Monday, April 15, 2019

In Our Place Condemned He Stood - Isa. 52:13 - 53:12


Actually I was assigned just Isaiah 53 as my text. But there is almost a unanimous consensus among scholars that the last three verses in the previous chapter, chapter 52 form a literary unit with Chapter 53. I think it’s better to preach from a single literary unit rather than breaking it up especially for novice or inexperienced preachers like myself. And in the following sermon I’ll just mention the passage as Isaiah 53 for easy reference. Let us read the text now.
This is the word of the Lord!
Twenty years ago statutes of ten martyrs of the 20th century were unveiled above the west gate of Westminster Abbey.  I guess one can say they are quite well represented. There are Africans, Europeans, a Chinese, a Pakistani, an American and one from Central America. There are also three women among them. They were also from different denominations, Anglican, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist and even from the Roman Catholic and Russian Orthodox Church.
When we think of martyrs, we think of those who died for their faith. Well, a number of them did die for their faith but some didn’t. But you can say because of their faith, they did the things that got them killed. They stood up against injustice and oppression. People like Bonhoeffer, Martin Luther King Jr, Oscar Romero and Janani Luwum.
Among the ten, there was one who actually didn’t die for his faith. Neither was he killed because he championed the cause of justice. He died or was killed  for another reason. He actually volunteered to die on behalf of an individual. His name is Maximilian Kolbe, a Polish priest. He has since been canonized or made a saint by the Roman Catholic church. He was incarcerated in the Auschwitz concentration camp during world war II. One day ten prisoners escaped from the camp. This prompted the deputy camp commander, to pick ten men to be starved to death in an underground bunker so as to deter further escape attempts. One of the unfortunate man, Franciszek Gajowniczek cried out, “My wife, my children!. Hearing that, Maximilian volunteered to take his place. One by one the men died leaving Maximilian as the last man living. The Nazi then gave him a lethal injection. Franciszek were to live for another 53 years dying in 1995. He was able to live because someone died on his behalf. Someone took his place. Someone became his substitute and took the fatal punishment meant for him.
The central theme in Isaiah 53 is about someone called the Servant who became the substitute of many and took the fatal punishment meant for them. The Servant suffered more horribly than starvation and was put to death in a much more horrible manner than lethal injection. The passage is the last of what came to be known as the four Servant Songs of Isaiah. The first one in chapter 42, second one in chapter 49 and the third one in chapter 50.
Before we consider the text in a more detailed manner, we need to first address a question. Who is this Servant that Isaiah spoke about?
There are many different theories and interpretation. Some think that the Servant was the prophet Isaiah himself or some other unidentified prophet, others think that the nation Israel or the remnant of Israel is the Servant. Besides those, there are many outrageous theories which we need not be bothered. The main problem with identifying the Servant with Isaiah or any other prophet is there is no evidence that prophets suffered for the sins of the people. Yes, they did suffered, some terribly so. But they suffered because of their ministry and for their uncompromising message. The same problem arises if we were to identify the Servant with Israel or the remnant of Israel. Israel didn’t suffer for the nations. Instead, they suffered at the hands of some nations because of their sin.
For Christians, reading the New Testament, there is no doubt who Isaiah was referring to when he spoke about the Suffering Servant. No other passage in the OT has been cited directly or alluded to more often in the NT than this passage in Isaiah. Let’s turn to Acts 8:26-40. It’s a long passage but I think we should read it.
Which passage of Scripture was the Ethiopian eunuch reading? He was reading a passage from Isaiah 53, vv 7-8. What did the Ethiopian ask Philip? He asked Philip, Who was it that Isaiah was speaking about? Was it Isaiah himself or someone else? What was Philip’s answer? We don’t have his exact answer but Luke, the author of Acts recorded for us that Philip told the Ethiopian the good news about Jesus.
