Textual Tradition in Hebrew and Greek:

Isaiah 52:13-53:12

by

Hyukki Kim

Ph.D./M.A. Seminar:Textual Traditions of the Old Testament (G125)

Dr. Mark J. BodaFebruary 29th, 2008

1

INTRODUCTION

Until the middle of 20th century, LXX studies have focused on the issues of textual criticism and

its relationship with the New Testament. The LXX was considered as a translation, which had a

Hebrew Vorlage and gave some influence to the New Testament writers. However, there have

not been many studies on the exegesis and theology of the LXX. Recently, scholars have

emphasized the fact that the LXX had been the canon of Christianity for the first several

centuries in the history of Christianity. In fact, in the debates of the early church fathers, their

Bible was the LXX, not the Hebrew text, because most of them did not understand Hebrew.1

With this new interest in LXX study, scholars have begun to recognize the LXX as a single

textual tradition which has its own unique theology.2

Bible translation is not just mechanical work which renders a text from one language to

the other. The translation is affected by the theology, circumstance, and world view of the

translator. Thus, the LXX also contains many elements which reveal the situation and theology

of the translator(s). The theology of the LXX is especially important because the New Testament

writers had used the LXX in their writings and the early church fathers had used it in their

theological debates. Thus, it is significant that the theology of the LXX is compared with that of

the MT. In this paper, I will compare the LXX with the MT, using Isa 52:13-53:12, which is an

important text in the development of Christology. By means of the comparison, I will evaluate

the distinctiveness of the LXX tradition from the MT. Then, I will estimate the influence of the

LXX tradition on the development of the New Testament theology.

1 Jobes and Silva, Invitation, 23-26.2 Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah; Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems; Baer, Translation and Theology inLXX Isaiah 56-66; van der Kooji, The Oracle of Tyre; Ziegler, Untersuchungen zur Septuaginta des Buches Isaias.

2

2. THE GENERAL REMARKS OF LXX ISAIAH

In the study of LXX Isaiah, the works of two scholars, J. Ziegler and I.L. Seeligmann, are of

great importance.3 It is not only because they have achieved many valuable works on the Greek

text of Isaiah but also because they are pioneers in arguing the specificity of LXX Isaiah which

has a unique and individual historical and linguistic setting. Ziegler not only has laid the basis

for research on LX Isaiah by producing a critical edition of LXX Isaiah, but also has written the

well known publication entitled Untersuchungen zur Septuaginta des Buches Isaias. As to the

study of the relationship between LXX and MT, he argued that the LXX’s difference from the

MT should be considered to be the translator’s personality.4 Thus, a tendency to explication and

to paraphrase is typical of this translation, although some of these variants might be caused by

the underlying Hebrew Vorlagen. He also argued that LXX Isaiah is not a literal rendering in

view of the large number of minuses and pluses. In addition, it was Ziegler who observed the

influence of the Hellenistic milieu of Egypt on LXX Isaiah. He compared the vocabulary of LXX

Isaiah with what is known from papyri,” finding translator’s “lexical choices related to

agriculture, botany, economics, and to jurisdiction.”5

Seeligmann argued that LXX Isaiah was translated around the middle of the second

century B.C., probably in Egypt.6 He offers also many valuable observations, especially the

translation tendency of actualization, or fulfilment-interpretation. Thus, he argues:

This translation, in fact, is almost the only one among the various parts of the Septuagint whichrepeatedly reflects contemporaneous history…. Those places where the paraphrase of the textcontains allusions to events happening in the more or less immediate neighbourhood of thetranslator’s place of residence give one a surprising image of the translator’s notion that the

3 Cf. Ziegler, Untersuchunge; Seeligmann, Septuagint Version of Isaiah.4 See Ziegler, Untersuchunge, 7.5 Van der Kooij, “Isaiah in the Septuagint,” 514.6 See Seeligmann, Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 70-91; Van der Kooij, “Isaiah in the Septuagint,” 513; Hengel,“Effective History of Isaiah 53,” 119.

3

period in which he lived was to be time for the fulfilment of ancient prophecies, and of hisefforts to contemporize the old biblical text and revive it by inspiriting it with the religiousconceptions of a new age.7

On the basis of significant differences between LXX and MT he tries to reconstruct the

translator’s theological ideas behind the translation. In addition, following Ottley and Ziegler he

content that the translator employed favoured words and phrases in cases of difficulties in

Hebrew. According to Seeligmann, those actualizing passages, or passages reflecting the

translator’s own views and ideas, are to be found in “isolated, free renderings.”8 The idea of

actualization in LXX Isaiah has been accepted by other scholars.9

Similarly, as Porter and Pearson notice, several scholars have observed the character of

LXX Isaiah as a Hellenistic document.10 For example, J. Koenig observes that the verb arb (“to

creat”) is rendered into katadeiknumi (“to display”) in LXX Isa 40:26, 41:20; 43:15; and 45:18.11

According to his view, it reflects Hellenistic philosophy which considers the world as a spectacle

made for humans to see by the gods. J. Lust similarly shows the translator’s tendency which, as a

result of his theological programme, consistently edits-out offending themes in the passages of

Isaiah:

[The texts of LXX Isaiah] present Jahweh as a God who causes men to sin: Is 6:10; 8:24; 29:9-10. In three other texts Jahweh is pictured as acting against his own people in a malevolent way.He smites his servant without any apparent moral grounds: Is 53:4, 10. He develops strangeplans against Judah: 28:21. In all these cases the Septuagint offers an interpretative translationin which the offensive character of the sayings disappears.12

According to Lust, this tendency is related to the surrounding culture of the Hellenistic period:

In its renderings the guiding inspiration was probably a theological one. The translator couldnot accept the idea of Jahweh as a God causing evil in an “immoral” way. This is easily

7 Seeligmann, Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 4. He mentions several passages such as Isa 14:18-20; 8:8; 10:24.8 Seeligmann, Septuagint Version of Isaiah, 41.9 Van der Kooij mentions J.C.M. das Neves, R. Hanhart, J. Kienig and himself (Oracle of Tyre, 10). For theirbibliography, see his book.10 Porter and Pearson, “Isaiah through Greek Eyes,” 532-39.11 J. Koenig, L’hermeneutique analogique du judaїsme antique d’apres les temoins textuels d’Isaїe (VTSup 33;Leiden: Brill, 1982), 173-93, as cited in Porter and Pearson, “Isaiah through Greek Eyes,” 536-37.12 Lust, “Demonic Character of Jahweh,” 13

4

understandable against the cultural background of the time. It is indeed well known that in theIntertestamental period a certain dualism emerged in which God and evil were graduallydissociated.13

In addition to Hellenistic notion, we also have to consider that a translator’s free

rendering may be influenced by various linguistic aspects: “the aim of writing good Koine

Greek; variety of lexical choices; different word order for reasons of style; grammatical and

contextual changes, such as harmonizations.”14 Thus, in order to understand the interpretation of

LXX Isaiah, we must consider various possibilities.

3. THE GENERAL REMARKS OF ISAIAH 52:13-53:12 IN MT15

Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is often treated with three other passages related to “the servant of the Lord”

and these four passages are together often called “Servant Songs.”16 Since the Early Church, the

Christian Messianic interpretation of “Servant Songs,” especially the last song Isaiah 53, has

been controversial between Christian and Jewish scholars, because most of Jewish scholars

argued that ‘the servant’ in the passages indicates ‘collective Israel,’ not the Messiah, Jesus

Christ.17 Although this collective understanding of the Servant has been the main interpretation

in Judaism, most Christian scholars have been in agreement about their messianic interpretation.

