|
Source |
Date |
Individual |
Messiah |
Israel |
Vicarious
Suffering |
Reference |
|
Talmud |
c. 300-600 CE |
Yes* |
No |
No |
No |
Shekalim 5:1 |
|
Talmud |
c. 300-600 CE |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Sanhedrin 98b:14 |
|
Talmud |
c. 300-600 CE |
No** |
No |
No |
No |
Berakhot 51:11 |
|
Talmud |
c. 300-600 CE |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Berakhot 57b |
|
Talmud |
c. 300-600 CE |
Yes** |
No |
No |
Yes |
Sotah 14a:7-10 |
|
Targum of Jonathan
on Isaiah |
c. 150 BCE—c. 350
CE |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
Targum Jonathan on
Isaiah 52:13 |
|
Tanchuma Toldot |
c.500-800 CE |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Unclear |
Tanchuma Toldot
14:1 |
|
Peshikta |
c. 600-900 CE |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Driver and Neubauer |
|
Midrash Ruth Rabbah |
c. 700-950 CE |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Unclear |
Midrash Rabbah Ruth
2:14 |
Table
12. Summary of major Rabbinic literature on Isaiah 52:13-53:12 before 1000 CE
*Rabbi
Akiva ** The one who the Lord delights in ***Moses
Source: Nick Meader, Resurrection:
Extraordinary Evidence for an Extraordinary Claim (Eugene, Oreg.: Resource
Publications, 2024), 237-38
On why the Jewish interpretation
changed after AD 1000:
One explanation is Rashi—probably the most influential scholar
in Jewish history. He likely pioneered the claim that the servant of Isaiah was
Israel alone. Jewish persecution during this period may have impacted Rashi. In
1096, he witnessed the death of many friends and family by Crusaders seeking a
source of income for their travels.
Reinterpretation of Isaiah 53 had several benefits. It delegitimized
the arguments of Christendom that Jesus was the Messiah of Isaiah 53. How could
that be true, if the Jewish people had all along concluded the passage was
about Israel? It also encountered suffering Jews. (Ibid., 240)
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift card:
ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com