ISAIAH 53 ALTERED

ISAIAH 53 ALTERED

Hugh Fogelman

Christian clergy, and their missionaries alike, have made Isaiah 53 central to their claim that this chapter of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) is a prophecy of Jesus. They can only get by with this totally absurd assertion simply because 99.9% of their flocks (sheeple) can or have ever read the passages in the original Hebrew. The Christian bibles have been altered, edited and changed so they can make their false claims and sell their Jesus to the Hebrew illiterate.

Many honest pastors, though not in the front of their congregations, will admit that the later forged LXX (Septuagint) Greek interpretations distort the “Original Hebrew” writings. Privately they admit the majority of Christians do not know that what they read in their bible is a product of purposefully manipulation, mistranslation and misquoted Hebrew scripture. Christians do not realize the NEW testament, in all their so many versions, draws from these prior adulterated, deliberately altered passages. Christian missions do not care about these true, but sad facts; they just want converts―to sell Jesus no matter what it takes!

One missionary organization even went so far as to publish literature that Rashi, a Jewish Rabbi (1040-1105 C.E.), altered the Jewish interpretation of Isaiah 53 from an "individual" to a "nation." And supposedly this Rabbi subsequently sold this bill of goods to all Israel as the “official” party line. This misconception actually appears to have originated with Edward Pusey, who in 1876 wrote “The new interpretation began with Rashi.” ¹ How very foolish and ignorant.

Jewish Biblical exegesis subscribed to the belief that Israel was the suffering servant spoken of throughout the passages in Isaiah 53. This pre-dates Rashi by many centuries and anyone who says different is simply wrong. Even Father Origen agrees with this assessment too!

Origen (185-254 C.E.) was the greatest Christian theologian and biblical scholar of the Church up to his time. He wrote the famous Hexapla, or Comparative Edition of the Bible in Hebrew, with Greek transliteration and the Greek texts of the Septuagint and other versions, in six parallel columns. The following is from Contra Celsum² 1:55; from around 248 C.E (almost 800 years before Rashi was born) by Father Origen:

“Now I remember that, on one occasion, at a disputation held with certain Jews, who were reckoned wise men, I quoted these prophecies (Isaiah 52:13-53:8); to which my Jewish opponent replied, that these predictions [referring to Isaiah 52 and 53 bore reference to the whole people, regarded as one individual, and as being in a state of dispersion and suffering, in order that many proselytes might be gained, on account of the dispersion of the Jews among numerous heathen nations. And in this way he explained the words, ‘Thy form shall be of no reputation among men;’ and then, ‘They to whom no message was sent respecting him shall see;’ and the expression, ‘A man under suffering.’”

Origen knew that Isaiah was talking about the Jewish people in singular form. Any intelligent person can see that no rabbi, especially Rashi changed Isaiah’s thrust from Israel to a prediction of Jesus. To say otherwise is patently stupid or a damned lie!

Origen continues;

“Many arguments were employed on that occasion during the discussion to prove that these predictions regarding one particular person were not rightly applied by them to the whole nation. And I asked to what character the expression would be appropriate, ‘This man bears our sins, and suffers pain on our behalf;’ and this, ‘But He was wounded for our sins, and bruised for our iniquities;’ and to whom the expression properly belonged, ‘"By His stripes were we healed.’ For it is manifest that it is they who had been sinners, and had been healed by the Saviour's sufferings (whether belonging to the Jewish nation or converts from the Gentiles), who use such language in the writings of the prophet who foresaw these events, and who, under the influence of the Holy Spirit, applied these words to a person.”

Origen, in Contra Celsum 1:55, continues, saying;

“But we seemed to press them hardest with the expression, ‘"Because of the iniquities of My people was He led away unto death.’ For if the people, according to them, are the subject of the prophecy, how is the man said to be led away to death because of the iniquities of the people of God, unless he be a different person from that people of God? And who is this person save Jesus Christ, by whose stripes they who believe on Him are healed, when ‘He had spoiled the principalities and powers (that were over us), and had made a show of them openly on His cross?’ At another time we may explain the several parts of the prophecy, leaving none of them unexamined. But these matters have been treated at greater length, necessarily as I think, on account of the language of the Jew, as quoted in the work of Celsus.”

Now if you understand what Origen wrote above, you will clearly see the two meanings assigned to Isaiah 53. The Jews have always stood fast that this represented Israel; whereas Origen–the Church―a thousand years later–could only see Jesus. The Christian missionaries are without a doubt wrong! All along the Jews knew, and even as recorded by the Church’s own preeminent writer at this early date, that the Isaiah 53, just like Isaiah 52 and Isaiah 54 etc, deal with corporate Israel and not an individual. The evidence speaks for itself.

In summary, as you have seen, the interpretation of corporate Israel for Isaiah 52 and 53 is neither new, nor did it begin with Rashi. Over 800 years before Rashi the Church Father Origen records for all to see, that the Jews interpreted this passage as referring to the entire nation of Israel.

So if any Christian attempts to claim that it was only with Rashi that the Jews began to refer to Isaiah 52:13-53:12 as referring to the entire nation of Israel; then you will know he is in error and his message is false. Do not be manipulated!

Footnotes:

1. Edward Pusey, 1876, The Suffering Servant Of Isaiah According To Jewish Interpretations; p. XLIV (trans. Driver and Neubauer, New York: Hermon Press, 1969

2. Contra Celsum, trans. Henry Chadwick, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, Book 1:55, 1965, p. 50

RETURN