 233–234, 240, 248, 254, 259, 304 47–48, 68, 82, 95, 97–98, 103–111, 113, 115–116, 121, 162, 166, 170, 175, 179, 195, 216, 226, 230, 232, 248, 254, 260, 264, 296 68, 114–115, 117–123, 131, 138, 146, 148, 162, 166, 173, 175, 177, 188, 192–193, 213,

42:5–7 42:5–9

42:6

42:6–7

42:6–9 42:7

226–227, 236, 270–271, 287, 304 70, 115, 146, 270 50, 62–65, 67–70, 72, 76, 115–116, 122, 149, 152–153, 161, 176, 183–184, 205–206, 238, 243, 252, 260, 285, 290, 304, 307 69, 86, 110, 114, 119, 121, 124–138, 140, 142, 146–149, 152, 162, 164, 166, 170–172, 177, 180, 187–189, 196, 203–204, 208, 210, 216, 218, 220, 223, 227, 230, 234, 239–240, 242, 248–253, 255, 259–260, 264, 270–271, 275, 283, 286–290, 296, 304, 306, 308 63, 67–68, 122, 146–147, 161, 172–173, 190, 194, 212, 216, 227–229, 248, 250, 291, 296, 304 63, 248 68, 120, 138– 144, 148–149,

INDEX

42:8

42:8–9 42:9

42:10 42:10–12 42:10–13

42:10–17 42:13 42:14–16 42:14–17 42:14–44:8 42:16 42:16–19 42:16–25 42:17 42:17–19 42:17–25 42:18–20 42:18–25

42:18–43:7

162, 174, 180, 200, 208, 210, 218, 229, 234, 237, 243, 259, 270–274, 279, 290, 304 68, 130–131, 145–152, 155, 161, 166–167, 169–171, 173, 179, 210, 234, 237, 249–250, 263–264, 270, 296, 304, 306 63, 70, 119, 162 61, 68, 77, 115–116, 147–148, 152–161, 165, 175, 178, 235, 255–257, 265, 281, 308 61, 175, 205 60 50, 61, 264, 285 51 263 263 50 49 136, 227, 263 290 206–207, 209, 290, 304–305, 308 152 287, 290 290 141 196, 208–209, 289 48

359 42:19

42:20 42:21 42:21, 24 42:22 43 43–44 43:1 43:1–7 43:1–12 43:1, 14 43:1, 14, 16 43:3 43:8 43:8–9 43:8–13 43:8–15, 26 43:9 43:10

43:12 43:12–13 43:13 43:14 43:14–21 43:15

43:16–17 43:16–21 43:17 43:18 43:18–19 43:19 43:19–21 43:20 43:22–28 43:26

4, 10, 52, 54, 79–80, 163, 202, 206, 208–209, 244, 285 140–141, 207 126, 208 110, 208 208 100 51 290 196 110 119, 271 119 94, 168, 249 207 290 196 255 156 9–10, 16, 27, 52, 54, 79–80, 119, 215–217, 249, 285–286, 290, 306 119, 249 254 269 168 263 168, 249, 259, 307 100 157 102, 104 155 156 158 263 83 290 170

360 44 44–45 44:1–2

44:1, 21 44:1–5, 21–22 44:3 44:4 44:6 44:6, 22–24 44:7 44:9 44:9–46:2 44:10, 15, 17 44:15, 17 44:17–20 44:21

44:22, 26 44:23 44:24–48:25 44:25 44:26 44:28 45

45–47 45–50 45:1

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT” 221–222 114 4, 10, 23, 52, 55, 79–80, 217–218, 220–221, 285–286, 288, 290, 306 286 196 88–89, 122, 232, 286 158 249, 259, 307 271 108, 156 270 49 119 152 270 4, 10, 23, 52, 55, 79–80, 218, 221, 285–286, 288, 290, 306 290 54, 237 48 293 4, 10, 53, 55, 79, 219, 222, 285, 306 214, 292, 298, 307, 310 51, 215, 225, 287, 294 52 51–52 157, 210, 212, 244–245, 258, 286–287, 289–290, 292, 307

45:1–4 45:1–6 45:1–8

298, 310 214 209–212, 214–215, 244, 304–305, 308 45:2 99, 210, 289– 290, 307 45:3 125, 210, 245, 249, 289, 292 45:3–13 292 45:4 4, 10, 23, 52, 55, 79–80, 83, 125, 163, 202, 209–210, 244–245, 285–288, 290–291, 305 45:4–5 292 45:5–6 249, 307 45:14, 18, 21, 22 249 45:7 121, 174, 213, 245 45:8 121, 126, 158, 212–213 45:11 156, 168 45:13 114, 125–126, 293 45:15 249 45:17 174, 286–287, 290 45:17, 25 289 45:18 249, 270 45:18–21 155 45:19 126, 270 45:20 152 45:20–25 255 45:22 114, 119 45:24–25 47 46 51, 69, 95 46–47 58 46:1 183 46:3–4 94 46:3, 12 95 46:3–48:21 49

