Resurrection in the OT, Part 9

Isaiah 53:7–12

(avg. read time: 5–9 mins.)

Beginning with Ezek 37, the last few texts that are part of this series can be arranged on a spectrum from most likely metaphorical reference to most likely literal reference:

Ezek 37:1–14 – Isa 53:7–12 – Isa 26:19 – Dan 12

The second text on this spectrum presents some interesting possibilities. Naturally, the fourth Servant Song in Isa 52:13–53:12 has drawn much interest from biblical scholarship and from earlier Christian authors because of how the earliest Christians related it to Jesus. Most often, it was a scriptural frame of reference for describing Jesus’s death, but its significance could also be taken to extend to Jesus’s resurrection (as in, e.g., John Chrysostom, Hom. 1 Cor. 38.4). However, this text has not only drawn attention as a potential resurrection text because of Christological interest, as Jewish scholar Jon Levenson also allows that this text is either using resurrection imagery or literally referring to resurrection.¹

Of course, what complicates this issue is that there is longstanding debate about the identity of the servant. It is such a longstanding debate with so many layers to it that I cannot adequately address it here without taking this analysis too far afield. It is because of this debate that this text is closer on this spectrum to Ezek 37 than Dan 12. If the servant is an abstract individual that serves as a stand-in for Israel, the imagery could simply imply a return from exile and restoration, as well as all things associated therewith (such as fertility of the land and blessings of children), as in Ezek 37. Alternatively, it could of course be a literal resurrection as well, but this text is in any case less direct than the collective resurrection text of Dan 12. If the servant is a particular individual who functions in a representative capacity on behalf of the people, the post-mortem vindication could well be an expectation of resurrection. Alternatively, but less likely, it could refer to a more general kind of post-mortem vindication for what the servant did for Israel.

But regardless of how one settles these issues, Daniel, the earliest documented interpreter of this text, applied it in the context of a concrete resurrection. I will discuss the details of this point in my final entry, but it is worth noting for now that any way one takes this text, there is at least an openness to vindication through resurrection as the fate of servant. Furthermore, while it may be possible to distinguish between literal, concrete resurrection and national restoration, one should not dichotomize them as if there is no overlap between them. In fact, in Daniel resurrection is a crucial part of the larger drama of restoration for the covenantal people and the consummation of their long-promised deliverance.

However precisely the servant is related to Israel, a general impression that the Servant Songs as a whole leave is that the story of the servant is interlocked with the story of Israel. The servant is, in some way, a representative of Israel, an ideal fulfiller of Israel’s function as YHWH’s servant. His story encapsulates the past, present, and future experience of Israel with YHWH and his unerring faithful love in vindicating them and returning them to life when they were dead (whether in terms of slavery in Egypt, subjugation under pagan rulers, exile from the promised land, or perhaps in the literal state of death itself). Thus, the story of the servant ultimately points back to the story of the master YHWH with his people. The other elements of this story leading up to the servant’s apparent resurrection that have been built up since ch. 40—and which reach their crescendo in the context surrounding this text—also point back to YHWH’s grander purpose of cosmic redemption through the covenant with Israel. YHWH’s resurrection of the servant—whatever the precise referent—represents YHWH’s faithfulness to that overarching purpose. He conquers the apparent obstacle to fulfillment and uses it as a vehicle to a more glorious victory.

But like Ezek 37, this is a case where the presence of resurrection imagery is inferred not so much from the presence of key vocabulary (although there are certain suggestive statements, as noted below) as it is from the progression of the story and the presence of certain highlights. After all, the statements declaring the servant’s death are only slightly less emphatic than the description of the Valley of Dry Bones in Ezek 37. If the statement that he was “struck down” (נכה) by God (53:4) was not clear enough, since it can be a fatal or non-fatal striking, he is also described as led to slaughter (53:7), cut off from the land of the living (53:8), having a grave with the wicked (53:9), but having it with the rich in his death (53:10), and as one who has poured out his life unto death (53:12). But the groundwork of expectation for vindication is laid throughout this text, as his suffering and death are regularly related to his faithfulness to the divine will (52:14; 53:3–5, 7–10). The song is also bookended by expectations that the righteous one will be exalted (Isa 52:13; 53:12). This finally leads to some kind of life that conquers death (Isa 53:10–12).