So, can we identify who the Servant is in Isaiah 53 by reading Act 8? Is it obvious? No, according to one famous OT scholar. He commented that Philip didn’t identify Jesus as the Servant but only used the passage to preach the good news about Jesus. My only reaction to this is. (Facepalm). I have great respect for Bible scholars and their scholarship. Many have blessed the church with their labour. But sometimes, some of them can do more harm than good. Because some of them are not even Christians. For them, the Bible is just any piece of literature to be taken apart or dissected for their dissertation or thesis. They don’t submit to the authority of the Bible.
Now if you are still not convinced that the Servant in Isaiah 53 is Jesus look at what Jesus himself has to say. Turn with me to Luke 22:37. Jesus is speaking “For I tell you this Scripture must be fulfilled in me. “And he must be numbered with transgressors.” For what is written about me has its fulfillment. Which passage did Jesus quote? Isaiah 53.12. What was just Jesus saying? The he in Isaiah 53:12, the he who was numbered with transgressors is none other than him, Jesus.
As we moved through the passage in Isaiah, you will be amazed at how so many things about the Servant in that passage got fulfilled in the life of Jesus. Well, skeptics may say that Jesus purposely acted in such a away as to fulfill those prophecies. It may be possible to do so for some of them but for many others they are beyond the control of Jesus. Let us go back to our text.
The passage can be divided nicely in 5 parts. Each part taking 3 verses.
1.    The Exaltation of the Servant Announced and His Work of Purification (52:13-12)
2.    The Rejection of the Servant By His People (53:1-3)
3.    The Substitutionary Suffering of the Servant (53:4-6)
4.    The Injustice Done To the Servant and his Death (53:7-9)
5.    The Ultimate Triumph of the Servant (53:10-12)
This fourth Servant Song starts the same way as the first one in chapter 42, Behold my servant. And because the Servant will act wisely and thus be successful in his mission, he will be high and lifted up and shall be exalted. The phrase “high and lifted up” appears four times in the book of Isaiah and no where else in the OT. The three other times it appears, it is used to describe God. We are probably familiar with the vision of Isaiah and his calling in chapter 6. There Isaiah saw God high and lifted up. This is another problem if we were to identify the Servant with Isaiah or any other prophet or even the nation Israel. It is hard to imagine anyone or any nation can be high and lifted up to be like God. Only the Son of God can be high and lifted up and exalted. Doesn’t this echo Philippians 2:9-11 “Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

But before the Servant can be exalted, he has to undergo horrendous suffering so much so he is disfigured. V. 14 “his appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance, and his form beyond that of children of mankind”. Although nothing is said about his suffering yet, I agree with one commentator that given the context of the whole passage, this disfigurement or sub-human appearance is not his normal appearance throughout life. It was caused by the suffering which was inflicted upon him. This brings to mind Mel Gibson’s Passion of Christ. Don’t you think it’s pretty bloody? The person hanging on the cross doesn’t look human, does he? Mel Gibson must have read this verse in Isaiah and unlike some bible scholars accepted that the verse is referring to Jesus. This is just pure speculation.
If the people of God were astonished or appalled by the appearance of the Servant due to his suffering, the kings of the other nations stand amazed and in awe. Somehow, they understood what is happening to the servant of Yahweh and what he will do. They were silenced with reverence. Paul uses the second part of v.15 to make known his intention to spread the gospel to where it has not been proclaimed so that “those who have never been told of him will see and those who have never heard will understand.” You can read that in Rom. 15:21.
The Gentiles who were not God’s people were so taken aback or lost for words by God’s salvation made possible by his servant’s work of sprinkling. In the OT, sprinkling often has to do with atonement if it is the sprinkling with blood or purification if with water. The Gentiles will be cleansed and be made acceptable to God because of the work of sprinkling done by the servant.
In contrast, God’s own people were still very blurred. The Gentiles understand what they formerly did not hear; Israel on the contrary, does not believe that which they have heard. Vv 1-3 is sort of a confession by God’s people, the Israelites, that they have misunderstood Yahweh’s servant. Part of the misunderstanding I think stems from their expectation. Their expectation of their Deliverer or Saviour.