INDEX 46:5 46:7 46:9

46:10–13 47 47:4 47:8, 10 47:9 48

48–50 48:1 48:1–8 48:1–16 48:3 48:5 48:6 48:9 48:11 48:12, 15 48:16 48:17

48:17–20 48:19 48:20

48:20–21, 25 48:20–52:12 48:21 48:22 49

49–54 49–55

269 94 119, 156, 249, 270 281 51, 69 168–169, 271 249 254 51, 69, 166, 278 52 243 290 155 156, 159–160 152, 270 129, 156 147 148 125 232 168–169, 249, 271 290 122, 286 4, 10, 52, 55, 79–80, 219, 223, 263, 271, 285–286, 288, 290, 306 176 49 47, 263 278, 290 4, 47–48, 51, 57, 138, 164, 166–167, 171, 173–174, 177, 192, 271 48 57, 212, 295

361 49:1 49:1–2 49:1–3, 7 49:1–4 49:1–5 49:1–6 49:1–7 49:1–12

49:1–13 49:1–52:12 49:2 49:3 49:3, 5–7 49:3–6 49:4 49:5 49:5–6

49:6

16, 165–167, 173, 175, 267, 269–270, 281 173 269 290 292 4, 24, 30, 62, 69, 175–176, 184, 224, 238, 285 164, 224 1, 16, 163– 172, 175–176, 183, 243, 267, 270, 285–286, 288, 290, 298, 304–305, 307, 309–310 294 48 173, 281, 287 16, 53, 55, 79–80, 167, 171, 173, 237, 283, 286, 288 10, 79 80 169–170, 175, 182, 270, 278, 284 53, 55, 170, 173, 175, 267, 269, 281 53, 80, 269– 270, 281, 284 16, 27, 55, 129, 134, 136–137, 170–172, 174–175, 267, 269–271, 281, 286, 290

362 49:7 49:7–13 49:8

49:8–9 49:8–10 49:8–12 49:9 49:9–11 49:10 49:11 49:12 49:13 49:14–26 49:15 49:23 49:26 50

50:1–3 50:2 50:2–3 50:4 50:4–6 50:4–9

50:4–10

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT” 55, 79, 94, 168–169, 267, 270–271, 273, 276, 281, 308 116, 184 129–130, 170–172, 254, 269–271, 276, 278, 281, 283, 286, 290 144, 172 196, 281 175, 263, 282–283, 285, 290 174, 267, 276 263 170, 267, 276 267 165 176, 285 176–178 248 249 168–169, 249, 271 4, 51, 176– 178, 180, 183, 185, 192 56, 176–177, 255, 281 272–273 185 16, 178, 180, 268–269 183 4, 24, 62, 69, 176–177, 182–184, 224, 238, 267, 272–274, 284, 285, 290, 294 272, 292

50:4–11

50:5 50:6 50:7 50:8 50:9

50:9–11 50:10 50:10–11 50:11 51 51–55 51:1, 5, 7 51:3 51:4

51:4, 7 51:9 51:9–10 51:10 51:15 51:17–23 51:23 52 52:1–6 52:3 52:3, 9

1, 16, 56, 163, 176–181, 184–185, 243, 281, 285–286, 290, 298, 304–305, 307, 309–310 268–270, 274, 290 180, 185, 269–270, 273, 276, 279, 286, 290 268 92–93, 179, 182–183, 255, 278–279, 281 178, 268–269, 282 184 10, 16, 56, 79, 178–179, 181, 272, 279, 283 116, 184, 285, 290 178, 182 51 51 126 157, 185, 285 92, 110–111, 136, 170, 199 110 263–264 263 271 249 48 276 4, 51, 192, 201, 289 201 169 271

INDEX 52:4, 11–12 52:6 52:7–10 52:7–12 52:10 52:11–12 52:12 52:13

52:13–15 52:13–53:12

52:13–57:21 52:14–15 52:14–53:12 52:15 53

53:1, 4, 8 53:1–9, 11–12 53:1–12 53:2

201 254 285 202 263–264 263 21, 263 10, 12, 16–18, 20–21, 27–28, 56, 69, 79–80, 186, 197, 200, 269, 282–283, 290 202, 268, 285 1, 4, 17, 23– 25, 30, 49, 51–52, 62, 163, 185–187, 192, 194, 201–202, 224, 243, 267, 274, 285–286, 290, 294, 298, 304–305, 307, 310 48 160, 197, 267 269 187–188 4, 11–12, 14– 21, 22, 26–28, 30, 34, 36, 86, 98, 100, 111, 137, 157, 187–189, 191–192, 194, 197–201, 251, 257, 270, 277, 279, 289, 310 281 290 202, 285 188, 193, 197–198, 251