That is not to say there is nothing in the specific terms used to indicate resurrection. We are told at multiple points what he will “see” (ראה). As in Job 19:27 and Ps 16:10, the use of this term in proximity to death is an indirect indication of resurrection. After the prophet describes the servant’s death, the servant is nevertheless said to see his seed or offspring and prolong his days. While the event of resurrection has not been narrated, unlike Ezek 37, this is a strong implication thereof. Likewise, the reference to the good pleasure of the Lord prospering in the servant’s hand recalls texts from the Psalms describing ongoing joy in the Lord.

The second use of ראה in v. 11 presents both a text-critical problem and a possible implicit link to an earlier resurrection text in Isa 26:19. The MT, Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, Vulgate, and Peshitta feature no object for what the servant sees. However, the LXX/OG and the Dead Sea Scroll manuscripts of 1QIsa[a], 1QIsa[b], and 4QIsa[d] all support the reading with an object, specifically of “light” (אור, φῶς in Greek). This variety of early attestation among texts that are not so closely related to each other provides valuable testimony that this object was part of the earlier text. Its absence in other texts is easily explicable as the אור resembles the אה of the preceding verb and thus, by homoioteleuton, was accidentally omitted. This noun is often associated with the eschatological state in Isaiah (2:5; 9:2; 10:17 [God as the light]; 42:6, 16; 49:6; 51:4; 58:8, 10; 60:1, 3, 19–20), a connotation which is likely present here as well, given the context of this passage in chs. 40–55. Furthermore, though it is sometimes translated differently, the אור is also present as part of the description of the renewing dew of resurrection life in Isa 26:19 (a description which is clearer in 1QIsa[a]). Whatever precisely is signified by this term, its associations with the eschatological state throughout Isaiah show that the expectation to see it after death requires resurrection life.

The description of the servant as God’s “righteous one” or “just one” who “makes the many righteous” or “justifies the many” further reinforces the points made above that we see in this text a blurring of the lines between individual and collective hope. After all, this individual acts for the fulfillment of the collective hope by fulfilling the will of God as God’s servant. And while the people who are made righteous/justified are not said to be made righteous in the same way as this servant, they are still implied to share in his fate as those who are also righteous. They will inherit the same eschatological state—including, perhaps, by resurrection—that the servant who made them righteous inherits.

This point of the union of fates in the grand-scale eschatological picture is made clearer in the context of this fourth Servant Song. I will not be going through all of chs. 40–55, although doing so would only further buttress the observations. Instead, I will be focusing on chs. 51–55. As in Ezekiel, the hope includes renewal for the people, the land, and the cities, chiefly in the comfort of Zion (51:2–3; 51:17–52:2; 52:9). The demonstration of God’s justice of setting the world aright will indeed be seen by nations beyond the bounds of Israel (51:4–6; 52:10). This deliverance by God’s just action is also described in terms of a new exodus (51:9–11; 52:3–6), and thus with the implications of the renewal of God’s sanctuary among the people, the renewal of the covenant relationship, and the renewal of their land, as well as creation in general. All of this is possible because of the good news of salvation, summarized simply as “Your God reigns” (52:7). This institution of the kingdom of God is also described as God himself returning to Zion for the execution of this reign (52:8, 11–12) and his salvific will (52:10). It is in this context that the prophet then tells us about the servant one last time in 52:13–53:12. On the other side of this song, ch. 54 continues describing the outcomes of the eschatological state that one can call “the kingdom of God.” Indeed, though the imagery changes to one of the renewal of a barren woman, the redemption of God’s people is stated in similar terms as before or renewal for the people, the land, and cities—chiefly Zion—and of course the renewal of the covenantal relationship described here in terms of marriage (54:1–8, 11–14). And while the earlier text described this eschatological state as a new exodus, here it is described as an everlasting amplification of the promise made after Noah’s flood (54:9–10). This section then concludes with the assurance of ch. 55 that God’s word does not go forth without accomplishing its purpose (esp. 55:6–11). We also see here another reference, as in Ezek 37, to the kingdom promise for David and his line (55:3–5). And the response of creation is one of celebration, because its hope too is tied with the liberation of God’s children (55:12–13). This overarching text thus establishes that it is this creation, this set of earthly promises, albeit with a markedly transformed situation, wherein the hope of resurrection makes the sense that it does. For resurrection can only be accomplished by the same God who makes all these promises. Only the God who is the Creator, the Judge, and the Redeemer can also be the God who raises the dead.

1. Levenson, Resurrection, 188–89.