13 Lust, “Demonic Character of Jahweh,” 13.14 Van der Kooij, “Isaiah in the Septuagint,” 518. Cf. Barr, The Typology of Literalism, 294-96; Tov, The Text-Critical Use, 54-62.15 For the text of MT, I will use the text of BHS which is based on the Leningrad Codex. For the text of LXX, I willuse the text of Rahlfs’ edition which is based on three ancient manuscripts, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, andCodex Alexandrinus.16 Cf. Isa 42:1-4; 49:1-6; 50:4-9; 52:13-53:12.17 See Rembaum, “Jewish Exegetical Tradition,” 289-311. Before confronted with Christian messianic interpretation,Jewish exegesis also generally considered these as messianic references, as seen in Loewe, “Prolegomenon,” 17-18.Loewe mentions, “Surviving Jewish exegesis up to the end of the amoraic period suggests that it was then frequently,perhaps even generally assumed without question that the figure referred to was the Messiah, which is of course howthe Targum also, somewhat later, interprets it.” However, as Rembaum notes, in the Middle Ages, they developed “acollective-national understanding” against Christian interpretation (Rembaum, “Jewish Exegetical Tradition,” 292-93). Cf. Hengel, “Effective History of Isaiah 53,” 75-146; also see Ådna, “Triumphant and Interceding Messiah,”

5

However, since the late 19th century, in particular 1892 when Bernard Duhm published

his Isaiah Commentary in which he isolated the four servant songs from the context and

considered them as secondary parts within the overall context of Deutero-Isaiah, differences

about the identity of the ‘Servant of the Lord’ began to occur between Christian scholars.18 When

North’s well-known standard work on “Servant Songs” was first published in 1948, he could

claim with some confidence that there were four major opinions on the identity of the servant: 1)

An anonymous contemporary of Second Isaiah; 2) Second Isaiah himself; 3) A group (whether

all Israel, ideal Israel, a remnant, or the prophets); 4) The expected Davidic Messiah. 19

Nowadays, however, we have various complicated theories, as seen Kruse’s summary article. He

observes that there are more views which give new twists to traditional ‘individual’ or

‘collective’ opinions.20 Because too many different opinions exist, biblical scholars are reluctant

to assert a one-side decision, that is, either ‘individual’ or ‘collective.’ Biblical scholars try to

hold some sort of fluid, oscillating or linear concept.

In fact, these diverse opinions emerged because of the difficulty and vagueness of the MT

text. Thus, some scholars argue that the songs are deliberately vague in order to point to a future

fulfilment and the songs focus not on the identity of the Servant but on his mission.21 Literary

critics, especially, focusing on the poetic and metaphorical character of those passages, tend to

criticize the critical methods which have been dominant in the research of the Servant Songs.

Thus Clines comments, boldly criticizing the former historical-critical scholarship:

Historical-critical scholarship is bound to mistreat a cryptic poetic text when it regards it as apuzzle to be solved, a code to be cracked. What if the force of the poem – to say nothing of the

189-224.18 Bernard Duhm, Das Buch Jesaja, übersetzt und erklärt (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1892), as cited inOswalt, Isaiah 40-66, 107.19 North, The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah, as summarized in Clines, A Literary Approach, 25.20 See Kruse, “Interpretive Trends,” 3-27.21 Cf. Clines, Literary Approach, 25-33; Westermann, Isaiah 40-66; Roth, “The Anonymity of the SufferingServant,” 171-79.

6

poetry of the poem – lies in its very unforthcomingness, its refusal to be precise and to giveinformation, its stubborn concealment of the kind of data that critical scholarship yearns to getits hands on as the building-blocks for the construction of its hypotheses?22

The literary approach usually focuses on the Songs’ structure and their rhetorical and

literary features in the context of Deutero-Isaiah.23 However, this debate will continue because of

the difficulties and vagueness of the text.24 The first difficulty in this text is the identity of the

characters such as I, you, he, they, we, and many.25 In fact, there is no clear indication of their

identity. The uncertainty of the identity is one element which makes the interpretation difficult.

While the identity of the servant has mostly been focused, the identity of “we” who confesses the

pain and death of the servant for them is also disputed. In addition, the identity of “many” whom

the servant justifies is not clear.

Another difficulty is the apparent break between the death of the servant in 53:8 and the

victorious future of the servant during his lifetime in 53:10-12. It is because many scholars

believe that in the period of the Babylonian exile the idea of the resurrection of the dead was still

undeveloped.26 Thus, some scholars argue that “real death was not meant, but only the proximity

to death typical for the formulations in the complaint psalms.”27

In addition, the MT text uses various pictures and images about the pain of the servant.

The metaphor of taking a burden upon one’s shoulders is used in different formulations (53:4, 11,

12). He is likened to a man heavily wounded for others’ sin (53:5) and also to the sheep

slaughtered (53:7). By legal punishment, he is sentenced to death (53:8). In addition, the life of

22 Clines, Literary Approach, 25.23 Cf. Ceresko, “Rhetorical Strategy,” 42-55; Barre, “Textual and Rhetorical-critical Observations,” 1-27; Bergey,“The Rhetorical Role of Reiteration,” 177-88; Goldingay, The Message of Isaiah 40-55.24 Thus, Hermission mentions that “Anyone who wants to get involved in the interpretation of Isaiah 53 must realizetwo things. First, the historical and theological understanding of this great text will remain controversial untilkingdom come. Second, one will be able to produce a completely new historical explanation of this text…only ifone is willing to enter the richly sown field of scholarly oddities” (“Fourth Servant Song,” 17).25 Cf. “I” (53:8, 11, 12); “You” (52:14; 53:10); “He” (servant); “Many” (52:14; 53:11, 12); “We” (53:2-6).26 See Reventlow, “Basic Issues,” 27.27 Cf. Whybray, Thanksgiving for a Liberated Prophet.

7

the servant is considered as a guilt offering (53:10). There are also some royal metaphors which

point to the identity of the servant (53:2; 12). However, because it is not clear, it has evoked

many different opinions. Referring to these various expressions, Reventlow argues that “it is not

possible to detect a fixed terminology in the poem. It is characteristic of poetry that the language

used, the pictures coming to the fore, are fluid.”28

In addition, Isa 52:13-53:12 contains some difficult syntax, and unusual expressions.29

While these are characteristic in Hebrew poetry, its various interpretive difficulties are notorious.

The MT text often does not have the conjunction waw which can distinguish between

sentences.30 The MT sentences often do not have the verb, making them the nominal clause. In

those cases, translations often add verbs in order to make the sentence smoother. For example, in

52:14, the MT reads ~d"(a' ynEïB.mi Arßa]tow> Whae_r>m; vyaiÞme tx;îv.mi-!Ke (literally, “So His appearance

disfiguration from any man and His form from the sons of men.”). In this sentence, most

translations render the noun tx;îv.mi (“disfiguration”) into the verb form “to be marred” in order to

make the sense clear.31 In addition, the MT text scarcely has a preposition or direct object marker.

For example, in 53:3 the MT reads tAbßaok.m; vyaiî ~yviêyai ld:äx]w: ‘hz<b.nI (literally, “despised and lacking

(by) men, a man (of) pains”). The first sentence does not have the subject, the verb and the

preposition of the noun ~yviêyai (men). In addition, the second sentence does not have any

conjunction and verb, making it hard to understand the relationship between the first and second

sentence. In Isa 52:13-53:12, similar nominal sentences are repeatedly used, making the

28 Reventlow, “Basic Issues,” 29. Also see Payne, “the Servant of the Lord,” 131-43.29 In this regard, Alter defines “poetry” as follows: Poetry is quintessentially the mode of expression in which thesurface is the depth, so that through careful scrutiny of the configurations of the surface-the articulation of the line,the movement from line to poem, the imagery, the arabesques of syntax and grammar, the design of the poem as awhole-we come to apprehend more fully the depth of the poem’s meaning (Art of Biblical Poetry, 205).30 For this reason, 1QIsaa adds the conjunction waw in many places where the MT text does not have it. Cf. 52:12;53:3 (x2); 53:4; 53:5 (x2); 53:8; 53:10 (x3); 53:11 (x2).31 The other possibility is that ancient translations could have a verb form as their Vorlage.

8

understanding of the sentences difficult. Thus, the interpretation of nominal sentences is often

gained by the parallel clauses and the context. Actually, some differences between the MT and

the LXX are caused by these difficulties.

4. THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MT AND LXX

As mentioned above, the difficulties of the MT text can be the cause of the difference between

the MT and the LXX. Thus, when the MT text is difficult, the LXX has sometimes free

renderings. However, in these free renderings, there often appears an interpretive tendency

toward a certain theological direction. This theological tendency can be divided into three

categories. First, there is the difference in describing the suffering and glory of the servant.

Second, the ministry of the servant is explained differently in some degree. Finally, there is the

different description of the character of God.

2. 1. The Suffering and Glory of the Servant

The MT text contains many images and expressions for describing the suffering and glory of the

servant. While the MT expressions of suffering are more violent and stronger than those of the

LXX, the LXX describes the contrast between the suffering and glory of the servant in clearer

language.

For the suffering of the servant, the MT’s strong language is softened in the LXX. In 53:3,

the LXX reads avlla. to. ei=doj auvtou/ a;timon evklei/pon para. pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouj (“But his form

was without honour, failing beyond all men”) which the MT text reads ~yviêyai ld:äx]w: ‘hz<b.nI (“He

was despised and forsaken of men”). The LXX text takes the subject from the previous verse and

9

just repeats the similar contents as the previous verse (“he had no form, nor beauty,” v. 2). The

MT text, however, intensifies the story line from the unattractiveness of his appearance in v. 2 to

people’s rejection and contempt of the servant in v. 3. Thus, the LXX weakens the idea of the

servant’s suffering.