363 53:3

53:4 53:4, 11–12 53:4–5, 8 53:4–6 53:4–7 53:4–10 53:5 53:5–7 53:5–8 53:6 53:7 53:8 53:9 53:10

53:10–12 53:11 53:11–22 53:12

54 54–55 54–66 54:1 54:1–17 54:1–55:13 54:5 54:8 54:10 54:13 54:16 54:17 55 55:3

20, 191, 200, 251 268 280 98, 191 251 286 283 20, 268, 280, 284, 290 132 290 268, 274, 280 191, 268, 275 27, 187–188, 199, 251 200 189, 197–198, 268–269, 275, 277, 280 111, 188 10, 27, 56, 79–80, 189, 286 278 189, 191, 251, 286 51, 201 49, 51 236 3, 21 285 116 168–169, 271 169, 271 252 180 121 3–4, 10, 47, 52, 56, 220, 223–224, 236, 285–286, 306 51, 57 252, 261

364 55:3–5 55:5 55:8 55:12–13 55:13 56–66 56:6 56:7 56:10 57:13 57:15 58:2 58:5 58:10 58:13 59:4 59:9 59:10 59:15–20 59:19 59:20 59:20–21 59:21 60:1 60:2 60:3 60:3, 19, 20 60:7 60:9, 14 60:16 60:20 60:21 60:22 61 61:1 61:1–2 61:1–3 61:1–6 61:1–9

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT” 225, 298–299 168 199 157, 263 263 2, 46, 249 179, 236 87 207 270 168 199 87 174 85, 168 125, 270 92, 136, 174 207 241 88–89 272 252, 261 88–89, 232 136, 174 77 137, 179 136 87 168 168, 249, 272 174 54, 236–237 249 215, 232, 236–237, 306 232–234, 237 196 123, 234, 238, 298, 310 225, 238 163, 225, 232–238, 244, 304, 306

61:2 61:3

61:4 61:4–9 61:6 61:8 61:9 61:10–11 62:1 62:3 62:6 62:12 63 63:1 63:1–6

63:1–4 63:2 63:3, 6 63:4 63:5 63:5–6 63:7 63:9, 16 63:11–14 63:14 63:17 63:18 64:5–7 65–66

65:8 65:9, 13–15 65:9, 15, 22 65:14 65:23 66:14 66:19 66:24

87, 236, 241, 254 99, 106, 232, 234–236 235 238 234 232, 234, 252 122 238 179 237 243 272 215, 238, 240–242, 306 238–239, 242 163, 225, 238–244, 304, 306 243 242 240–241 254 239 243 243 272 243 88–89 241 241 241 47, 156, 257, 265 129 236 83 94 122 236 174 101

INDEX Jeremiah 2:11 7:29 9:23 10:24 12:7 13:7 14:17–22 15:19 15:20 16:19 17:27 18:2 20:2 23:5 26:11, 16 29:1–20 30:9 31:31–34 31:34 32:19 33:14–22 33:15 37:15 46–51 46:27, 28 48:21 51:9

148 276 199 199 188 188 249 269 143 267 101 159–160 276 159, 197 199 144 231 252 137 140 88 159 276 58 23 199 199

Ezekiel 16:60–63 17:6 17:9–14 17:22 17:31 21:4 21:12 23 23:24 25–32 28:11–19 29:7 31:5, 8, 12 33:26

