Isaiah 52:13–53:12

[kwrandolph]

In view that this chapter has come up again for discussion, I decided to put up my understanding of the chapter. This is a somewhat free translation intended to match the meaning of the Hebrew language, rather than a strict word for word translation.

In Isaiah 52:1–12 Israel is referred to in the second person singular. But in verse 13 and following, the “slave” is mentioned in the third person singular. Further, in verse 14 the “slave” is contrasted to Israel where Israel is again mentioned by the second person singular. Therefore, the “slave” in Isaiah 52:13–53:12 is not Israel.

What we have is that Isaiah 52:1–12 is one section, then Isaiah 52:13–53:12 is another section referring to someone who is distinct from Israel. In order to establish his identity, we’ll need to read the whole section.

I post my translation below so you guys can have at it, and show how poorly I translated. Once it’s picked apart, we can possibly end up with a better translation.

Karl W. Randolph.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Isaiah 52:13 “Behold my slave will cause discernment, exalted, lifted up and exceedingly high (14) just as many were shocked at you, so his looks were ruined beyond a man and his form beyond sons of man (15) yet he’ll sprinkle many nations, concerning him kings will gape their mouths, for they saw what was not recounted to them, and had insight of that which they didn’t hear. (53:1) Who has trusted that what we made heard, and unto whom was the arm of the Lord revealed? (2) for he rose up as a sucker (unwanted growth) before him, and as a root from dry ground, he had no form and no grandeur, and we saw him and he didn’t have the looks that would make us desire specifically him. (3) Disdained and abandoned of men, a man of pains and knowing weakness, he was disdained as one from whom we hide our faces, and we didn’t think about him. (4) Surely our weaknesses he lifted up and he carried our pains, and we considered him afflicted, struck by God and humiliated. (5) He was pierced because of our rebellions, crushed because of our perversions, the punishment of our peace was upon him and in his stripes (as from a whipping) there is healing for us. (6) All of us like sheep have gone astray, each of us faced his own way, and the Lord has caused the perversion of all of us to come upon him. (7) Oppressed and he was humiliated but he didn’t open his mouth, as a lamb presented to the slaughterer and as an ewe before its shearers is silent, so he didn’t open his mouth. (8) he was taken away from restraint and justice, and who will mention his life, for he was severed from the land of the living because of the rebellion of my people coming upon him. (9) He was brought to the grave with the wicked, but was with the rich when he was dead, who had not done any injustice, nor was there any trickery in his mouth. (10) And the Lord desired his wounding crushing, if you place his life a guilt offering, he will see seed, he will cause days to lengthen, and the Lord’s desire will succeed in his hands. (11) Because of his life’s trouble, he will cause to see, he’ll fill with his knowledge, my just slave will cause to justify many and will carry away their perversions. (12) For that reason I will apportion to him among the many, and he’ll apportion spoils with the powerful, because which he emptied his life unto death, and he was numbered with the rebels, and he lifted up the error of many and interceded for rebels.

Karl W. Randolph.

[Kenneth Greifer]

Karl,

First of all, I don't claim that my alternative translations are right and every other possible translation is wrong. I think the quotes in Biblical Hebrew can be read and understood more than one way sometimes. So, I am not saying you are wrong, and I am right. I am saying that I have another possible translation or explanation besides what you are saying.

I do have a question about Isaiah 53:2. How do you know that the word "sucker" means an unwanted growth from a tree's root in Biblical Hebrew, just because that is what it means in English? I understand that the word for branches or twigs is the same word, but feminine in quotes, but I am not sure if in those quotes you would say they are also "suckers" in a negative way. For examples of the feminine noun, see Job 8:16 and Hosea 14:6.

[Kenneth Greifer]

Karl,

How do you know that Isaiah 53:5 says "by his stripes" meaning the person was whipped? Also, how do you know the word is plural "stripes" and not "stripe"? Wouldn't "his stripes" be spelled a little differently than "his stripe"? Can it just be a wound of some sort?

[Kenneth Greifer]

Karl,

I just looked up the Dead Sea Scroll version of Isaiah 53:5 and it says "by his stripes (or wounds?)" using the plural unlike the Masoretic text.