Few year ago I hardly stepped into a cinema. Then I took a break from my job. While my wife was working very hard in the office, I went to the movies. Now the role has been reversed. I’m now working very hard while she watches Korean drama at home. Anyway I think in 2016 I watched more movies than the past 10 years before that. I became hooked on movies about superheroes, The Avengers, Capt. America, Wonder Woman, Spiderman and the latest being the Black Panther. I’m looking forward to the Infinity Wars. I guess all of us love superheroes don’t we? And all of us have certain expectation of our superheroes, how they should look like, tall, strong, handsome or beautiful like Wonder Woman and with some super duper powers. The ability to zap  evil doers or the bad guys to another galaxy. But in human history, not the Marvel or DC Universe, sometimes we do come across unlikely and unconventional heroes.
One of the best movies I have seen this year was the Darkest Hour. It is  about the life of Winston Churchill during those few crucial months at the beginning of world war 2, where Britain was left standing alone to face the Nazi war machine. Churchill at that time was already 66 and can be considered past his prime. He also came with a lot of baggages and past failures. Many blamed him for the military disaster at Gallipoli during world war 1. The Allies suffered more than 300,000 casualties at Gallipoli.
The King actually had serious doubt about his capability to assume the responsibilities of a Prime Minister. Not only the King, but many of his colleagues as well. And of course, Churchill was anything but handsome or attractive at that time. I think he was sometimes depicted as a bulldog by some cartoonists. But I think it wouldn’t be too far off to say that Churchill saved Britain and the western world from Hitler. In Churchill we have an unlikely hero. Btw, after watching the movie, I wrote on my FB that the actor who portrayed Churchill should win an Oscar for Best Actor for his performance. My prophecy came true. Gary Oldman won the Oscar for Best Actor few weeks ago.
The Israelites were looking for a superhero to deliver them. A Capt Israel perhaps. Well, at least now they have Wonder Woman. (Sorry for those who have not been watching superheroes movies. Ask me afterwards what’s the connection between Israel and Wonder Woman). Perhaps, the Israelites were looking for someone with a kingly or regal appearance. Someone with power. Someone who fits the description, the arm of the Lord. Deliverers are often dominating, forceful, attractive people who by their personal magnetism draw people to themselves.
But instead comes along someone from a lowly, humble and not all too promising background. Instead of an oak tree or the cedar of Lebanon, he is compared to a young plant, a root out of a dry ground. Instead of being like Saul, the first king of Israel, tall, handsome and kingly, this one has no form or majesty. Few would have taken a second look at him. He wouldn’t have merited a second thought.
Very very ordinary. So because of his ordinariness he was being rejected, despised and counted for nothing.
Vv. 4-6 represent the center of the whole passage if we break the passage into 5 parts. Each part taking 3 verses. Here I believe we have the central theme of the whole passage. The theme of substitutionary suffering of the Servant. You just cannot miss the substitutionary nature of the Servant’s suffering. The Servant didn’t suffer because of his sin. That was the mistake made by the Israelites, second part of verse 4 “yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God and afflicted.” One of the prevailing worldviews at that time and even now is people suffer because they have sinned. Maybe they have offended God. No, the Servant didn’t suffer because he has sinned against God.
The Servant didn’t suffer for a cause. Neither did he suffer because someone made him suffer although later we will see that God did played a role in his suffering. The Servant suffered for God’s people. The language of substitution cannot be clearer in these 3 verses. Look at the pronouns.
What did he bear? Our griefs. Our sorrows. Why was he pierced? Because of our transgressions. Why was he crushed? Because of our iniquities. The verbs “pierced” and “crushed” are two of the strongest words in Hebrew language to describe a violent and painful death. Pierced conveys the idea of pierced through and wounded to death. Crushed conveys the sense of beaten in pieces, destroyed. Read the account in the gospels about the events leading up to the crucifixion of Jesus and you will appreciate the verbs used here, pierced and crushed.
Upon whom did the chastisement or punishment fallen upon? It was upon him, the Servant. What does that result in? It brought us peace. Peace with God. By whose wounds are we healed? By his, the Servant’s wounds. What did the Lord laid on him? The iniquity of us all.
