New Evidence for an Old Question? The “Gabriel’s Revelation” text and the question of a suffering Messiah

The discussions surrounding the recently discovered “Gabriel’s Revelation” (or “Dead Sea Stone”; see the posts below) have brought to the foreground the long-debated question of whether first century Judaism expected a suffering (and vindicated?) Messiah. This issue is closely related to—though broader than—the question of whether the “Suffering Servant” passages of Isaiah were interpreted messianically in the pre-Christian era.

Since a knowledge a first-century Judaism can only enhance our understanding of Jesus' person and work, it is worthwhile considering this question. Here are a few bibliographical notes to get the interested student started:

In a classic study of the last century, H. H. Rowley concluded negatively that “There is no serious evidence...of the bringing together of the concepts of the Suffering Servant and the Davidic Messiah before the Christian era....”1 Yet Rowley limited his study to passages that were more traditionally messianic, that is, that concerned the Messiah from David’s line.

Examining a broader category of “messianic” texts, in 1985 S. H. T. Page still concluded cautiously that while there are strands of evidence suggesting that a messianic interpretation of Isaiah’s Servant, and even the Suffering Servant, may have been known in some circles, “It is unlikely that the concept of a messiah who would atone for sin through his suffering was developed in the intertestamental period, but there is good reason to think that some initial steps had been taken in that direction.”2

More recently Martin Hengel, also examining a wide range of Second Temple texts, claimed that “the demonstrated echoes of this text [Isa. 53] are enough to suggest that traditions of suffering and atoning eschatological messianic figures were current in Palestinian Judaism, and that Jesus and the earliest Church could have known and appealed to them.”3

The jury is obviously still out on the nature and extent of first century ideas related to a suffering and atoning messiah. While scholars' conclusions on “Gabriel’s Revelation” are unlikely to “shake our basic view of Christianity,” they will provide more clues in the continuing quest for first century messianic expectations.4

Notes
1. “The Suffering Servant and the Davidic Messiah,” in The Servant of the Lord and other Essays in the Old Testament (London: Lutterworth, 1952) 61-88; quote from p. 85.
2. “The Suffering Servant Between the Testaments,” New Testament Studies 31 (1985), 481-497; quote from p. 493.
3. “The Effective History of Isaiah 53 in the Pre-Christian Period,” in The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources (eds. B. Janowski and P. Stuhlmacher; Eerdmans: Grand Rapids, 2004), 75.
4. In addition to the sources in the previous notes, see Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (eds. William H. Bellinger Jr. and William R. Farmer; Harrisburg, PN, 1998).