In 53:4, the LXX reads ei=nai evn po,nw| kai. evn plhgh/| kai. evn kakw,sei (“to be in trouble

and calamity and ill-treatment”), where the MT reads hN<)[um.W ~yhiÞl{a/ hKeîmu [:Wg°n" (“stricken, smitten

by God and afflicted”). Thus, the LXX again changes the harsh language of the MT into the

gentle form. In the MT, the first two verbs are very strong words which may be used to express

the brutal destruction, even death. Especially, the MT text indicates clearly that the subject of the

harsh action is God. In the LXX text, however, no violent action, or subject of the violence is

indicated but the condition of suffering is depicted, implying that the suffering is severe.

Another example is found in 53:5 in which the LXX reads auvto.j de. evtraumati,sqh kai.

memala,kistai (“But he was wounded… and has been weakened”), while the MT reads aK'ÞdUm.

ll'äxom. ‘aWhw> (“he was pierced… and was crushed”). The strong words “pierced” and “crushed,”

which again could mean the brutal destruction, are rendered into weaker words “wounded” and

“weakened.” This softening in translation is what Lust indicates in his article, “the Demonic

Character of Jahweh.” It is the tendency in which the translators would avoid that the cruel

action of judgement is attributed to God who is the implied subject of these actions. In other

words, because the harsh language of the MT is not acceptable to the translator’s theology about

God, he renders it into soften language. This tendency will be discussed more in the next chapter.

Although the LXX tends to weaken the violent expressions of the MT, the LXX clearly

states the glory of the servant, using the cognate words of do,xa (“glory”). The LXX uses four

times the cognate words of do,xa (“glory”): doxasqh,setai (52:13); avdoxh,sei and h do,xa (52:14);

10

do,xa (53:2). They all are used for the servant. It is interesting that these words are not usual

translational equivalents of the Hebrew words. That is, they are free renderings. This use of do,xa

and its cognate is well observed by Brockington’s article. He argued that the translator of LXX

Isaiah had a special interest in the Greek doxa and its cognate words.32 In the LXX, the noun doxa

is the almost constant equivalent of the Hebrew dAbK'. In LXX Isaiah, however, doxa is not only

the almost constant equivalent of dAbK', but also is used to translate a number of other Hebrew

words. Thus, LXX Isaiah shows his frequent use of doxa and of cognate words. In addition, they

are often used where one would not expect it to be used as the most appropriate translational

equivalent of the Hebrew.

Brockington argues that their use is theological and is associated, directly or indirectly,

with God’s redemptive work among men.33 First, this word conveys the idea of brightness of

appearance. Brockington shows many examples in which it denotes a man’s external

appearance.34 In his judgement, through this use, this word absorbs a number of Hebrew words

and their connotation. In addition, “gaining in this way more and more emphasis on external

appearance, it was an appropriate portmanteau word to use in relation to the appearance of God

in theophany.”35 This emphasis on the appearance of God reminds us of Koenig’s observation

that the rendering of the verb arb is influenced by the Hellenistic philosophy. The extensive use

of doxa could be also influenced by the Hellenistic philosophy which considers the world as a

spectacle made by gods for human beings and emphasizes a human perspective. Second, the

translation of Isaiah links this word to a marked soteriological emphasis, which is evident in “the

32 See Brockington, “The Greek Translator of Isaiah,” 23-32.33 Brockington, “The Greek Translator of Isaiah,” 26.34 Cf. Isa 11:3; 12:14; 13:2; 17:4; 18:7; 40:5.35 Brockington, “The Greek Translator of Isaiah,” 31.

11

several ‘targumic’ additions of swthria and swthrion to the Hebrew text.”36 For example, in

40:5 where the MT reads wD"êx.y: ‘rf'B'-lk' WaÜr"w> hw"+hy> dAbåK. hl'Þg>nIw> (“Then the glory of the LORD will

be revealed, And all flesh will see together”), the LXX reads kai. ovfqh,setai h do,xa kuri,ou kai.

o;yetai pa/sa sa.rx to. swth,rion tou/ qeou/ (“And the glory of the Lord shall appear, and all flesh

shall see the salvation of God”). This additional phrase, “the salvation of God” clearly shows the

tendency of the translator which emphasizes the connection between “glory” and “salvation.”

In our text, the first word doxasqh,setai occurs in 52:13 where LXX renders the MT’s

three Hebrew verbs (Hb;g"w> aF'nIw> ~Wry", “He will be high and lifted up and exalted”) into two Greek

verbs (uywqh,setai kai. doxasqh,setai, “he shall be exalted and glorified”). It is interesting that the

first verb uywqh,setai can render all the three Hebrew verbs.37 Thus, it is most likely that the

LXX is paraphrasing the Hebrew phrase which consists of three similar verbs, adding its favorite

word doxasqh,setai. 38 Therefore, it is not a literal translation but a “theological exegesis”

according to Tov’s terminology. 39 By means of this word, the LXX text emphasizes the

expectation of the servant’s glorious future as a saviour.

While the first occurrence is concerned with the glory of the victor or saviour, the other

three occurrences are related to the appearance of the servant in the negative sense, probably

implying the disqualification of the servant as a saviour. Thus, the second word avdoxh,sei (“he

will be without glory”) is translated for the Hebrew noun tx;v.mi (“disfiguration”). In following

occurrences, doxa is a translation of ra;to (“form,” 52:14) and rd'h' (“splendour,” 53:2): “your

glory be absent from the men,”; “he has no form nor glory.”

36 Brockington, “The Greek Translator of Isaiah,” 30. Cf. 40:5; 63:12-14; 45:21, 24; 60:1-7; 62:1-2; 66:18-19.37 Cf. Isa 3:16; 5:16; 13:2; 19:13; 30:18; 33:10; 37:23; 40:9, 25; 52:8.38 See Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 182-83. He notes that these two verbs (uyow and doxajw) appear together inIsa 5:16; 33:10. In addition, the LXX contains two cognate words of doxajw in the following verse, where their exactequivalent Hebrew words do not exist.39 Tov, Textual Criticism, 127.

12

By the use of these cognate words, the translator of LXX Isaiah connects the servant in

52:13-15 with the servant in 53:2ff. In addition, these cognate words make clear the move of the

servant from the glory to humiliation, implying people’s disappointment for their expected

saviour.

Apart from these cognate words of doxa, although the LXX clearly describes the

restoration of the servant, the LXX has some weakened expressions concerning the restoration of

the servant’s fortune and God’s favour for the servant. In 53:10, the MT reads xl'(c.yI Adðy"B. hw"ßhy> #p,xeîw>

~ymi_y" %yrIåa]y: [r;z<ß ha,îr>yI (“He will see offspring, he will prolong days, and the Lord’s pleasure will

prosper in his hand”), clearly showing the servant’s fortune and God’s favour for the servant.

The LXX, however, renders it into h yuch. umw/n o;yetai spe,rma makro,bion kai. bou,letai ku,rioj

avfelei/n (“your soul will see a long-lived offspring. And the Lord wishes to take away”). While

changing the subject from the servant to the people, the LXX does not contain any description of

the servant’s fortune and God’s favour for him, more focusing on people’s response.40

With regard to the servant’s glory which is given as the result of his atoning ministry, in

the MT text there are listed many elements in 53:11: ~yBi_r:l'( yDIÞb.[; qyDI²c; qyDIîc.y: ATª[.d:B. [B'êf.yI ha,är>yI

(“He will see and be satisfied, by his knowledge the righteous one, my servant, will justify the

many”). First, He is called with special name such as yDIb.[; qyDI²c; “the righteous one, my servant”

(or “my righteous servant”) which implies God’s special favour. His joy and satisfaction are also

expressed: “he will see [light], he will be satisfied.”41 Finally, the servant is recognized as one

who can justify others. Although there have been many opinions concerning the exact meaning

of the phrase qyDI²c; qyDIîc.y:, it is clear that this phrase indicates the result of his atoning ministry,

40 For the detailed discussion, see the next chapter.41 Cf. 1QIsaa, 1QIsab, and 4QIsad contain the word rwOa “light.”

13

implying his future status as a judge or saviour.42 In the LXX, however, those expressions are

significantly changed and weakened because it has free renderings, which make God as the

subject of those sentences: “[the Lord wish]… to show him light and fill him with understanding,

to justify a righteous one who is well served many.” Thus, the LXX describes again the servant

as one who is passively rewarded by God.