Do you see the pattern in the pronouns used? He and our, him and us. We should be grieving and be sorrowful. Instead he bear our griefs and sorrows. We should be pierced and crushed for our sins. Instead he was pierced for our transgressions and crushed for our iniquities.  We should have been alienated and cut off from God. Instead he was punished or chastised so that we can have peace with God. We should be spiritually sick. Instead he was wounded so that by his wounds we are healed. We should be bearing the consequences of our sin. Instead our sins were laid on him. The Servant took our place just like how Maximilian took the place of Fraciszek.
The idea of substitutionary suffering of the Servant is not only confined to these three verses. Look at v.8 “he was cut off from the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people. V. 11 “make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities. V.12 “yet he bore the sins of many”.
The idea that someone taking the punishment of another so that the other can be saved can be found from the beginning of the OT. In Exodus the Israelites were told to slaughter a lamb and take some of its blood and put it on their doorposts so that judgment that was coming on the Egyptians households will be passed over from the Israelite households. The paschal lamb died on behalf of the firstborn of each Jewish household.
We also see in Leviticus 16 on the Day of Atonement, one goat was offered as a sin offering for the people. Another one called the scapegoat who was supposed to symbolically bear the sins of the people was to be sent into the wilderness.
What do the NT writers say about Jesus? Do they see Jesus having suffered on our behalf? Do they see Jesus as having taken our place? That he was being punished instead of us? Can we see the idea of substitutionary suffering in their writngs? If we have identified Jesus as the Suffering Servant in Isaiah 53, then we would expect the NT writers to see the suffering and death of Jesus as a punishment on our behalf in order to atone for our sins. Just like what we see the Suffering Servant did in Isaiah 53. And that is exactly what the NT writers saw.
2 Cor. 5:21 “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God”. God put our sins on Jesus who is sinless, who knew no sin. For whose sake? For our sake. Why? So that we can become righteous before God. Isaiah 53:6 – God laid upon the Servant the iniquity of us all.
Gal. 3:13  - “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us – for it is written “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”. Meaning cursed is everyone who is crucified. Who is it that is supposed to be cursed? Each one of us. But what did Christ do? He took our place. He became cursed on our behalf as he died the most horrible death on the cross. So that we can be redeemed. So that we can be healed. So that we can have peace with God. So that we can be reconciled to God.
From Paul, we now turn to Peter. 1 Peter 2:22-25. He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. Peter is quoting here the second part of verse 9 of Isaiah 53. Peter continues. When He was reviled, he did not revile in return, when he suffered he did not threaten but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly. Peter is here alluding to v.7 of Isaiah 53. V.24 He himself bore our sin in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. Whose sin did Jesus bear? Our sin. As a result we might die to sin and live to righteousness. The same thing Isaiah said of the servant of the Lord. Look again at v. 11-12 of Isaiah 53. There Peter quoted directly from the last part of Isa. 53:5 “By his wounds you have been healed
V.25 is interesting. “For you were straying like sheep, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.” What did Isaiah 53:6 says about the people of God. They were like sheep who have strayed. Can you see the idea of Christ being our substitute here? Taking our sins or bearing our sins so that we like lost sheep can return to the fold. Surely it’s clear which passage in OT that Peter thought of when he wrote these few verses.
Lastly 1 Pet 3:18 – For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit. The righteous, that is Christ in place of the unrighteous, that is us. Again here is the language of substitution and punishment.
Isaiah 53 is a very important text to the NT writers in their understanding of the work of Christ. As mentioned before, it is the most quoted OT text in the NT. Not only direct quotations but as we have seen, allusions as well. Someone said that if Isaiah 53 is lost we can reconstruct it from the NT. Maybe that’s an exaggeration but the truth is not too far off.
So we can see that the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement (or PSA in short) of Christ is clearly taught in the NT. JI Packer considers it to be the “best part of the best news that the world has ever heard”. Let me explain a bit here about this term. Penal has to do with punishment. Just like we have our Penal Code where it lays down the offences and the punishment prescribed for the respective offences. For example s. 302 of the Malaysian Penal Code is about murder and if a person is convicted of murder, the punishment is death. So PSA is about Christ being our substitute, taking on the punishment that was supposed to be inflicted on us in order to make atonement for our sins.
