Jews: please provide the OLDEST REFERENCE you can to support your belief that Isaiah 53 applies to the Jews?

This is in reply to the answers received for this question: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090407184100AAa5mvN&r=w#IqZyW2jJL0hDOithv24Q One answerer wrote: "Simply put- Jews have always understood this to apply to the nation as a whole!" That seems to be the automatic response ...... show more This is in reply to the answers received for this question:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?...

One answerer wrote: "Simply put- Jews have always understood this to apply to the nation as a whole!"

That seems to be the automatic response ... but is it REALLY true? Actually, the ancient sages had three candidates for the identity of the "suffering servant:" it was either the Messiah, the prophet Jeremiah, or the faithful Jewish remnant. Therefore, the assertion that Isaiah 53 was "always" understood to apply to "the nation as a whole" is not at all incorrect.

Please note: references that post-date Yeshua DO NOT prove your argument; all they prove is that a Jewish apologist came up with the argument to rebut Christianity. I'd like to see references that PRE-DATE Yeshua stating that the Jews as a nation are the "suffering servant."

Thanks.
Update: LOL, of course I meant "not at all correct."
Update 2: @ Serius: 1) please answer the question that was asked, if you can; 2) the Essenes' theology contradicts traditional Judaism AND Messianic Jewish/Christian theology. They believed there would be THREE Messiahs who were ALL men. The first would be killed, then the last two would co-reign. But this has... show more @ Serius:

1) please answer the question that was asked, if you can;
2) the Essenes' theology contradicts traditional Judaism AND Messianic Jewish/Christian theology. They believed there would be THREE Messiahs who were ALL men. The first would be killed, then the last two would co-reign. But this has NOTHING to do with the question. Refer back to point one, please.
Update 3: @ Pinko: the Jews who answer here do searches of questions that contain the word "Jew." So it doesn't matter when we ask, they all see them. Also, I do know that they've seen this question, because I linked you to one that was just asked and answered.
Update 4: I'll keep this open for a few days, because obviously you guys are having trouble finding these references.

But if none of you are able to prove me wrong, then what does that say about what you believe?
Update 5: @ Allonyoav: you have used a classis straw man argument and NOT answered the question. ANSWER IT: SHOW ME WHERE THE TRADITION SAYS THAT ISAIAH 53 PERTAINS TO THE JEWISH PEOPLE!!! If you were an honest person, you would admit that IT DOESN'T! The fact that some Jews were using this argument against... show more @ Allonyoav: you have used a classis straw man argument and NOT answered the question. ANSWER IT: SHOW ME WHERE THE TRADITION SAYS THAT ISAIAH 53 PERTAINS TO THE JEWISH PEOPLE!!!

If you were an honest person, you would admit that IT DOESN'T! The fact that some Jews were using this argument against Christians PROVES NOTHING, since it's NOT IN THE TRADITION! So don't try and brush me aside as if I'm some kind of idiot. YOU'RE WRONG AND YOU KNOW IT, THAT'S WHY YOU'VE RESORTED TO INSULTS INSTEAD OF ANSWERING THE QUESTION!
Update 6: @ Angels have the Arc Light: NO, I'm not trying to tear you away from the traditions --- I'm trying to get you to LOOK AT THEM! And if you will do an honest search, you will see that what I've written is 100% correct. The interpretation of Isaiah 53 as pertaining to the Jewish people as a whole DOES... show more @ Angels have the Arc Light: NO, I'm not trying to tear you away from the traditions --- I'm trying to get you to LOOK AT THEM! And if you will do an honest search, you will see that what I've written is 100% correct. The interpretation of Isaiah 53 as pertaining to the Jewish people as a whole DOES NOT APPEAR IN ANY OF THE WRITTEN TRADITIONS until Rashi in the 1100's. As I pointed out, by your own rules of interpretation, IT'S THE OLDEST TRADITION THAT MATTERS. And the oldest traditions prove that most applied Isaiah 53 to the Messiah; a few applied it to Jeremiah; and a miniscule number applied it to the Jewish remnant (which is NOT the entire Jewish nation).

If I seem frustrated, it's because I'm trying to CHALLENGE YOU to prove me wrong. Please, by all means, try to do so. It will point you to the truth; it may not point you to Yeshua, but at least you would know the truth about THIS.
Update 7: @ Cher: so Chabad.org is anti-semitic? Because that's where I read Rashi's commentary on the Scriptures.

Didn't expect THAT, did you?
Update 8: And no, Cher, I haven't blocked a "whole bunch of Jewish answerers." I've only blocked YOU, due to your history of nonsensical, lying rants against me -- wherein you usually call me an anti-semite, merely because I disagree with you. So anything you have to say to me must be done in the light,... show more And no, Cher, I haven't blocked a "whole bunch of Jewish answerers." I've only blocked YOU, due to your history of nonsensical, lying rants against me -- wherein you usually call me an anti-semite, merely because I disagree with you. So anything you have to say to me must be done in the light, not in darkness.
Update 9: @ Angels have the Arc Light: If you have a MDiv, that means nothing if you're incorrect. According to Jewish rules of interpretation, it's the OLDEST traditions that matter more than the newer ones. Since the OLDEST traditions say Isaiah 53 does NOT pertain to the Jewish people as a nation, this means... show more @ Angels have the Arc Light: If you have a MDiv, that means nothing if you're incorrect. According to Jewish rules of interpretation, it's the OLDEST traditions that matter more than the newer ones. Since the OLDEST traditions say Isaiah 53 does NOT pertain to the Jewish people as a nation, this means that Rashi's teachings MUST be set aside. If you disagree with this basic truth, then you are not being honest with yourself, nor have you learned, despite your degree.

And as for your first comment: you specifically stated that I was trying to urge that nearly 2,000 years of tradition be set aside. As I answered (but you did not understand), I am actually trying to get you to read the REAL traditions, not later teachings that DO NOT qualify as Rabbinic tradition. See point number one, above.
17 answers 17