Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him;
he put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul and offering for sin (HEB: אָשָׁם;
LXX: περι αμαρτιας), he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the
pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. (Isa 53:10)
Now, however, a qualification must be
made: while this may be the case for Isaiah 53, it is definitely not the case
for the context of the fourth servant song. To the extent that the meaning
of Isaiah 53 depends on its coming after Isaiah 52, it is simply not possible,
taking into account the immediate frame of reference where issues of cultic purity
are the central concern, to read of the servant’s being led to slaughter (53.7)
and of his being an ‘offering’ for sin without reference to the priestly cult
in Jerusalem. On account of the placement of the fourth servant song, issues of
cultic purity are the primary context of the servant’s work resulting in a dramatic
continuation of themes in the fourth servant song. Following the suggestion of
Seitz and Leene, the placement of the fourth servant song after 52.11-12 can be
understood to answer a specific question, namely, how Jerusalem and the
returning exiles will be cleansed.
At the same time, this chapter earlier
introduced the appendix-like character of the fourth servant song and the literary
problems it raises. Bolstering one’s sense of this appendix-like quality is the
editorial gloss, 49.7, a text which on several accounts is from the same hand
that composed the fourth servant song. One notes for example that in both 49.7
and 53.3 the servant the servant is initially described as ‘one despised’ (בזה)
before his vindication. On the relationship of 49.7 to the fourth servant song,
Childs writes, ‘It follows the same pattern of the servant’s humiliation and
abuse, his ultimate recognition by kings and rulers, and his final vindication by
God. (Childs, Isaiah, p. 386)
Albertz concludes that the placement of
49.7 must have occurred after Isaiah 40-52 was already composed. (Albertz, Israel
in Exile, p. 393 n. 765) In addition to its strong connection to the fourth
servant song, one notes some literary features including a double introduction
(‘thus says the LORD’) in v. 7 and v. 8 as well as a shift from third person
speech (49.7) to first person speech (v. 8). Because the fourth servant song is
so closely related to this editorial gloss (49.7) it adds to the likelihood
that the fourth servant song was also composed as a supplementary appendix to
the complete composition of 40.1-52.12. In the case of 49.7, the purpose of its
placement is to reinterpret the work of the servant. Namely, it depicts the
servant fulfilling his mission as light for the nations amid apparent humiliation
and defeat. (Albertz, Israel in Exile, p. 426) This raises the possibility
that a similar re-interpretive purpose guides the placement of the fourth
servant song after the definite conclusion of 52.7-12.
As noted above, the pilgrimage
paradigm helps one make sense of the placement of the fourth servant song.
Since the context is not primarily new exodus but pilgrimage and the attendant
issues of cultic purity, a new perspective becomes possible in which a thematic
development occurs between Isaiah 52 and Isaiah 52, depicting the servant as
the answer to the question of how Jerusalem and the returning exiles are to be
cleansed. The pilgrimage paradigm allows once to see the context of the song in
a new light and its thematic relationship to the context.
In addition, this new perspective on
the context of the fourth servant song (a context in which the issue of cultic
purity predominates) helps one reckon with aspects in the fourth servant song
that are indicative of a re-interpretive adjustment and editorial supplement.
In other words, shifting one’s perspective from a new exodus interpretation of
52.7-12 to a pilgrimage emphasis helps one to grasp the relationship of Isa.
52.7-12 52.13-53.12 in terms of editorial supplement as well as dramatic development.
The placement of 52.13-53.12 and its utilization
of cultic imagery, however subtle, provides a re-interpretive adjustment to the
anticipation of a restored cult at the end of Isa. 52.7-12. It can be read
meaningfully as an editorial supplement that reinterprets that context, now
adding a provocative use of a sacrificial term. The fourth servant song applies
the language of the cult to the prophetic figure. Forgiveness and reconciliation
no longer center on the cultus but on the suffering of this figure,
whether he stands for an individual prophet or for the prophetic office as a
whole. In other words, one encounters in the fourth servant song an affirmed
use of sacrificial language that is provocatively applied to the suffering of
the prophetic figure, creating some tension with the priestly conception in
52.11. (In taking this direction, I understand אָשָׁם in 53.10 as a cultic metaphor,
depending here on the work of Berges. See Jesaja 49-54, pp. 268-69)
The question of
whether or not the fourth servant song treats the servant’s death as a
sacrifice should be answered in the affirmative given the literary context that
anticipates the restoration of the cult through the pilgrimage paradigm. On the other hand, signs of a
re-interpretive process raise the possibility that a provocative use of a
cultic concept occurs here. While Israelite pilgrimage meant sacrifice, (Smith,
Pilgrimage Pattern, p. 16) the text in its freedom adapts such a concept
as the reader moves from Isaiah 52 to Isaiah 53. By taking the literary context
seriously, one concludes that imagery of the cult continues in Isaiah 53. By
recognizing the editorial dynamics at work, one also concludes that such imagery
is reinterpreted metaphorically in the sense that cultic concepts are here
applied to the non-cultic contexts of prophetic obedience and the suffering it
entails. (Caleb Gundlach, The Way to Zion in Isaiah 40-55: Beyond New Exodus
or Metaphor [Hebrew Bible Monographs 104; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix
Press, 2022], 191-93, italics in original, emphasis in bold added)
In a footnote to the above, we read that:
Other similar interpretations are
found in Baltzer, Deutero-Isaiah, pp. 38, 421; Berges, ‘The Fourth
Servant Song’, pp. 492-93; and ‘Isaiah and Jeremiah’, pp. 255-56. Especially in
the case of Baltzer, the positive use of sacrificial language in this new
context is for the purpose of rejecting the cult. Cf. Blenkinsopp (‘A
Jewish Sect’, pp. 7-11) where the servants in T[rito]I[saiah] are understood as
a group living in tension with the cult in the post-exilic period. Pushing the
sort of polemic one finds in TI and the D[eutero]I[saiah] chapters depends on
firmly dating DI well into the restoration of the temple in Jerusalem.
Alternatively, the text may be seen non-polemically as creatively imagining a
means of forgiveness and reconciliation before the full restoration of
the priestly apparatus.
It is not clear to me how one should adjudicate
between these reconstructions. What is clear is the element of surprise in the
text. Clearly, something unexpected in fact happened that involved suffering
and a change of heart among the ‘we’ group. The text underscores some particular
occurrence, an event in time and space, that has surprised and bewildered the
authors as this comes through in 53.1: ‘who has believed what we have heard?’
It is as though the authors are saying, ‘we were not expecting this’. (Ibid.,
193 n. 116)