252 236 158 193 197 101 105 214 199 58 143 107 236 166

365 34:23–24 36:27 37:5, 8, 10 37:14 37:24, 25 39:21 44:24

231, 309 88–89 123 88 309 199 281

Daniel 1:1–21 2 4 9 9:11 9:18 9:24–27 12:3

144 159 197 300 266 140 129, 131, 298, 310 279

Hosea 2:2 3:5 5:11 6:4 14:6

108 231 98 91 193

Amos 1–2 2:13 4:2 5:22 6:11, 14 7:8 8:11 9:8, 9, 13

58 77 77 85, 113 77 77 77 77

Micah 3:8 6:1–13 6:1–16 6:15 7:9

199 182, 279 93 241 92, 103

Habakkuk 1:4, 7

91

366

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Zephaniah 3:5 3:8

92 199

Haggai 1:3 1:13

222 222

Zechariah 3:8 4:1 6:9–13 6:12 9:9

159, 197, 261 268 88 158, 197, 261 95

New Testament

Matthew 3:16–17 8:17 12:17–21 12:18–21 26:67 27:30

88 308 26 298, 308–310 276 276

Mark 1:11 10:45

261 308

Luke 1:31–33 2:32 4:16–30 4:17–21 4:18–19 22:37 24:25–27 24:26

258 308 308 123 298, 310 308 26 304

John 1:1–3 12:27–28 17:1, 22, 24 18:22

118 304 304 276

10:5 11:17 12:4

241 104 140

Malachi 1:6 1:10, 13 2:17 3:1 3:17 4:1 4:4

148 85, 113 93 222, 252 248 197 266

19:36

40–41

Acts 3:22 7:37 8 8:27–32 8:32–33 13:47 16:17 17:23 17:25 26:18 28:28

43 43 111 26 298, 310 311 174 120 120 311 174

Romans 1:16 4:16–18 5 5:12–17 8:29 15:21

174 137 288 300 132 311

2 Corinthians 6:2

311

INDEX Galatians 2:2 3:23–29

311 137

Ephesians 6:10–20

143

Philippians 2:16

311

Colossians 1:15, 18

132, 255

Hebrews 3:1–6 3:19 4:8–9 4:12 7:16, 23–28 9:11–14 9:24–26, 28 10:1–4

88 197 43 166 277 277 277 277

Apocrypha

16

4 Ezra 7:28–29

AUTHORS

Abravanel, Isaac 13, 22 Adams, Jim W. 59 Ådna, Jostein 15, 16 Albertz, Rainer 33, 34 Alexander, Joseph Addison 1 Alexander, T. Desmond 255, 261 Allis, Oswalt T. 1 Andersen, Francis I. 76 Anderson, Bernhard W. 60, 263, 265, 280, 282 Anthonioz, Stéphanie 175 Archer, Gleason L. 2 Arnold, Bill T. 194, 259 Ascalone, Enrico 127 Augusti, Johann C. W. 35

367 James 2:13

280

2 Peter 3:9

134

1 John 1:5

227

Revelation 1:5 2:12 5 12–14 13:8 14:17–20 18:1–10 19:1–3 19:11–16 19:13–15 20:11–15 21:1–15 21:2–3, 22

132 166 260 143 166 241 156 156 309–310 240, 242 309–310 156 309–310

Averbeck, Richard E. 111, 197, 274 Bahrdt, Karl F. 35 Bali, Joseph 12, 16, 112 Baltzer, Klaus 60, 62, 112, 115, 119, 135–137, 143, 145– 146, 152, 184, 199, 209, 214, 282 Baron, David 6, 11, 21, 24, 30, 32–33 Barstad, Hans M. 3, 85–87 Bauer, G. L. 35 Baumgartner, Walter 82, 86, 90, 103–105, 107, 123, 126, 129, 157, 207, 236, 242, 272

368

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Beale, Gregory K. 39–40, 214, 293, 297 Beaudet, Roland 297 Begrich, Joachim 91, 183 Bentzen, Aage 155 Bergen, Robert D. 194, 257 Berges, Ulrich 3, 62–63 Berkouwer, Gerrit C. 288 Berlin, Adele 24, 63, 84 Bertholet, Alfred 35 Beuken, Willem A. M. 47–48, 63, 67, 137, 261 Beyer, Bryan E. 259 Bidmead, Julye 127–128 Birnbaum, Philip 24 Bjørndalen, Anders J. 120 Blenkinsopp, Joseph 3–4, 7, 60, 67–68, 87, 180, 214 Block, Daniel I. 195, 197–198, 200 Bock, Darrell L. 40 Bonnard, Pierre E. 150, 182 Bonsirven, Joseph 37 Bottéro, Jean 198, 282 Bovati, Pietro 181–182 Brassey, Paul, D. 292 Braude, William G. 13 Brettler, Marc Zvi 24, 63 Breuer, Edward 24 Brierre-Narbonne, Jean-Joseph 15, 18 Briggs, Charles A. 107, 298 Brooks, Roger 33 Brown, Francis 77, 107 Brown, Laurence E. 33 Brown, Michael L. 12, 20 Brueggemann, Walter 177, 182, 238 Budde, Karl 4 Calvin, John 32–33 Canale, Fernando, L. 147 Carr, David 46–47, 57 Ceresko, Anthony R. 59 Charlesworth, James H. 15

Childs, Brevard S. 46, 62, 68, 78, 132, 187, 228, 280 Chilton, Bruce D. 6, 16, 28, 88 Chisholm, Robert B., Jr. 57 Churgin, Pinkhos 11 Clements, Ronald E. 3, 45 Collins, Adela Y. 39 Collins, John J. 38–39, 292 Corrodi, Heinrich 35 Cullmann, Oscar 309 Dahood, Mitchell 91–92 Davidson, Andrew B. 93, 97, 121 Davidson, Richard D. 9, 39–40, 42–43, 45, 50, 59, 70, 122, 147, 158, 214, 272, 274, 288, 293, 295, 307, 309, 311 de Moor, Johannes C. 57, 67 Deenick, Karl 200 Delitzsch, Franz 4, 87, 95, 132, 140, 144, 146, 167, 194, 222, 238, 251 Dell, Katharine J. 35 Dodd, Charles H. 289 Dorn, Louis O. 77 Dorsey, David A. 48–49 Douglas, Mary 141 Doukhan, Jacques B. 27, 37, 53, 251, 255, 299 Driver, Godfrey Rolles 92 Driver, Samuel R. 2, 15, 18–23, 107 Duhm, Bernhard 2, 4, 26, 58, 62, 78, 176, 303 Dumbrell, William J. 46–48, 50, 112 Dunn, James D. G. 26–27 Dyrness, William 288 Eaton, John H. 212, 261 Eddinger, Terry W. 47 Edersheim, Alfred 28 Ekblad, Eugene R., Jr 146, 193 Elliger, Karl 97, 126, 135, 183