This understanding of the work of Christ on the cross i.e. Christ taking our place on it, suffering and dying on our behalf to save us from the wrath of God is something that the Reformers especially Calvin emphasized. To them it was something very central to the gospel. It has been accepted by those who professed to be evangelicals. Some of our hymns carried this theme. One which we are going to sing afterwards goes like this
Bearing shame and scoffing rude, In my place condemned he stood
Sealed my pardon with his blood, Hallelujah, what a Savior.
Another one
Was it for crimes that I have done, He groaned upon the tree
Amazing pity! Grace unknown! And love beyond degree
Well might the sun in darkness hide, and shut his glories in
When Christ the mighty Maker died, For man the creature’s sin
And another one
What Thou, my Lord has suffered, was all for sinners sake
Mine, mine was the transgression, But Thine the deadly pain
But there were those who objected to this doctrine even during Calvin’s days. They were in the minority until maybe about the early 19th century.
Today we have many evangelical Christians who object to this notion of PSA. I do admit that PSA is just one way of looking at the atonement of Christ. There are other ways which we can understand the work of Christ on the cross. But I believe PSA lies at the very heart of the gospel or as Packer puts it, the best part of the best news. The main objection to PSA is I guess that it’s unfair. It is unjust. It is barbaric. How can God allow an innocent man to suffer on behalf sinners? But those who criticize PSA forget that that innocent man was God himself. Sometimes they also see in this doctrine the son of God pleading with his angry father not to punish sinners. How then can God be love?
They fail to understand that the plan of redemption was a trinitarian effort. It was initiated by the Father, accomplished by the Son with Holy Spirit applying the benefits to sinners.
No, the plan of redemption wasn’t just the idea of God the Son. This is consistent with what we have read in Isaiah 53. V.6 The Lord has laid on him…..V. 10 It was the will of the LORD to crush him…..God the Father initiated the whole thing. The NT agrees with Isaiah. Acts 2:23 – This Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. It was God who sets everything up.
However, the Son willingly and gladly obey the Father setting his face towards the cross. John 10:11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.” Vv. 17-18 “For this reason the Father loves me because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.” Does this sounds like cosmic or divine child abuse as some critics of PSA allege?
Coming back to our text, after the center portion vv.4-6, vv.7-9 confirm that ultimately the Servant will not only suffer but will die. Before he died he will be unjustly treated. Justice was denied to him. Remember Jesus’ sham trial before his execution. Well, the good news come in vv.10-12. V.10 he shall see his offspring, he shall prolong his days? How does one who has died see his offspring and prolong his days? Doesn’t this point to the resurrection of Jesus Christ? All of us who now believes in him can be considered his spiritual offspring. Isaiah 53 ends with the Servant who suffered, died, buried and rose again making intercession for sinners. Let’s turn to Hebrew 7:25 “Consequently he (Jesus) is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.” Now the suffering Servant has become the ever living Priest.
In 1994, Fraciszek Gajowniczek who lived for another 53 years visited the St. Maximilian Kolbe Catholic Church of Houston. He told his translator that “so long as he has breath in his lungs, he would consider it his duty to tell people about the heroic act of love by Maximilian Kolbe” This was the response from a person who was supposed to die towards the one who died on his behalf. What then should be our response towards the one with nail pierced hands, and blood soaked brow. Towards the one whose back was whipped until probably pieces of flesh can be seen hanging from it. What then should be our response towards the one who hung on that cursed tree crying out My God My God why hast Thou forsaken me as he bore the sins of you and me?
How can we not exclaim with Charles Wesley, Amazing love, how can that be! That Thou my God should die for me! Well, dear brothers and sisters, I shall leave your response to the work of the Holy Spirit in you as you continue to consider what Christ has done for you.
Dear friends, if you have not yet believe in the Suffering Servant who is now high and lifted up, there can be only one response. Believe in him. He has paid the price for you. He has taken your punishment on your behalf. All you need to do is to put your faith in Him and sing with us Hallelujah! What a Saviour!

No comments:

Post a Comment