In the first clause of 53:12, the MT reads ~yBiªr:b' Alå-qL,x;a] !keúl' (“therefore I will allot him a

portion with the great”), while the LXX reads dia. tou/to auvto.j klhronomh,sei pollou.j (“therefore

he will inherit many”). By means of the first person subject, in the MT God’s favour and the

servant’s fortune are clearer than the LXX where the servant is the subject. It is not clear whether

this change is caused by the Hebrew Vorlage or a free rendering. However, it is coincident with

the translator’s tendency which tends to highlight God’s concern about his people, not about the

servant’s fortune.

2. 2. The Ministry of the Servant and People

There is a difference in describing the relationship between the servant and others. In 52:14 the

MT and the LXX both express the amazement of the nations about the humiliation of the servant.

It implies that the ministry of the servant is expected not only by the Israelites but also by the

other nations. In the next verse, however, the LXX text renders ~yBiêr: ~yIåAG ‘hZ<y: !KEÜ (“Thus He will

sprinkle many nations”) into ou[twj qauma,sontai e;qnh polla. evpV auvtw/| (“Thus shall many nations

be astonished at him”). This free rendering could be caused by the misunderstanding of the

Hebrew verb hzn (Hi, “to sprinkle”), or by harmonizing the text with the context because the

42 For the detailed discussion, see Olley, ‘Righteousness’ in the Septuagint, 48-51.

14

context is about the amazement of the nations and kings.43 In this case, however, the LXX text is

in harmony with a certain theological tendency of LXX Isaiah. In the MT, the servant’s ministry

is to purify the nations, emphasizing the active role of the servant in relation to the nation. In the

LXX, however, there is no active role of the servant but the amazement of the nations which was

already introduced in the previous verse. Thus, it is coincident with the tendency of LXX Isaiah

which attributes the active sovereign role to God and the passive role to the servant and which

emphasizes the perspective of the people.

In the second half of 52:15, the LXX rendering has a slightly different focus from the MT

reading. The LXX reads o[ti oi-j ouvk avnhgge,lh peri. auvtou/ o;yontai kai. oi] ouvk avkhko,asin

sunh,sousin (“because those who were not informed about him shall see and those who did not

hear shall understand”) where the MT reads Wnn")ABt.hi W[ßm.v'-al{) rv<ïa]w: Waêr" ‘~h,l' rP:Üsu-al{) rv,’a] yKi

(“For what had not been told them they will see, And what they had not heard they will

understand”). The LXX focuses on the people who did not hear, while the MT on the message

which people had not heard. Therefore, the MT emphasizes the significance of the servant’s

message, while the LXX highlights the understanding of the people.

With regard to the servant’s identity, the description of the servant in 53:2 is important

because this verse has a royal connotation. However, the LXX has a quiet different rendering.

The MT reads vr<Vo’k;w> wyn"©p'l. qnE÷AYK; l[;Y:“w: (“And He grew up before Him like a tender shoot, and like

a root”), while the LXX reads avnhggei,lamen evnanti,on auvtou/ wj paidi,on wj ri,za (“We

announced before him as a child, as a root”). The MT describes the weak beginning of the

servant’s ministry.44 As Baltzer notices, this verse contains many messianic connotations which

43 See Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 188. He notes that Ziegler and König consider that the LXX chose qaumajwspecially to fit the immediate literary context.44 See Goldingay and Payne, Isaiah 40-55, 300.

15

are related to the servants of the Lord, such as David and Moses.45 First, this verse is connected

to Isa 11:1-10 where the righteous Davidic king is prophesized. Especially, Isa 11:1 reads hr<(p.yI

wyv'îr"V'mi rc,nEßw> yv'_yI [z:GEåmi rj,xoß ac'îy"w> (“Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, and a branch

from his roots will bear fruit”). Here we find the similar terminology such as “a shoot,” “the

stem,” “a branch,” and “his roots.” In addition, 53:2 contains ra;to (“form”), rd"h' (“majesty”),

and ha,r>m; (“appearance”). These words are often used for David and kings. 46 This verse,

however, has negative connotations against the servant. That is, people expect that the servant

can be the messianic figure but they are disappointed because the appearance of the servant is not

what they have expected.

The LXX text, however, has a significantly different meaning. The LXX renders the first

word l[;Y:w: (“and he grew up”) into avnhggei,lamen (“we announced”), probably influenced by the

subject “we” in the second half of this verse.47 Thus, in the LXX, “a child” and “a root” are

connected to “we” group, not the servant, describing the disappointed emotion of the “we” group

who observe the unexpected appearance of the servant. 48 Thus, in the LXX reading the

connotation of the messianic king is weakened.

Although the messianic connotation is weakened in the LXX, the LXX makes clearer the

atonement of the servant than the MT. In 53:4 while the MT reads ~l'_b's. WnybeÞaok.m;W af'ên" aWhå

‘WnyE’l'x\ !kEÜa' (“Surely our infirmities He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried”), the LXX reads

ou-toj ta.j amarti,aj hmw/n fe,rei kai. peri. hmw/n ovduna/tai (“This one bears our sins and suffers

pain for us”). While the MT reading is with the metaphorical expressions, the LXX clearly

45 Baltzer, Deutero-Isaiah, 404-5.46 Cf. 1 Sam 16:18 (ra;toï); 17:42 (ha,Þr>m;); Ps 21:6; 45:4, 5 (rd"+h').47 Because of the strange translation of the LXX, Ziegler suggests a conjectural emendation: avneteile me,n (“he roseup”). See Ziegler, Isaias, 99. However, there is no textual support.48 Although Ekblad attributes “as a child” to “we” group and “as a rood” to the servant, two parallel phrases shouldbe connected together with the same object (Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 198-99).

16

indicates that the suffering of the servant is because of his people’s sins. The translation tendency

of LXX Isaiah prefers the clearer language to the metaphorical expressions. Thus, while the MT

employs various expressions for the sin of people, the LXX uses only two words: amarti,a (sin)

and avnomi,a (lawlessness). Especially, at six other times amarti,a (sin) matches four different

Hebrew words.49 In addition, while the LXX rendering in 53:4 could be influenced by the clear

statement of the atonement in the following verses, this verse in the LXX indicates the atoning

ministry of the servant in a way that is far clearer than the MT.50 In this verse, the combination of

ferw and amarti,a reminds the readers of the guilt-offering in Leviticus.51 In addition, in 53:6-7

the mention of sheep is also correspondent with the occurrence of sheep in Lev 5:6-7 where the

LXX reads kai. oi;sei peri. w-n evplhmme,lhsen kuri,w| peri. th/j amarti,aj h-j h[marten qh/lu avpo.

tw/n proba,twn avmna,da (“And he shall bring for his transgressions against the Lord, for his sin

which he has sinned, a ewe lamb of the sheep”). Thus, although our text is the first place where a

human being is described as bearing sin for others, LXX Isaiah indicates clearly the idea of the

atonement of the servant with a special emphasis.52

It is interesting that the verbs fe,rei (“he bears”) and ovduna/tai (“he suffers pain”) are

used in the present tense, while the MT text has the perfect tense in both cases. There could be

two possibilities with this tense change. First, following Grelot’s theory, Ekblad argues that the

present tense most likely reflects the LXX translator’s tendency to actualize the servant poems

for his audience. It means that “the present tense opens the way for LXX readers of any time to

49 Cf. !wO[' (53:5, 6, 11); ~v'a' (53:10); aj.xe (53:12); [v;P, (53:12).50 See Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 213.51 Cf. Lev 4:28; 5:6, 7, 8, 11, 12; 14:19-20; 15:14-15, 29-30; 16:15. Ekblad finds the closest use in Lev 5:6-8,noticing some differences.52 Spieckermann shows that Isa 53 is the single text in the Old Testament where the idea of vicarious sufferingoccurs (“the Idea of Vicarious Suffering,” 1-15).

17

identify the servant as their contemporary.”53 Second, according to Porter’s theory of the verbal

aspect in Greek, while the aorist tense has perfective aspect and the present has imperfective

aspect, “the aorist is merely used in its common narrative function” and “the present form draws

added attention to the action to which it refers.”54 Thus, the change of the tense can indicate that

the translator tries to draw attention to the atoning ministry of the servant. Both theories explain

that the change of the tense indicates the translator’s special focus on the action of the servant,

which is not found in the MT text.

There is another example which makes clearer the atoning death of the servant in the

LXX than the MT. In 53:8, while the MT reads Aml'( [g:n<ï yMiÞ[; [v;P,îmi (“for the transgression of my

people the stroke [was] to him”), the LXX rends it into avpo. tw/n avnomiw/n tou/ laou/ mou h;cqh eivj

qa,naton (“because of the lawlessness of my people he was led to death”). Thus, the LXX renders

freely the metaphorical language of the MT (“the stroke was to him”) into the clear indication of

death (“he was led to death”). In this verse, it is interesting that the LXX verb h;cqh has passive

form while the MT does not have a verb. This is in agreement with the LXX tendency which

attributes a passive role to the servant.