INDEX Engnell, Ivan 71, 76, 113, 131, 199 Erbt, Wilhelm von 35 Esh, Shaul 92 Euler, Karl Friedrich 30 Evans, Craig A. 45–46 Fanwar, Wann M. 120, 249, 263 Finkelstein, Louis 22 Fischer, Johann 135–136 Fishbane, Michael 37 Fraine, Jean de 288 Franke, Chris 69 Frankfort, Henri 149, 199 Franklin, Norma 282 Freedman, Harry 18 Freehof, Solomon B. 6–7, 13 Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. 13 Frydland, Rachmiel 19–22 Gage, W. A. 214 Gane, Roy 39, 133, 136–137, 188, 253, 277, 300 Gentry, Peter J. 193, 252–253, 275, 294 Gesenius, H. William F. 106, 108, 157 Gesenius, Wilhelm 127 Gibson, John C. L. 139, 153, 156 Gillet, Lev 22, 35 Glassner, Jean-Jacques 199 Goldingay, John 33, 46–47, 62– 63, 76, 78, 80–81, 84, 87, 114, 119–120, 141, 146, 160, 167, 169, 176, 184, 199, 204–205, 209, 214, 271 Goppelt, Leonhard 40, 158, 293 Gossai, Hemchand 91 Gosse, Bernard 241 Grajetzki, Wolfram 282 Gray, Bennison 9 Greenberg, Gillian 12

369 Greenberg, Moshe 37 Greene, Mark 300 Gregory, Bradley C. 39 Grelot, Pierre 15, 238, 240 Grisanti, Michael A. 134 Groningen, Gerard van 28 Gürkan, S. Leyla 13 Ha, KyeSang 187, 277 Haag, Herbert 35 Hagner, Donald A. 24 Hailperin, Herman 31–32 Hamilton, Victor P. 262 Hanson, Paul D. 3–5, 39 Haran, Menahem 47 Hartley, John E. 141 Hasel, Gerhard 37 Hegermann, Harald 27 Heschel, Abraham Joshua 6, 23 Heskett, Randall 210, 307 Hessler, Eva 60 Hill, Charles E. 274 Hill, Linzy H. 265, 282 Hoftijzer, Jacob 85 Honeycutt, Roy L. 5 Hoonacker, Albin van 34 Horbury, William 35 Hugenberger, Gordon 264, 293 Ibn Ezra, Abraham ben Meïr 6–7, 12, 21–22 James, Fleming 8 James, Frank A., III 274 Jeffrey, Steve 274 Jeremias, Joachim 14, 16–17, 27, 80 Jones, Douglas 154–155 Jongeling, Karel 85 Joüon, Paul 108, 126 Joyce, Paul 248 Kaiser, Otto 183 Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. 33, 37, 61, 159, 224–225, 238, 247– 248, 253, 288–289, 297– 299 Kaizer, Ted 200

370

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Kaufmann, Yehezkel 2 Keel, Othmar 128 Keil, Carl F. 4, 87, 95, 132, 140, 144, 146, 167, 194, 222, 238, 251 Kelley, Page H. 121 Kim, Hyun Chul Paul 58, 62 Kimhi, David 6, 12, 22 Kiraz, George A. 12, 16, 112 Kissane, Edward J. 2, 60 Klausner, Joseph 6–7, 15 Klein, Ralph W. 195, 257 Knight, George A. F. 56, 58, 72, 274, 278 Köhler, Ludwig 82, 86, 90, 103–105, 107, 123, 126, 129, 157, 207, 236, 242, 272 Koole, Jan L. 222 Korpel, Marjo C. A. 57, 67 Kosmala, Hans 65–66, 72 Kraetzschmar, Richard 34 Laato, Antti 49–50, 87, 196, 292 Labat, René 131 Ladd, George E. 39, 309 Lampe, Geoffrey William H. 40 Lange, Johann Peter 129 LaRondelle, Hans K. 297 Leclerc, Thomas L. 113, 170, 181–182, 255 Leene, Henk 3 Lessing, Reed 77, 101, 107, 111, 113, 115, 120–121, 134, 157, 159–160, 166, 170, 177, 179–181, 183– 184, 192, 204, 209, 214, 271 Leupold, Herbert C. 240 Levey, Samson H. 6, 12, 15–16 Liddell, Henry George 105 Liedke, G. 199