[Kenneth Greifer]

Karl,

I was looking up the word translated as "stripes" in Isaiah 53:5 to see if any other quote mentions "whips" for that word, but all I could find was Psalm 38:3 and 6 which mention the psalm writer being pressed down by God's hand and His arrows hitting him. Maybe it means "stab wounds."

[Kenneth Greifer]

Karl,

I haven't found any quotes where the word "sucker" or "twig" or "branch" from Isaiah 53:2 in the feminine version like in Job 8:16, 14:7, or Psalm 80:12 means a tree that grows from another tree's roots and harms it. The quotes just sound normal to me. It could mean "a sucker" like you define the word, but I have not seen it used that way.

[Kenneth Greifer]

Dear Kenneth:

You are still struggling to get anything, anything but the clear reading of the text.

King Hezekiah was not violently killed, rather he died a natural death.

King Hezekiah was not with the wicked when he died, this “slave” was.

King Hezekiah was not whipped of beaten, this “slave” was.

Not only was this “slave” whipped, but there’s healing for us in that fact.

While Hezekiel was considered a just king, he didn’t cause others to be considered just.

Because Hezekiah was king, he wasn’t abandoned, this “slave” was.

There are more differences between what happened to King Hezekiah and what is described for this “slave”. Therefore King Hezekiah can’t be the subject of t his passage.

In response to this discussion that you posted, I made a quick and dirty translation of Isaiah 52:13–53:12. I invite you to read it and tell all of us all the places where it is wrong. Give it your best shot. Shoot it down. It’s not that long. It should be easy for you to find all the errors in it.

Karl W. Randolph.

Karl,

You asked me to find any problems with your translations, but then you don't answer me for some reason.

[Kenneth Greifer]

Karl,

In your translation, you say the person was beaten, but the verb "to smite" is often used when G-d smites someone with health problems. For example, Deuteronomy 28:27-28.

[kwrandolph]

You asked me to find any problems with your translations, but then you don't answer me for some reason,

I wanted to give a more thoughtful answer instead of just throwing something off. Then other things intervened to delay my response.

First of all, I don't claim that my alternative translations are right and every other possible translation is wrong. I think the quotes in Biblical Hebrew can be read and understood more than one way sometimes. So, I am not saying you are wrong, and I am right. I am saying that I have another possible translation or explanation besides what you are saying.

The question is, what rendering of the text into English best fits good linguistic practices.

Best linguistic practices don’t always fit how we want to understand a passage. For example, Isaiah 52:15 says “sprinkle” which makes no sense that I can see here, but I still translate it as “sprinkle”.

I do have a question about Isaiah 53:2. How do you know that the word "sucker" means an unwanted growth from a tree's root in Biblical Hebrew, just because that is what it means in English? I understand that the word for branches or twigs is the same word, but feminine in quotes, but I am not sure if in those quotes you would say they are also "suckers" in a negative way. For examples of the feminine noun, see Job 8:16 and Hosea 14:6.

The change between masculine to feminine can have major differences in meaning. One of them is the masculine refers to the individual, the feminine to an abstract idea or abstraction. Often this idea is not easy to translate into English. Another use of the feminine is to refer to a collection or group, not to a single individual.

Most of the time יונק is found in Tanakh, it refers to what in English is called a “suckling”, namely a baby still feeding at his mother’s breast. A suckling is not something that rises up, rather ceases to be a suckling upon weaning.

A suckling is something that is desired. But the context here indicates something that is undesired. A “sucker” is something that rises up, yet is undesired. Further, it fits with the context of roots.

Lexicography is still somewhat of a guessing game. So here you have a word from the root meaning “to suck” that is in context with roots and is something that is unwanted. So what would be your answer as to what that word means?

As for בחברתו this in context of being wounded and crushed is recognized as what probably should have been written as בחבורתיו as found also in the DSS. חבורה is used elsewhere to refer to a stripe from a stick or whip in beating.

Karl W. Randolph.

[Kenneth Greifer]

Karl,

I could not find any quotes that use the word translated as "stripe" for someone hit by a stick or a whip. I found Psalm 38:3 about arrows and Psalm 38:6, but that is it. The other quotes are vague.