As seen above, in 53:10 the LXX changes the subject of the sentence from the servant to

the people: ~ymi_y" %yrIåa]y: [r;z<ß ha,îr>yI Avêp.n: ‘~v'a' ~yfiÛT'-~ai (“If He would render Himself as a guilt

offering, He will see offspring, He will prolong days,”); eva.n dw/te peri. amarti,aj h yuch. umw/n

o;yetai spe,rma makro,bion (“If you [2nd pl] give an offering for sin, your soul [2nd pl] shall see a

long-lived offspring”). The MT text emphasizes the servant’s voluntary atoning action and his

fortune. Intentionally changing the subject, however, the LXX changes the focus from the

53 Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 215. Cf. G.B. Grelot, Les Poemes du Serviteur: De la Lecture Critique al’Hermeneutique. (Lectio Divina 103; Paris: Cerf, 1981), 105.54 Porter, Idioms, 31. For the fuller explanation, see Porter, Idioms, 28-40, 187-88.

18

servant to the readers. Thus, the LXX clearly requires the readers’ response of the servant’s

atoning action and promises God’s reward for them.55 It is also coincident with the tendency of

the LXX which weakens the active action of the servant and emphasizes the response of people.

Generally speaking, the weakening of the servant’s voluntary aspect is caused by the translator’s

concern which would emphasize God’s sovereignty. Emphasis on people’s response shows the

translator’s concern about his people.

3. The Character of God

While the MT often focuses on the ministry of the servant, the LXX shows its concern about

God’s intention and sovereignty. This tendency appears in 53:1 where the LXX begins with an

exclamation ku,rie (“Lord!”), which is not in the MT. Because there is no textual evidence

outside of the LXX to support this variant, it is most likely an interpretative addition establishing

the Lord as addressee. By means of exclaiming God’s name, the LXX begins a new paragraph

which addresses the reflection of “we” group to the servant in the form of a prayer.56

As seen above, the translator’s concern about God’s character appears in the omission of

God’s name and the weakened language of the servant’s suffering in 53:4-5: hN<)[um.W ~yhiÞl{a/ hKeîmu

[:Wg°n" (“stricken, smitten by God and afflicted”); ei=nai evn po,nw| kai. evn plhgh/| kai. evn kakw,sei (“to

be in trouble and calamity and ill-treatment”). It is also seen in v. 10: yliêx/h,( ‘AaK.D: #peÛx' hw"ùhyw: (“But

the Lord was pleased to crush him, making [him] suffer”); kai. ku,rioj bou,letai kaqari,sai auvto.n

th/j plhgh/j (“And the Lord is pleased to cleanse him from his stroke”). In this verse, while the

MT describes God’s intention to make the servant suffer, the LXX dramatically changes this

description into God’s action which rescues the servant from his suffering. The LXX rendering

55 See Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 244-45.56 See Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 194.

19

does not have any external textual evidence except the free rendering of Targum.57 Thus, it is

likely the theological translation of the LXX translator. Thus, this verse has double functions

which avoid implicating God in the oppression and highlight God’s role in the salvation.

It becomes clear when this clause is compared with the last clause in this verse. As

Ekblad shows, v. 10 has a chiasmus structure:58

A kai. ku,rioj bou,letai kaqari,sai auvto.n th/j plhgh/j (“and the Lord is pleased to cleanse…”)

B eva.n dw/te peri. amarti,aj (“if you give an offering for sin”)

B’ h yuch. umw/n o;yetai spe,rma makro,bion (“your soul shall see a long-lived offspring”)

A’ kai. bou,letai ku,rioj avfelei/n (“and the Lord is pleased to take away”)

This structure is significantly different from the MT text. As seen above, the subjects of B and B’

are changed from the servant to “you” group. In addition, A’ is freely rendered from the MT text:

xl'(c.yI Adðy"B. hw"ßhy> #p,xeîw> (“And the Lord’s pleasure will prosper in his hand”). Thus, the chiasmus

structure between A and A’ reflects theological translation which emphasizes God’s initiative in

the restoration of the servant. It is more focused in v. 11.

While v. 10 and v. 11 are clearly divided in the MT text by means of different subjects, in

the LXX v. 11 is connected to the last sentence in v. 10 by the same subject and the long chain of

infinitive clauses: bou,letai ku,rioj avfelei/n … dei/xai … pla,sai … dikaiw/sai (“the Lord is

pleased to take away…to show…to form…to justify). In the MT text it is the servant who will

see, be satisfied, and justify the many. However, it is God in the LXX who takes every action to

reward the servant. Especially, the last infinitive phrase dikaiw/sai (“to justify”) makes clear that

justifying action only belongs to God, not the servant as in the MT. It clearly shows the

translation tendency of the LXX.

57 According to Chilton, Targum reads: “Yet before the Lord it was a pleasure to refine and to cleanse the remnant ofhis people, in order to purify their soul from sins.”58 See Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 243.

20

In v. 9 where the MT reads wyt'_moB. ryviÞ['-ta,w> Arêb.qi ‘~y[iv'r>-ta, !TEÜYIw: (“and he made his grave

with wicked men, and with a rich man in his death”), the LXX reads kai. dw,sw tou.j ponhrou.j

avnti. th/j tafh/j auvtou/ kai. tou.j plousi,ouj avnti. tou/ qana,tou auvtou/ (“and I will give the wicked

for his burial and the rich for his death”). While the MT text is difficult to understand, the LXX

renders it into clearer language. First, the LXX changes the subject from the third person singular

to the first person singular. In the MT the identity of the subject is not clear whether it is God or

the servant. In the LXX, however, the subject is clearly God.

Second, in the MT it is not clear whether two repeated ta, are direct object markers or

prepositions denoting proximity. The LXX translates two repeated ta, as direct object markers.

Then, the LXX renders Arb.qi (“his grave”) and wyt'moB. (“in his death”) into avnti. th/j tafh/j auvtou

(“for his burial”) and avnti. tou/ qana,tou auvtou (“for his death”). The LXX adds avnti. (for, instead

of, or in place of) in order clarify its meaning. The LXX’s use of ponhrou.j (“wicked”) and

plousi,ouj (“rich”) reflects a view of the wicked and the rich as a visible, enduring class of

people distinct from those who confess their sin and the servant’s atoning work in 53:1-7. In

several places of LXX Isaiah, the rich is related to the wicked that is the object of God’s

judgement.59 Thus, the LXX rendering in v. 9 makes the sentence imply God’s retribution

against the wicked and the rich who despised and killed the servant. 60 The idea of God’s

retribution is not found in the MT text. The MT text is generally considered to mean the

59 Cf. 5:14; 32:9, 13; 33:20; 53:9. In these passages, the word plousi,oj occurs in the context of God’s judgment andit is an added word in each sentence, which is not found in the MT. It shows the translator’s tendency whichconsiders rich to be connected to the evil.60 See Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 236-39; Zimmerli, “paij qeou,” 677. Hengel and Jeremias argue that thisverse indicates that the servant will be a judge for the wicked and the rich, implying the messianic interpretation ofthe LXX (Hengle, “Effective History of Isaiah 53,” 123; Jeremias, “paij qeou,” 691). However, it is unlikelybecause the LXX usually tends to lessen the active role of the servant and the LXX text does not support thatinterpretation.

21

servant’s humble burial among the wicked and the rich.61 In addition, the form of the verb !TEÜYIw: in

the MT indicates the perfect tense which implies the event of the servant’s actual death and

burial. The tense of the verb dw,sw, however, is the future, which implies God’s future

judgment.62 Thus, the LXX rendering emphasizes God’s sovereignty in restoring the servant and

punishing the wicked in the future.