Lindblom, Johannes 62, 91, 168 Lindsey, F. Duane 4–5, 29, 59, 95, 122, 159, 168, 184, 192, 252, 256–258, 261, 272–273, 278, 281 Lods, Adolphe 8 Luck, G. Coleman 258 Luther, Martin 27 Ma, Wonsuk 90 Machinist, Peter 60, 62, 112, 115, 119, 135–137, 143, 145–146, 152, 184, 199, 209, 214, 282 Marcus, Ralph 5 Margalioth, Rachel 2 Matthews, Victor H. 237 McAllister, Ray W. 141 McCarter, P. Kyle, Jr. 194–195 McConville, J. Gordon 108–109 McKenzie, John L. 4–5, 7, 87, 91, 184 Meier, Samuel A. 118 Melugin, Roy F. 47–48, 53, 58, 69, 164, 183 Mercer, Samuel 200 Merrill, Eugene H. 31–32, 142 Mettinger, Tryggve 272–273 Meyers, Eric M. 282 Michaelis, Johann David 80 Middlemas, Jill 34 Milgrom, Jacob 133 Miller, Patrick D. 260 Miller, Stephen Roy 2 Moran, W. L. 127 Morris, Leon 39, 274 Moskala, Jiří 174, 270, 278, 280 Motyer, J. Alec 1, 29, 60, 62– 64, 76, 79, 87, 90, 94, 115, 122, 157, 170, 176, 184, 209, 214, 224–225, 231, 238, 260–261, 281–283, 297, 299

INDEX Mowinckel, Sigmund 71, 76 Muilenburg, James 91, 144, 181, 222, 240 Muraoka, T. 108, 126 Muskita, Hudyard 85 Mutua, James 89 Neubauer, Adolf 15, 18–23 Neusner, Jacob 14 Ninow, Friedbert 158, 266, 282–283, 297 North, Christopher R. 7, 14, 30, 34–35, 60, 80, 96, 135, 154, 184, 187, 269, 278 O'Connor, M. 92, 102, 125– 127, 139, 142, 158, 170 Odendaal, Dirk H. 254, 278 Ojewole, Afolarin O. 298–299 Origen 30–31 Orlinsky, Harry M. 274 Osborne, Grant R. 37 Oswalt, John N. 1, 4, 7–8, 29, 58, 62, 76, 78, 93, 125, 138, 143, 154, 164, 173, 175, 187, 192–194, 209, 215, 222–223, 226, 231– 232, 238, 241, 270, 280, 284 Oudersluys, Richard C. 266 Ovey, Michael 274 Packer, James I. 274–275 Page, Sydney H. T. 15–16 Parpola, Simo 198 Patai, Raphael 5 Paul, Shalom M. 2, 13, 34, 60, 83, 109–111, 125, 128, 169, 176, 209, 215, 235, 238, 251, 258–259, 264, 279 Payne, David F. 76, 78, 80–81, 84, 87, 119–120, 141, 146, 167–169, 199, 204–205, 271 Peake, Arthur S. 8

371 Peyronel, Luca 127 Pfeiffer, Robert H. 8 Phillips, Morgan L. 249 Pieper, August 275 Ploeg, J. van der 91 Pope, Marvin H. 118 Pritchard, James B. 197 Pyle, Douglas 12–13 Rad, Gerhard von 7, 110 Rae, Scott 278 Rahlfs, Alfred 21 Rashi 6, 19, 21–26, 31–32, 303 Reade, Julian 282 Remaud, Michel 33–34 Rembaum, Joel Edward 6 Ridderbos, Herman 288–289 Rignell, Lars G. 76, 160, 176 Ringgren, Helmer 26, 79, 119, 151, 253, 298 Robertson, O. Palmer 181, 298 Robinson, George L. 1 Robinson, H. Wheeler 254 Rodríguez, Ángel Manuel 174, 275 Rogland, Max 127 Rosenberg, A. J. 12 Rosenthal, Erwin Isak Jakob 21, 24, 26 Routledge, Robin L. 72, 259 Rowley, Harold Henry 5, 8–9, 34–35 Rydelnik, Michael 21, 24, 26, 31, 294, 298 Sach, Andrew 274 Sailhamer, John 31–33 Sapp, David A. 275 Sarachek, Joseph 6, 34 Sawyer, John F. A. 58 Say Pa, Anna May 91–92 Schoors, Antoon 155 Schreiner, Stefan 23 Schultz, Richard 256 Scott, Robert 2, 105

