The Narrow Path Ministries

I have a question as to why Isa 53 was written in the past tense when it was still a future event from the time of writing? At least I have thought this is prophetic of Jesus Christ, which Isaiah wrote hundreds of years before hand, but then wrote it in the past tense as if it had already happened. why?

Douglas

This is pretty common in the Old Testament prophets. Commentators speak of this phenomenon as "the prophetic perfect tense." The assumption is that the prophet, in vision, is carried to the time of the prophesied event and is describing what he sees as an accomplished fact. Whether this explanation is correct or not might be debated, but it is a common view, and I find it adequate.

I agree with Steve,

additionally it seems to me that God sees time as one piece ("I am ... the beginning and the end"), while we humans see it as yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

That makes a lot of sense from our perspective for sure, but I wonder how the original recipients of the letter would have understood it? Trying to put myself in the shoes of a contemporary Jew of the time, would I have understood that God was telling us that this was still a future event given that Isaiah wrote it as though it was already an acomplished event. How do you think the people of the time understood it? or maybe they didn't? Was it not realy written for them, but for those who would read it later (that is much later)?

That makes a lot of sense from our perspective for sure, but I wonder how the original recipients of the letter would have understood it? Trying to put myself in the shoes of a contemporary Jew of the time, would I have understood that God was telling us that this was still a future event given that Isaiah wrote it as though it was already an acomplished event. How do you think the people of the time understood it? or maybe they didn't? Was it not realy written for them, but for those who would read it later (that is much later)?






I believe they generally see the suffering servant of Isa 53 as the nation of Israel and that in the future Israel would suffer for the sins of others. Some see it as a different suffering servant in each future generation , so in each case i believe they see it as at least partly a future event.

God did call Abram "Abraham" , father of numerous decendents therefore the style of God speaking of things that are not yet as though they are is not an unusual way for God to speak, as Paul said.

Isaiah was a prophet, and, in my opinion, would have been understood to be describing future events despite his use of the perfect tense. For example, Micaiah the prophet spoke in the past tense, in 1 Kings 22:17 about the death of Ahab, which Ahab recognized it as a prediction of the future. As I said, this was common prophetic style.

The prophets even vacillate between the past and the future tenses while describing the same event. See, for example, Jeremiah 4:23-26 (describing the devastation in the past tense) and Jeremiah 4:27-28 (using the future tense). I think the people who heard the prophets were accustomed to this.