A similar point is made in the use of the verb paradidomi (“to hand over”). This word

renders two different Hebrew words, [gp (“to encounter,” 53:6, 12) and hr[ (“to pour out,”

53:12), which are not expected to be translation equivalent words. In v. 6, in both of the MT and

the LXX the subject of the verbs is indicated as God: WnL'(Ku !wOð[] taeÞ ABê [:yGIåp.hi ‘hw"hyw: (“and the

LORD has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him”); kai. ku,rioj pare,dwken auvto.n tai/j

amarti,aij hmw/n (“and the Lord gave him over to our sins”). However, in two cases in 53:12,

while the MT has two different active verbs, the LXX has the same passive verbs which are often

called divine passive: Avêp.n: ‘tw<M'’l; hr"Û[/h, rv,’a] tx;T; (“Because he poured out his soul to death”);

avnqV w-n paredo,qh eivj qa,naton h yuch. auvtou/ (“Because his soul was given over to death”); [:yGI)p.y:

~y[iÞv.Pol;w> (“and for the transgressors he will intercede”); kai. dia. ta.j amarti,aj auvtw/n paredo,qh

(“and because of their sins he was given over”). Although the agent of “handing over” the

servant to death is not indicated, it is implied as God from the context.63 Thus, while in the MT

the voluntary atoning death of the servant is emphasized by the subject and active verbs, the

LXX focuses on the passive aspect of the atoning death. Therefore, the repeated used of the verb

paradidomi (“to hand over”) implies that the atoning death of the servant is depending on God’s

61 See Baltzer, Deutero-Isaiah, 417-18; Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 237; Heskett, Messianism, 198..62 See Hengel, “Effective History of Isaiah 53,” 123.63 See Hengel, “Effective History of Isaiah 53,” 124.

22

decision. By means of various free renderings, the LXX tends to emphasize God’s sovereignty

upon the atoning ministry of the servant.

CONCLUSION

As seen above, the LXX renders the difficult language of the MT into the Greek, adjusting it to

the translator’s historical situation and his theology. Although the MT and the LXX contain

almost identical contents, two different mind-sets behind them are noticed. Strictly speaking, two

traditions are the products of two different worlds.

MT Isaiah is deeply rooted in the ancient Hebrew culture, which is found in the Old

Testament. It employs various biblical metaphors: a tender shoot, a root out of parched ground, a

lamb, a sheep, a smitten and afflicted man, a guilt offering and the servant of the Lord. Although

some of these metaphors might be acceptable for the LXX translator’s contemporaries, not all

are acceptable. In addition, the MT writer does not have the same presupposition of God as the

LXX translator. In the Old Testament, God’s character is revealed by means of his people’s

experience and confession. The Old Testament does not show the theologically comprehensive

concept of God. Thus, the MT sometimes employs violent language for God. In our text God is

described as one who strikes, smites, afflicts, and crushes his servant. In the perspective of the

MT, however, this does not have a problem with God’s gracious character which is often

confessed by his people: “you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in

steadfast love, and ready to relent from punishing” (Jonah 4:2).64 In our text this violent language

focuses not on God’s character, but on the servant’s suffering which is caused by people’s sins.

Usually, the violent language is used for God’s punishment upon people’s sins. By means of this

64 Cf. Exod 34:6; Num 14:18; 2 Chron 30:9; Neh 9:17, 31; Ps 86:15; 103:8; 111:4; 112:4; 116:5; 145:8 Joel 2:13;Jon 4:2.

23

violence, the MT tends to evoke a shock to the readers so that they may repent their sin. In fact,

that is what “we” group is doing in our text. “We” group confess: “we accounted him stricken,

struck down by God… But he was wounded for our transgressions, crushed…” This violent

language, however, is not acceptable for the comprehensive and theological mind of Hellenistic

period when LXX Isaiah was translated, because God and evil can be associated with each other.

Therefore, although he tries to render faithfully the MT text into the Greek, when he encounters

this violent language, the LXX translator tends to weaken or to change it.

Another difference is noticed in the mind-set of the LXX. In the MT, the distinctiveness

between God and his agent is not clear sometimes. Especially, it is true in the message of

prophets. It is often hard to distinguish between divine speech and a prophet’s speech. His

anointed people, such as king, prophet, and priest, accomplish their work with God’s authority.

Therefore, the servant’s special ministry, which cleanses and justifies people, is understandable

for “the servant of the Lord.” In fact, “the servant of the Lord” is a very special term for God’s

anointed individual.65 However, the LXX tends to distinguish between human sphere and divine

sphere. In the point-view of the LXX, a ministry which cleanses and justifies people does not

belong to human sphere, but to divine sphere. Thus, because the LXX translator was not

comfortable with the expressions in the MT which the servant of the Lord cleanses and justifies

people, he changed these expressions into different meanings.

A similar point is made in the servant’s voluntary atoning death. In both of the traditions

the servant’s atoning death is very clearly described. Even in some points the LXX’s description

is clearer than the MT. However, in terms of his voluntary death, the LXX renderings weaken

the MT’s expressions, emphasizing divine initiative. It is clearly shown in the use of the verb

65 Cf. Zimmerli and Jeremias, “paij qeou,” 663-65; Byrne, Biblical Motif, 151-76; Goldingay, Message of Isaiah 40-55, 478-81

24

paradidomi (“to hand over”). In the perspective of the LXX it is God who delivers his people

from their sins. Because of this reason, the LXX repeatedly weakens the expressions of the

servant’s actions and also of the servant’s fortune by God’s reward.

In the Old Testament, the reward for the faithful servant is an important concept.

Especially, the physical and material blessings signify God’s favour and reward. Throughout the

Old Testament, these blessings are promised to God’s faithful people. Thus, in our text, God’s

reward and favour are expressed by the servant’s fortune: the servant’s long life, his offspring,

his satisfaction, his knowledge, being a saviour and judge, taking the booty, and being an

intercessor. Although the LXX contains some of these elements, it significantly changes and

weakens some of them. One reason for this change is because the LXX emphasizes God’s role in

the servant’s atoning ministry. The other reason could be because the Hellenistic culture

emphasizes the spiritual aspect of divine blessing.

Our MT text is a part of a prophetic message. Although prophets show their great concern

about their people’s faith and fate, many parts of their messages were basically prophecies,

which were proclaimed for their future. However, as a future generation, the contemporaries of

the LXX translator would have read this prophetic message as what had already been

accomplished or was accomplished in their era. In other words, the translator could render it as a

message which was applied to his contemporaries. Thus, LXX Isaiah reveals special concern

about reader’s perspective or reader’s response. It is most clearly shown in 53:10 where the LXX

changes the subject from the servant in the MT to the people. By means of this change, while

changing the servant’s fortune into the readers’ fortune, the translator urges the readers to repent

their sins and promises God’s reward.

25

Because of these different mind-sets, although the LXX is a translation from the MT text,

two traditions often reveal their own tendencies. Actually, the translation tendency of the LXX is

often coincident with the New Testament because the New Testament was written in the similar

Hellenistic milieu as the LXX. Thus, when we compare between the MT and other ancient

translations, we should understand the translation tendency of an individual translation. When we

understand its tendency, we can properly judge the meaning of differences between the MT and

other translations. In addition, it should be remembered that a translation is the work of

theological interpretation. Thus, by means of differences between the MT and translations we

could gain a better understanding for the history of the interpretation of the Bible. With this

notion about translations, we should begin the study of ancient translations.

26

Appendix

TEXTUAL DIFFERENCES

Isa 52:13-53:12

~Wrôy" yDI_b.[; lyKiÞf.y: hNEïhi`dao)m. Hb;Þg"w> aF'²nIw>

13 Behold, My servant will prosper,He will be high and lifted up and greatly exalted.

~yBiêr: ‘^yl,’[' WmÜm.v' rv,’a]K;Whae_r>m; vyaiÞme tx;îv.mi-!Ke

`~d"(a' ynEïB.mi Arßa]tow>14 Just as many were astonished at you,So His appearance was marred more than any manAnd His form more than the sons of men.

~yBiêr: ~yIåAG ‘hZ<y: !KEÜ~h,_yPi ~ykiÞl'm. WcïP.q.yI wyl'²['

Waêr" ‘~h,l' rP:Üsu-al{) rv,’a] yKi`Wnn")ABt.hi W[ßm.v'-al{) rv<ïa]w:

15 Thus He will sprinkle many nations,Kings will shut their mouths on account of Him;For what had not been told them they will see,And what they had not heard they will understand.

Wnte_['muv.li !ymiÞa/h, ymiî`ht'l'(g>nI ymiî-l[; hw"ßhy> [;Arïz>W

53:1 Who has believed our message?And to whom has the arm of the LORD beenrevealed?

wyn"©p'l. qnE÷AYK; l[;Y:w:hY"ëci #r<a,äme ‘vr<Vo’k;w>

Whaeîr>nIw> rd"+h' al{åw> Alà ra;toï-al{`WhdE(m.x.n<w> ha,Þr>m;-al{)w>

2 For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot,And like a root out of parched ground;He has no form or majestythat we should look upon Him,Nor appearance that we should desire Him.

~yviêyai ld:äx]w: hz<b.nIylixo+ [:WdåywI tAbßaok.m; vyaiî

WNM,êmi ‘~ynIP' rTEÜs.m;k.W`WhnU)b.v;x] al{ïw> hz<ßb.nI

3 He was despised and forsaken of men,A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;And like one from whom men hide their faceHe was despised, and we did not esteem Him.