372

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

Seitz, Christopher R. 3 Sellin, Ernst 7, 34–35 Shea, William H. 38 Silver, Abba Hillel 14 Simon, Maurice 18 Simon, Ulrich E. 256 Singgih, Emanuel G. 33 Slager, Donald 77 Slotki, Israel W. 24–25 Smalley, Beryl 31–32 Smillie, Gene R. 70 Smith, Gary V. 144, 155, 159, 197, 209, 213, 222, 251, 264, 289, 294 Smith, James E. 298 Smith, John M. P. 8 Snaith, Norman H. 59 Soloff, Rav Asher 14, 21–22, 24 Sommer, Benjamin D. 2, 237 Speiser, Ephraim A. 137 Stansell, Gary 71 Stäudlin, C. F. 35 Stefanović, Ranko 260 Stenning, John Frederick 15–16 Stern, Philip 142 Stone, Bebb W. 4, 69 Stone, Michael E. 17 Story, Cullen I. K. 60 Stott, John R. W. 275 Strand, Kenneth A. 38 Stromberg, Jacob 237 Stuart, Douglas K. 37 Stuhlmueller, Carroll 59–60, 155, 265, 272 Thiselton, Anthony C. 90 Thomas, Robert L. 28, 62–63 Thompson, Michael 3–4 Tiemeyer, Lena-Sofia 3, 34 Treiyer, Alberto R. 236 Tsumura, David T. 194 Uziel, Jonathan Ben 15 Vaux, Roland de 133

VenGemeren, Willem A. 58 Waldow, Hans Eberhard von 79, 264 Wallace, Daniel B. 126 Waltke, Bruce K. 92, 102, 125– 127, 139, 142, 158, 170 Walton, John H. 137, 198, 200, 282 Ward, James M. 251 Watts, J. Washington 82 Watts, John D. W. 8, 48, 63, 75, 87, 112, 143, 154–155, 157, 164, 176, 181, 183, 192, 231, 238, 255 Watts, Rikki E. 79, 263, 289, 297 Wegner, Paul D. 194 Weinfeld, Moshe 136, 147, 149–150, 196, 260 Wellum, Stephen J. 252–253, 275, 294 Westermann, Claus 4–5, 47–48, 62, 71–72, 77, 164, 183– 184, 192, 209, 236, 261, 283 Whitley, Charles Francis 126, 135 Whybray, Roger N. 8, 68–69, 77–79, 154, 160, 274 Wieringen, Archibald L. H. M. van 2 Williamson, Hugh G. M. 237, 251, 261, 280 Wilshire, Leland E. 5 Winckler, Hugo 259 Wolf, Herbert 29, 62 Wolff, Hans Walter 188 Woollcombe, Kenneth J. 40 Young, Edward J. 2, 8, 29, 62, 77, 87, 95, 114, 134, 143, 157, 160, 177, 184, 187, 192, 251, 275 Younker, Randall K. 122

INDEX

373

Ziegler, Joseph 78

Zimmerli, Walther 14, 27, 30, 59, 80, 249, 262, 264

SUBJECTS

Cyrus 7, 9, 22, 29, 35, 47–49, 51, 55, 76, 91, 99, 114, 125, 128, 143–144, 154– 155, 157–159, 173, 209– 214, 225, 244–245, 258, 266, 287, 289, 291–294, 296, 298, 301, 303, 305, 307, 309–310 Davidic. See king/kingship, covenant eschatology 8, 41, 46–47, 256, 309 exodus motif/theme 59–60, 176, 185, 201, 265, 292 theology 263, 283 glorify 53–54, 173, 267, 297, 304 God’s character 112, 125, 131, 148–148, 177, 248–250 grasp the hand 81–82, 126– 129, 196, 203–204, 253, 264 healing 144, 161, 212, 243, 259, 289 humility 93, 95, 189, 223, 267 Israel corporate 28, 78, 224, 300 servant as/is 8, 13–16, 21–25, 30–34, 203, 208, 222, 305 Jacob 21, 30, 33, 52–55, 78– 79, 119, 134, 172, 179, 202–204, 208–210, 218– 219, 221, 223, 288, 290– 291, 303 judgment 51, 58, 61, 91–93, 99–103, 134, 165–166, 178–179, 181–183, 186–

“Behold” 61, 76–78, 81, 90, 115, 153, 165, 178, 186, 250, 254, 261 blind eyes 138–141, 143–144, 200, 221, 237, 259, 265, 274, 279 blindness 140–142, 207, 209 chosen 13, 68, 71, 78, 83–85, 90–91, 114, 162, 164–165, 169, 179, 189, 203, 210– 211, 215, 217, 219–220, 222–224, 236, 257–258, 275, 286–287, 289, 296, 299, 307 corporate solidarity 247–248, 288–289, 299 covenant 42, 58–70, 84, 102, 108, 128–138, 147, 152, 161–162, 164, 169, 171– 172, 177, 180, 188–189, 194–196, 203, 205, 210, 214, 218, 221, 224, 227, 232–233, 239–240, 242, 250–253, 257–258, 260– 266, 276–277, 279, 289– 292, 296–297, 300, 304, 306–308 of people 135–138, 171– 172, 218, 221, 251– 252, 270 creation 56, 64, 115, 119, 121– 123, 148, 157–158, 175, 188, 192, 213, 244, 257, 262, 265, 270 Creator 55, 57, 64, 67, 81–82, 94, 104, 110, 118–123, 148, 151, 155, 157, 161– 162, 174–176, 188, 213, 235, 250, 265, 269–270, 279, 296, 304, 306