13 ivdou. sunh,sei o pai/j moukai. uywqh,setai kai. doxasqh,setai sfo,draSee, my servant shall understand and he shall beexalted and glorified exceedingly.14 o]n tro,pon evksth,sontai evpi. se. polloi,ou[twj avdoxh,sei avpo. avnqrw,pwn to. ei=do,j soukai. h do,xa sou avpo. tw/n avnqrw,pwnJust as many shall be astonished at you-so shall your appearance be without glory from men,and your glory be absent from the men-15 ou[twj qauma,sontai e;qnh polla. evpV auvtw/|kai. sune,xousin basilei/j to. sto,ma auvtw/no[ti oi-j ouvk avnhgge,lh peri. auvtou/ o;yontaikai. oi] ouvk avkhko,asin sunh,sousinso shall many nations be astonished at him,and kings shall shut their mouth,because those who were not informed about himshall seeand those who did not hear shall understand.

ku,rie ti,j evpi,steusen th/| avkoh/| hmw/nkai. o braci,wn kuri,ou ti,ni avpekalu,fqh

Lord, who has believed our report?And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?

2 avnhggei,lamen evnanti,on auvtou/wj paidi,on wj ri,za evn gh/| diyw,sh|ouvk e;stin ei=doj auvtw/| ouvde. do,xakai. ei;domen auvto,nkai. ouvk ei=cen ei=doj ouvde. ka,lloj

We announced before himas a child, as a root in a thirsty land:he has no form nor glory;and we saw him, but he had no form nor beauty.

3 avlla. to. ei=doj auvtou/ a;timonevklei/pon para. pa,ntaj avnqrw,pouja;nqrwpoj evn plhgh/| w'nkai. eivdw.j fe,rein malaki,ano[ti avpe,straptai to. pro,swpon auvtou/hvtima,sqh kai. ouvk evlogi,sqh

But his form was without honor,failing beyond all men,a man being in calamityand knowing how to bear sickness;because his face is turned away,he was dishonored and not esteemed.

27

af'ên" aWhå ‘WnyE’l'x\ !kEÜa'~l'_b's. WnybeÞaok.m;W

`hN<)[um.W ~yhiÞl{a/ hKeîmu [:Wg°n" WhnUëb.v;x] Wnx.n:åa]w:4 Surely our grieves He Himself bore,And our sorrows He carried;Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, Smittenof God, and afflicted.

66Wn[eêv'P.mi ll'äxom. ‘aWhw>Wnyte_nOwO[]me aK'ÞdUm.

wyl'ê[' ‘Wnme’Alv. rs:ÜWm`Wnl'(-aP'r>nI Atàr"bux]b;W

5 But He was pierced throughfor our transgressions,He was crushed for our iniquities;The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him,And by His scourging we are healed.

ny[iêT' !aCoåK; ‘WnL'’KuWnynI+P' AKßr>d:l. vyaiî

`WnL'(Ku !wOð[] taeÞ ABê [:yGIåp.hi ‘hw"hyw:)6 All of us like sheep have gone astray,Each of us has turned to his own way;But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all Tofall on Him.

èwyPi-xT;p.yI al{åw> éhn<[]n: aWhåw> fG:“nI lb'êWy xb;J,äl; ‘hF,K;

hm'l'_a/n< h'yz<ßz>gO ynEïp.li lxer"k.W`wyPi( xT;Þp.yI al{ïw>

7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,Yet He did not open His mouth;Like a lamb that is led to slaughter,And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers,So He did not open His mouth.

xQ'êlu ‘jP'v.MimiW rc,[oÜmex:xe_Afy> ymiä ArßAD-ta,w>~yYIëx; #r<a,äme ‘rz:g>nI yKiÛ`Aml'( [g:n<ï yMiÞ[; [v;P,îm

8 By oppression and judgment He was taken away;And who could tell His generation?Because He was cut offout of the land of the living.For the transgression of my people,the stroke was to him.

4 ou-toj ta.j amarti,aj hmw/n fe,reikai. peri. hmw/n ovduna/taikai. hmei/j evlogisa,meqa auvto.n ei=nai evn po,nw|kai. evn plhgh/| kai. evn kakw,seiThis one bears our sinsand suffers pain for us,and we accounted him to be in troubleand calamity and ill-treatment.5 auvto.j de. evtraumati,sqh dia. ta.j avnomi,aj hmw/nkai. memala,kistai dia. ta.j amarti,aj hmw/npaidei,a eivrh,nhj hmw/n evpV auvto,ntw/| mw,lwpi auvtou/ hmei/j iva,qhmenBut he was wounded because ofour acts of lawlessnessand has been weakened because of our sins;upon him was the discipline of our peace;by his bruise we were healed.6 pa,ntej wj pro,bata evplanh,qhmena;nqrwpoj th/| odw/| auvtou/ evplanh,qhkai. ku,rioj pare,dwken auvto.n tai/j amarti,aij hmw/nAll we like sheep have gone astray;a man has strayed in his own way,and the Lord gave him over to our sins.

7 kai. auvto.j dia. to. kekakw/sqaiouvk avnoi,gei to. sto,mawj pro,baton evpi. sfagh.n h;cqhkai. wj avmno.j evnanti,on tou/ kei,rontoj auvto.na;fwnojou[twj ouvk avnoi,gei to. sto,ma auvtou/And he, because he has been ill-treated,does not open his mouth;like a sheep he was led to the slaughter,and as a lamb is silent before the one shearing it,so he does not open his mouth.

8 evn th/| tapeinw,sei h kri,sij auvtou/ h;rqhth.n genea.n auvtou/ ti,j dihgh,setaio[ti ai;retai avpo. th/j gh/j h zwh. auvtou/avpo. tw/n avnomiw/n tou/ laou/ mou h;cqh eivj qa,natonIn his humiliation his judgment was taken away.Who will describe his generation?Because his life is being taken from the earth,he was led to death on account of the acts oflawlessness of my people.

28

Arêb.qi ‘~y[iv'r>-ta, !TEÜYIw:wyt'_moB. ryviÞ['-ta,w>

`wypi(B. hm'Þr>mi al{ïw> hf'ê[' sm'äx'-al{ l[;9 He made His grave with wicked men,And with a rich man in His death,Because He had done no violence,Nor was there any deceit in His mouth.

yliêx/h,( AaK.D: #peÛx' hw"hyw:Avêp.n: ‘~v'a' ~yfiÛT'-~ai

~ymi_y" %yrIåa]y: [r;z<ß ha,îr>yI`xl'(c.yI Adðy"B. hw"ßhy> #p,xeîw>

10 But the LORD was pleased to crush Him, withthe stroke;If He would render Himself as a guilt offering,He will see offspring, He will prolong days,And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper inHis hand.

[B'êf.yI ha,är>yI ‘Avp.n: lm;Û[]me~yBi_r:l'( yDIb.[; qyDI²c; qyDIîc.y: AT[.d:B.

`lBo)s.yI aWhï ~t'ÞnOwO[]w:11 As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will seeit and be satisfied;By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant,will justify the many,As He will bear their iniquities.

~yBiªr:b' Alå-qL,x;a] !kel'èll'v' qLeäx;y> é~ymiWc[]-ta,w>

Avêp.n: ‘tw<M'’l; hr"Û[/h, rv,’a] tx;T;hn"+m.nI ~y[iÞv.Po-ta,w>

`[:yGI)p.y: ~y[iÞv.Pol;w> af'ên" ~yBiär:-aj.xe ‘aWhw>12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with thegreat,And He will divide the booty with the strong;Because He poured out Himself to death,And was numbered with the transgressors;Yet He Himself bore the sin of many,And he will intercede for the transgressors.

9 kai. dw,sw tou.j ponhrou.j avnti. th/j tafh/j auvtou/kai. tou.j plousi,ouj avnti. tou/ qana,tou auvtou/o[ti avnomi,an ouvk evpoi,hsenouvde. eure,qh do,loj evn tw/| sto,mati auvtou/And I will give the wicked for his burialand the rich for his death,because he committed no lawlessness,nor was deceit found in his mouth.10 kai. ku,rioj bou,letai kaqari,sai auvto.n th/jplhgh/jeva.n dw/te peri. amarti,ajh yuch. umw/n o;yetai spe,rma makro,bionkai. bou,letai ku,rioj avfelei/nAnd the Lord desires to cleanse him from his blow.If you give an offering for sin,your soul shall see a long-lived offspring.And the Lord wishes to take away11 avpo. tou/ po,nou th/j yuch/j auvtou/dei/xai auvtw/| fw/j kai. pla,sai th/| sune,seidikaiw/sai di,kaion eu= douleu,onta polloi/jkai. ta.j amarti,aj auvtw/n auvto.j avnoi,seifrom the pain of his soul,to show him light and fill him with understanding,to justify a righteous one who is well subject tomany,and he himself shall bear their sins.

12 dia. tou/to auvto.j klhronomh,sei pollou.jkai. tw/n ivscurw/n meriei/ sku/laavnqV w-n paredo,qh eivj qa,naton h yuch. auvtou/kai. evn toi/j avno,moij evlogi,sqhkai. auvto.j amarti,aj pollw/n avnh,negkenkai. dia. ta.j amarti,aj auvtw/n paredo,qhTherefore, he shall inherit many,and he shall divide the spoils of the strong,because his soul was given over to death,and he was reckoned among the lawless,and he bore the sins of many,and because of their sins he was given over.

29

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alter, R. The Art of Biblical Poetry. New York: Basic Books, 1985.

Baltzer, K. Deutero-Isaiah: a Commentary on Isaiah 40-55. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress,2001.

Baer, D.A. When We All Go Home: Translation and Theology in LXX Isaiah 56-66. Sheffield:Sheffield Academic Press, 2001.

Barr, J. The Typology of Literalism in Ancient Biblical Translations. MSU 15. Göttingen:Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979.

Barre, M.L. “Textual and Rhetorical-critical Observations on the Last Servant Song.” CBQ 62(2000): 1-27.

Bellinger, Jr., W.H. and W.R. Farmer, eds., Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 andChristian Origins. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998.

Bergey, R. “The Rhetorical Role of Reiteration in the Suffering Servant Poem.” JETS 40 (1997):177-88.

Brockington, L.H. “The Greek Translator of Isaiah and His Interest in DOXA. VT 1 (1951): 23-32.

Byrne, F.M. “The Biblical Motif of the Servant: A Theology for Mission.” D. Miss. diss. FullerTheological Seminary, 1996

Ceresko, A.R. “The Rhetorical Strategy of the Fourth Servant Song.” CBQ 56 (1994): 42-55.

Childs, B.S. Isaiah. OTL. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001.

Clements, R.E. “Isaiah 53 and the restoration of Israel.” Pp. 39-54 in Jesus and the SufferingServant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins. Edited by W.H. Bellinger, Jr., and W.R.Farmer. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998.

Clines, D.J.A. I, He, We and They: A Literary Approach to Isaiah 53. JSOTSup 1. Sheffield:JSOT Press, 1976.

Ekblad Jr., E.R. Isaiah’s Servant Poems According to the Septuagint: An Exegetical andTheological Study. Leuven: Peeters, 1999.

Flint, P.W. Studies in the Hebrew Bible, Qumran, and the Septuagint presented to Eugene Ulrich.Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2006.

Goldingay, J. The Message of Isaiah 40-55: A Literary-Theological Commentary. London: T&TClark, 2005.

30

Goldingay, J. and D. Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40-55. Vol. II.ICC. London/New York: T&T Clark, 2006.

Hanson, P.D. “The World of the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah 40-55.” Pp. 9-22 in Jesus and theSuffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins. Edited by W.H. Bellinger, Jr., andW.R. Farmer. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998.

Hengel, Martin “The Effective History of Isaiah 53 in the Pre-Christian Period.” Pp. 75-146 inThe Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources. Translated by D.P.Bailey. Edited by B. Janowski, and P. Stuhlmacher. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004.

Hermisson, H.-J. “The Fourth Servant Song in the Context of Second Isaiah.” Pp. 16-47 in TheSuffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources. Translated by D.P.Bailey. Edited by B. Janowski, and P. Stuhlmacher. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004.

Heskett, R. Messianism within the Scriptural Scrolls of Isaiah. JSOTSup 456. NewYork/London: T&T Clark, 2007.

Jobes, K. H. and M. Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000.

Jellicoe, S. The Septuagint and Modern Study. Oxford: Clarendon, 1968.

Kruse, C.G. “The Servant Songs: Interpretive Trends since C.R. North.” Studia Biblica etTheologica 8 (1979): 3-27.

Loewe, R. “Prolegomenon.” The Fifty-Third Chapter of Isaiah According to the JewishInterpreters. Edited by S.R. Driver and A. Neubauer. Repr. New York: Ktav, 1969.

Lust, J. “The Demonic Character of Jahweh.” Bijdragen 40 (1979): 2-14.

--------. Messianism and the Septuagint: Collected Essays. Leuven: Leuven UniversityPress/Uitgeverij Peeters, 2004.

Melugin, R.F. “On Reading Isaiah 53 as Christian Scripture.” Pp. 55-69 in Jesus and theSuffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins. Edited by W.H. Bellinger, Jr., andW.R. Farmer. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998.

Mettinger, T.N.D. A Farewell to the Servant Songs: A Critical Examination of an ExegeticalAxiom. Lund: Gleerup, 1983.

North, C. R. The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah: An Historical and Critical Study. London:Oxford, 1956.

Olley, J.W. ‘Righteousness’ in the Septuagint of Isaiah: A Contextual Study. Septuagint andCognate Studies 8. Montana: Scholars Press, 1979.

Orlinsky, H. M. “The So-called ‘Servant of the Lord’ and ‘Suffering Servant’ in Second Isaiah.”Pp. 1-133 in Studies on the Second Part of the Book of Isaiah. VTSup 14. Leiden: Brill,

31

1967.

Oswalt, John N. The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66. NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.

Ottley, R.R. The Book of Isaiah According to the Septuagint: Codex Alexandrinus. 2 vols.Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1904-06.

Payne, D.F. “the Servant of the Lord: Language and Interpretation.” EvQ 43 (1971): 131-43.

Porter, S.E. Idioms of the Greek New Testament. 2nd ed. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,1994.

Porter, S.E. and B.W.R. Pearson, “Isaiah through Greek Eyes: The Septuagint of Isaiah.” Pp.531-46 in Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Vol. II. Edited by C.C. Broyles andC.A. Evans. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1997.

Rahlfs, A. and R. Hanhart, Septuaginta. Rev. ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2006.

Rembaum, J.E. “The Development of a Jewish Exegetical Tradition Regarding Isaiah 53.”Harvard Theological Review 75 (1982): 289-311.

Sapp, D.A. “The LXX, 1QIsa, and MT Versins of Isaiah 53 and the Christian Doctrine ofAtonement.” Pp. in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins.Edited by W.H. Bellinger, Jr., and W.R. Farmer. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International,1998.

Seeligmann, I.L. The Septuagint Version of Isaiah: A Discussion of Its Problems. MVEOL 9.Leiden: Brill, 1948.

Spieckermann, H. “The Conception and Prehistory of the Idea of Vicarious Suffering in the OldTestament.” Pp. 1-15 in The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and ChristianSources. Translated by D.P. Bailey. Edited by B. Janowski, and P. Stuhlmacher. GrandRapids: Eerdmans, 2004.

Tov, E. The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research. JBS 3. Jerusalem: Simor1981.

--------. Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. 2nd Rev. Assen/Minneapolis: VanGorcum/Fortress, 2001.

Troxel, R. “Exegesis and Theology in the LXX: Isaiah V 26-30.” VT XLIII, 1 (1993): 102-11.

van der Kooij, A. “The Old Greek of Isaiah in Relation to the Qumran Texts of Isaiah: SomeGeneral Comments.” Pp. 195-213 in Septuagint, Scrolls and Cognate Writings: PapersPresented to the International Symposium on the Septuagint and its Relations to theDead Sea Scrolls and Other Writings. Edited by G. J. Brooke and B. Lindars. Atlanta:Scholars Press, 1992.

32

--------. “Isaiah in the Septuagint.” Pp. 513-30 in Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah. Vol.II. Edited by C.C. Broyles and C.A. Evans. Leiden: Brill, 1997.

--------. The Oracle of Tyre: the Septuagint of Isaiah XXIII as Version and Vision. Leiden: Brill,1998.

Watson, F. “Mistranslation and the Death of Christ: Isaiah 53 LXX and its Pauline Reception.”

Watts, J.D.W. Isaiah 34-66. WBC. Waco: Word. 1983.

Westermann, C. Isaiah 40-66. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969.

Whybray, R.N. Isaiah 40-66. NCB. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1975.

--------. Thanksgiving for a Liberated Prophet. JSOTSup 4. Sheffield: Sheffield University, 1978.

Ziegler, J. Isaias. Septuaginta XIV. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1967.

--------. Untersuchungen zur Septuaginta des Buches Isaias. ATAbh 12.3. Münster:

Aschendorffschen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1934.

Zimmerli, W. and J. Jeremias. “paij qeou.” TDNT vol. V: 654-77.