374

“BEHOLD! MY SERVANT”

187, 199, 205, 208, 212– 214, 223, 226–227, 230, 233, 240–242, 253–255, 278–280, 291, 299–300, 304 justice 61, 68, 92–93, 98, 102– 104, 108–115, 162, 169– 170, 187–188, 195, 199, 217, 221, 226–234, 241, 250, 254, 259–260, 268, 278, 287, 296–297 king/kingship 12–13, 20, 25, 76, 83–85, 88, 101–102, 108, 112–113, 120, 125, 127–128, 131, 143, 148– 150, 168–169, 194–200, 210, 224, 226, 228, 231, 236–237, 253, 257–262, 264, 266, 281–282, 287, 291–292, 296–300, 307– 310 Davidic 195, 197, 231, 257–258, 260–262, 292, 308–309 land 99, 109, 113, 137, 143, 155, 157, 172, 188, 201, 235, 239, 259, 266, 283 law 6, 19, 68, 89, 91, 98, 101, 109–112, 115, 162, 195– 196, 207–208, 250, 260, 262, 264, 273, 277, 296 lawsuit 179, 182, 252, 259, 279, 281 light of nations. See covenant of people Messiah/messianic 6, 39, 43, 58–59, 76, 91, 102, 129, 131, 155, 157, 159, 161, 193–194, 225, 248, 256, 258, 284, 288, 295, 299, 300, 303–304, 307 servant as/is 11–20, 25– 30, 78, 243, 245, 297– 298, 301, 308–310

mišpāṭ. See justice priest 14, 84, 88, 111, 141, 187, 199–200, 236–237, 258, 277, 298–299, 310 prison/prisoners 139, 142– 144, 172, 174, 179–180, 196, 200, 207–208, 218, 221, 227, 229, 233–234, 237, 243, 259, 263, 265, 274, 279, 296, 304 redeemer 51, 55, 68, 94, 129– 130, 135, 144, 168–169, 175, 191–192, 250, 270– 276, 278, 289–290, 300, 308 redemption 29, 144, 164, 167, 169, 175, 191–193, 198, 242, 244, 248, 254, 265– 266, 268, 273, 275, 280, 289, 291, 300, 307 righteousness 65, 124–126, 128,129, 149, 152, 186, 189, 195, 203–204, 207– 211, 213, 216, 218, 220– 221, 223, 226–231, 233– 234, 238–239, 252, 259, 275, 288, 293, 296 salvation/salvific 100–102, 114, 119–130, 134, 136– 140, 157–163, 166, 170– 174, 180–181, 183–184, 189–191, 204–205, 212– 214, 228, 232, 236–240, 242–244, 262–263, 267– 271, 273–274, 276, 278– 281, 285, 296, 299–300 servant corporate 4, 9–10, 45, 49, 52–56, 80, 129, 163, 167, 170, 174, 179, 202, 215–224, 250, 285–291, 299–301, 304–309

INDEX individual 9–10, 36, 52– 56, 80, 83, 129, 163, 170, 174, 202, 215– 224, 248, 250, 268, 285–292, 300–301, 305–306, 309 my 6, 12–13, 16, 19–23, 28, 50, 53, 69, 71, 76– 82, 110, 114, 134, 167– 168, 186, 200, 207, 210–211, 215, 219– 221, 269 of the Lord 29, 34, 51, 79, 83, 129, 135, 144, 146, 149, 152, 158, 160, 162, 200–201, 207–208, 222, 226, 229, 247–248, 251– 252, 257–258, 260, 264, 270, 279–281, 291–292, 299 servant poem first 11, 36–37, 48, 61– 162, 164–242, 247– 266, 271–276, 279– 280, 284, 291–301, 303–310 second 50, 164, 171, 174, 176, 238, 267–273, 276, 278, 281–284, 288, 305, 309

375 third 50, 163, 176–177, 180–181, 183–185, 267, 269, 273–274, 276–277, 279, 281, 283–284, 305, 309 fourth 15, 23, 48, 59, 163, 185–186, 191–193, 196, 200–202, 267– 269, 273–277, 280, 282–284, 305 shoot 123, 159, 192–193, 197, 229–231, 235–236, 266, 280 song/hymn 51, 60–61, 70–72, 130, 151, 175–176, 185, 201–202, 238, 243, 264, 284–285, 289, 305 spirit 13, 68, 88–91, 94–95, 113–115, 120–124, 162, 173, 179, 194–196, 204, 213–214, 216–224, 229– 233, 236–237, 245, 255, 257–258, 261–262, 266, 268, 273, 286–287, 296, 299, 304 Spirit of the Lord 13, 88– 91, 194–195, 231, 236– 237 typology 38–43, 214, 245, 293– 294, 297